Texas wants to rewrite the US History books

[Daseal]

Buster,

I think it's a stretch to say that there is no separation of church and state in law or founding documents. If you use that logic, there's very little in founding documents. They're very ambiguous, and were created that way for a reason. These laws are very open to interpretation which is what has made them so flexible to this day.

The correspondance you're speaking of was Jefferson to the Danbury Baptists which is said:

Originally Posted by Thomas Jefferson

Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between man and his god, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, and not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their "legislature" should "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," thus building a wall of separation between church and State. Adhering to this expression of the supreme will of the nation in behalf of the rights of conscience, I shall see with sincere satisfaction the progress of those sentiments which tend to restore to man all his natural rights, convinced he has no natural right in opposition to his social duties.

I think he makes his idea of what that law should stand for relatively obvious here.

Also, to say it's not in law is a fallacy as well. The Supreme Court used that exact phrase in one of their rulings.

Originally Posted by Supreme Court

The phrase "separation of church and state" became a definitive part of Establishment Clause jurisprudence in Reynolds v. U.S. (1879), where the court examined Jefferson's involvement with the amendment and concluded that his interpretation was "almost an authoritative declaration" of its meaning.

Source: <3 Wikipedia.
Separation of church and state in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[tryfuhl]

Originally Posted by Daseal

Buster,

I think it's a stretch to say that there is no separation of church and state in law or founding documents. If you use that logic, there's very little in founding documents. They're very ambiguous, and were created that way for a reason. These laws are very open to interpretation which is what has made them so flexible to this day.

The correspondance you're speaking of was Jefferson to the Danbury Baptists which is said:


I think he makes his idea of what that law should stand for relatively obvious here.

Also, to say it's not in law is a fallacy as well. The Supreme Court used that exact phrase in one of their rulings.


Source: <3 Wikipedia.
Separation of church and state in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

well there are plenty of other supreme court rulings and/or mentions of it, mostly for separation but some not

either way it's hard to agree that the separation wouldn't be for the best