Paul Manafort Wins Again. Trump Gets TWO At-Large Delegate In Arizona
Alleged Russian mob fixer, Paul Manafort, upped Donald Trump’s game yesterday in Arizona. Instead of being shut out he got two Trump loyalists as delegatesRead More »
Where are all the defenders of separation of church and state now? Church is being hugely imposed upon; where are those willing to speak up and keep this man-made law protected?
The separation of church and state is a heated issue in America today, and has been for centuries. In modern times, people have used the phrase as an excuse to try to ban religion from nearly every area of life; whether it be schools, government, and even some charities. Those in America who do not believe in God and consider themselves to be atheists or agnostics never cease to speak out against any intrusion of church on state. Somehow, though, this is never reversed; most of these people feel that there is no limit to how much state can impose on church. President Obama’s new contraception mandate is an issue that includes both church and state.
The term “separation of church and state” is nowhere in the Constitution. The phrase itself came from a letter written by Thomas Jefferson.
The Danbury Baptist Association wrote a letter to Jefferson in October of 1801. They were a religious minority in their state of Connecticut. They were complaining that in their state, the religious freedom they enjoyed was not looked upon as an immutable right, but as a privilege granted by their state legislature. It was looked upon as “favors granted.” In his response, Jefferson did not address their issue on a state level, but on a national level. Also in his response was the phrase “a wall of separation between church and state” from which we get the short-hand we use today, “separation of church and state.” Jefferson was saying that there should be no state-run church or an official state church. He was in no way saying that in order to serve in government, you must hide your religion or deny it when questioned. Nor was he saying that we must keep them on two opposite sides of the spectrum.
This nation was founded on Judeo-Christian values. That fact is indisputable. George Washington said, “It is impossible to rightly govern the world without God and the Bible.” Andrew Jackson said, “That Book, sir, is the Rock on which our Republic rests.” Samuel Adams, a signer of the Declaration of Independence, said, “He who made all men hath made the truths necessary to human happiness obvious to all. …Our forefathers opened the Bible to all.” The list goes on and on. Even though not all of the Founders were believers– public record shows that the delegates included 28 Episcopalians, 8 Presbyterians, 7 Congregationalists, 2 Lutherans, 2 Dutch Reformed, 2 Methodists, 2 Roman Catholics, 1 unknown, and 3 deists– all of them had a way of thinking that lends evidence to the belief that they thought on Biblical principles. Church was established in America long before state was. The church should be held in high regard in this nation, not taken for granted as something that can be used when needed and discarded otherwise.
Such is the case we find ourselves in today. Obama’s contraception mandate is a clear violation of the Constitution, simply because it is a government-mandated program. What makes this an even larger issue, however, is the fact that Obama has extended his radical ideas to the point of trying to overtake the church. Forcing the Catholic church to go against their beliefs is simply wrong. It’s ridiculous. Aside from the fact that Obama flunked his college American History class, it appears that he also flunked logic. This approach really doesn’t make any sense.
Where are the defenders of separation of church and state now? I haven’t heard them as loudly as I do when the situation is reversed. When state is being challenged, these nay-sayers speak out loud and clear; if they’ve been doing the same now, I seem to have missed them. How much more one-sided could this argument be?