Reflections

[Greg Reimer 7376]

As we concluded the Easter season and reflected on what it means, I remembered a comment made probably 100 years ago that I read about from the American evangelist Billy Sunday. Look him up for an addition to your theological learnedness. He said years ago," The Rivers of America will run with blood filled to their banks before we will submit to them taking the Bible out of our schools."Well, guess what. They did, we allowed it, now look at the mess we have now.

[L.Fite]

99,964% of the people don't understand what separation of church and state is really about...

Kinda sad...

And not an accident...

And that's about all I wish to offer, lest I end up on some list somewhere...

[Eddies66]

First Amendment rights: As a student in a public school, you have First Amendment rights to engage in voluntary, free speech conversations. It just has to be done in a way that does not interfere with or substantially disrupt classroom time and academic instruction. You can voluntarily express your personal and religious beliefs to your classmates through verbal or written expressions. But make sure to follow school policy and do not engage in these activities during classroom or instruction time.

Having sub’d since 2013 in both California and Nevada. Not one school library did not have a religious section with a Bible and many other books on other religions.

[Eddies66]

Originally Posted by L.Fite

99,964% of the people don't understand what separation of church and state is really about...

Kinda sad...

And not an accident...

And that's about all I wish to offer, lest I end up on some list somewhere...

Here is what is meant by separation, that no public property or money may be used for religious worship, exercise or instruction, or the support of a religious establishment; and, that public schools shall be free from sectarian control or influence.

[Mike Jones]

The Danbury Baptist Association of Danbury, Connecticut sent a letter, dated October 7, 1801, to the newly elected President Thomas Jefferson, expressing concern over the lack in their state constitution of explicit protection of religious liberty, and against a government establishment of religion.

In their letter to the President, the Danbury Baptists affirmed that "Our Sentiments are uniformly on the side of Religious Liberty":

The address of the Danbury Baptist Association in the State of Connecticut, assembled October 7, 1801.

To Thomas Jefferson, Esq., President of the United States of America

Sir, Among the many millions in America and Europe who rejoice in your election to office, we embrace the first opportunity which we have enjoyed in our collective capacity, since your inauguration, to express our great satisfaction in your appointment to the Chief Magistracy in the United States. And though the mode of expression may be less courtly and pompous than what many others clothe their addresses with, we beg you, sir, to believe, that none is more sincere.

Our sentiments are uniformly on the side of religious liberty: that Religion is at all times and places a matter between God and individuals, that no man ought to suffer in name, person, or effects on account of his religious opinions, [and] that the legitimate power of civil government extends no further than to punish the man who works ill to his neighbor. But sir, our constitution of government is not specific. Our ancient charter, together with the laws made coincident therewith, were adapted as the basis of our government at the time of our revolution. And such has been our laws and usages, and such still are, [so] that Religion is considered as the first object of Legislation, and therefore what religious privileges we enjoy (as a minor part of the State) we enjoy as favors granted, and not as inalienable rights. And these favors we receive at the expense of such degrading acknowledgments, as are inconsistent with the rights of freemen. It is not to be wondered at therefore, if those who seek after power and gain, under the pretense of government and Religion, should reproach their fellow men, [or] should reproach their Chief Magistrate, as an enemy of religion, law, and good order, because he will not, dares not, assume the prerogative of Jehovah and make laws to govern the Kingdom of Christ.

Sir, we are sensible that the President of the United States is not the National Legislator and also sensible that the national government cannot destroy the laws of each State, but our hopes are strong that the sentiment of our beloved President, which have had such genial effect already, like the radiant beams of the sun, will shine and prevail through all these States—and all the world—until hierarchy and tyranny be destroyed from the earth. Sir, when we reflect on your past services, and see a glow of philanthropy and goodwill shining forth in a course of more than thirty years, we have reason to believe that America's God has raised you up to fill the Chair of State out of that goodwill which he bears to the millions which you preside over. May God strengthen you for the arduous task which providence and the voice of the people have called you—to sustain and support you and your Administration against all the predetermined opposition of those who wish to rise to wealth and importance on the poverty and subjection of the people.

And may the Lord preserve you safe from every evil and bring you at last to his Heavenly Kingdom through Jesus Christ our Glorious Mediator.

Signed in behalf of the Association,

Neh,h Dodge

Eph'm Robbins The Committee

Stephen S. Nelson[4][5]

[Mike Jones]

So its original intent was that there would be no " State Church', in other words Baptist, Congregationalist, Lutheran, etc etc. The problems with the Church in England was still fresh in their minds. Obviously, Christianity was the faith of early America, as is evident form the Judeo-Christian value system at work through out. I am sure had they known what would become of this country, they would have been more specific about it. Diametrically opposed systems don`t work together and that applies to religions, as well.

[Greg Reimer 7376]

That's the issue,quandry, whatever term you use to describe the physical, mental political or ecclesiastical morass that is humanity. We were all endowed by our Creator with a free moral agency. That gives us our undeniable individuality. In other words, we have the option to think for ourselves. That is what sets us apart as a species, is the freedom to use our human mindset-some for the good of others, some for far less ambitions. No system on earth is going to evoke a unanimous response to its presentation to us. There are so many differences of opinion out there, in society, in issues of religion, government, what constitutes human rights, and everything else. Religion is interesting, because there are so many variants of it. Some say that they are all basically alike. Not so. There is too many differences of opinion within even that for that idea to go very far. I've learned that even within basic Bible Christianity that there are three interesting approaches. The first is tradition..That's man's opinion of what the Bible says and what God does. The second is doctrine.That's man's attempt to define God in our own terms. The third is Scripture. The Bible is God's revelation of who He is. We as humans interject our own opinions of the interpretation of it all and we don't always agree on even that. Same thing with secular pursuits. So many differences of opinion in government, what it is, who it is, and what it does. The main fear we humanoids have is that if the people in charge get their way, we will lose the option to think for ourselves. The right to do this is a very precious commodity and is of vast importance, but that can't ignore the fact that there are very vast differences as to what that is. That's mankind's quandary- who do we believe?

[Mike Jones]

I thought about responding in detail, but instead let me just say” In God we Trust”.