"Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other."
– John Adams (Founding Father and 2nd President of the United States of America)
Like so many other members of the now “un-silent American majority” who voted for DonaldTrump to be our republic’s 45th President, over the last few weeks I took great comfort in hearing President-Elect Trump say the words “Merry Christmas” to the American public, and on done so many times on national television. For the last eight years under President Obama’s administration, the entire country was subjected to nothing short of national historic blasphemy while Obama and his band of clapping seals on the far left forced us to endure their relentless assault on the Judeo-Christian values our country has held dear since its founding, along with their attempts to re-write historical fact.
Much like they do every year, once again this Christmas various far-left and atheist groups used lawsuits or the threats of lawsuits as tools to bully law abiding Americans into taking down Nativity scenes all across America. Frankly, I know I speak for many Americans when I say I am SICK of hearing about “separation of church and state” from liberals. Do any of them even realize those words are nowhere to be found in the Constitution? Yes, you read that correctly… they are NOWHERE in the Constitution.
So, before Facebook and their new “fact checkers” at Snopes (aka an embezzler, a hooker, and a dominatrix… and no, I’m not kidding), get too cozy in their new relationship and manage to restrict free speech even further, this seems like a good time to set the record straight, and get the truth out to as many people as possible regarding the myth behind the nonexistent “separation of church and state.”
There’s a reason that in the 45 Steps to Destroy the United States written by the old Soviet Union during the height of the Cold War in the 1950's numbers 27 and 28 read as follows:
27. Infiltrate the churches and replace revealed religion with "social" religion. Discredit the Bible and emphasize the need for intellectual maturity, which does not need a "religious crutch."
28. Eliminate prayer or any phase of religious expression in the schools on the grounds that it violates the principle of "separation of church and state"
Do they sound familiar? In the following video, I break down exactly how and where the myth behind the “separation of church and state” originated, and how you can stand up and spread the truth to anyone you hear spouting that nonsense in the future.
The actual text of the First Amendment reads:
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
So, where on earth did all this nonsense about “separation of church and state” come from, and furthermore, why has talking about Jesus Christ or the Christian faith in general almost become a criminal offense these days? Heck, in one instance this year it became punishable by jail for a short time…
In Everson v. Board of Education (1947) a liberal Supreme Court cited a PERSONAL LETTER from Thomas Jefferson to the Danbury Baptists in 1802. If you know anything about our judicial system, you know legal judgments are based on what is called PRIMARY AUTHORITY.Primary authority is a term that refers to STATEMENTS OF LAW, or statements that are BINDING upon the courts, government, and individuals. Understood? Binding forms of primary authority include sources like the Constitution, Federal Statutes, State Statutes, etc.
In addition to Primary Authority is something known as SECONDARY AUTHORITY. Secondary authority is a source that purports to explain the MEANING or APPLICABILITY of the actual text found in primary authority. Secondary Law is NOT BINDING on the courts. Allow me to repeat that last sentence: Secondary Law is NOT BINDING on the courts.
Since a PERSONAL LETTER is neither primary law, nor secondary law, it never should have been used by the Supreme Court in the Everson v. Board of Education decision, but since when does the rule of law or the Constitution ever stop liberal activists from doing whatever they please? Recall that with liberals, “the ends always justify the means,” no matter what.
In the letter, Jefferson wrote:
"Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & 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 & 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."
Leave it to liberal justices, Supreme Court Justices or otherwise, to continue advancing their liberal ideology by unconstitutionally legislating from the bench, a power NOT granted to the judiciary under Article III of the Constitution.
Presumably, the Court's majority assumed that since Thomas Jefferson was one of the Founding Fathers, regardless of the fact that what he wrote was done in private and written as a metaphor no less, that they could use it to unconstitutionally give birth to the legal fiction we know today as "separation of church and state."
Ever since the Everson case in 1947, the words “separation of church and state" have become the rallying cry for the far-left as its continued effort to wage war on Christianity and the Judeo-Christian values our country was founded on. Listen to the brief remarks made by one of the great leaders of the 20th century on the subject…
Sadly, but as a general rule of thumb nonetheless, most garden variety uninformed liberal voters have never bothered to read the Constitution, much less taken the time understand even some of its most basic principles. Instead, they prefer to parrot what they've heard from television pundits, liberal politicians, or in sound bites, rather than actually do the legwork themselves and get the actual facts. Why? I'll never understand.
What those same ignorant liberal voters fail to realize (or care about), is that before any legislation is passed (the Constitution included), notes are kept while the verbiage is still being crafted. Those notes are recorded, and they are kept in what is called the legislative history of whatever is being written. Those notes and the history can later be found in any law library using various legal resources including but not limited to online resources like Westlawor Lexis, and their counterparts in print.
Later, if or when questions arise about the intent of the original drafters, or issues concerning why the original drafters chose to phrase things the way they did, that information can be easily accessed or referenced in the legislative history. Of course, that might take some effort, and it would require more than just parroting a sound bite heard elsewhere, hence why there are so many uninformed voters. It's also why anyone arguing that the Second Amendment is for hunting is an utter buffoon.
Originally, the First Amendment applied only to the federal government, and some states continued official state religions after ratification. Massachusetts, for example, was officially Congregationalist until the 1830s. In Everson v. Board of Education (1947), the U.S. Supreme Court incorporated the Establishment Clause (i.e., made it apply against the states). In the majority decision, Justice Hugo Black wrote:
The "establishment of religion" clause of the First Amendment means at least this: Neither a state nor the Federal Government can set up a church. Neither can pass laws which aid one religion, aid all religions, or prefer one religion to another … in the words of Jefferson, the [First Amendment] clause against establishment of religion by law was intended to erect 'a wall of separation between church and State' … That wall must be kept high and impregnable. We could not approve the slightest breach.
Ultimately, as embarrassing as it is, in Everson v. Board of Education the Court took Thomas Jefferson's use of a METAPHOR of a wall of separation between church and state, which was derived from his personal correspondence, to set a binding legal precedent that still holds today.
Leave it to liberals to take something not intended for the public, take it completely out of context, and then twist and pervert it for their own ideological purpose. Today, that holding from Everson v. Board of Education is used to wage a never-ending assault on our nation’s Christian history.
Since the Court claimed that Jefferson’s private comments were evidence that he intended for there to be a literal “separation of church and state,” and liberals swear by the Court's holding, try asking them how they account for the fact that Jefferson is one of SEVERAL of our first few Presidents who actually allowed CHURCH SERVICES to be held inside the capital building on Sundays during his presidency? Some "wall" he was referring to…
The following video is a powerful message by President Ronald Reagan that reminds each American that we are One Nation Under God. And, that we are a nation that has a government, and not the other way around. In the video Regan encourages Americans to celebrate not just our freedom, but also celebrate the One who gave us these freedoms. This three minute mini-movie is perfect for any time that you are speaking on the topics of freedom, the First Amendment, or America's religious heritage.
Regardless of political persuasion, most people can probably agree that Thomas Jefferson was a pretty smart fellow, so it’s more than reasonable to assume that he knew the words Jesus Christ would no doubt be said during the church services he allowed to take place within the capital, so how then, have "We the People" allowed the situation to go the far? How have liberals managed to continue deleting God from our nation's history and our national dialog?
NEED PROOF THOMAS JEFFERSON ALLOWED CHURCH SERVICES IN THE CAPITAL BUILDING?
David Barton is an American evangelical Christian minister, conservative activist, and author. He claims that Thomas Jefferson approved the use of the Capitol building as a church in 1800. He cites the following example given as evidence:
And I’ll give you a great example. We moved into the US Capitol in 1800, November of 1800. And when we moved in, one of the first acts of Congress was to approve the use of the Capitol as a church building. You can find that in the records of Congress, Dec 4 1800. Now, who did that?
You had the head of the Senate and the head of the House, the speaker of the House was John Trumbull, the president of the Senate who approved that was Thomas Jefferson. Thomas Jefferson approves church in the Capitol? Yep, he went there as Vice President, he went to the church at the Capitol for 8 years as President, and as President of the US, he’s going to church, and this is recorded in all sorts of members of Congress, their records, their diaries, because they went to church at the Capitol too. And so, Thomas Jefferson, President of the United States, thinks, you know I think I can help the worship services at this new church at the Capitol, they met in the Hall of the House of Representatives, so Jefferson ordered the Marine Corp band to come play for the worship services, in the church services at the US Capitol.
The worship band is the Marine Corp Band? Pretty good worship band. Thomas Jefferson did that. I thought he wanted separation of church and state. If you read his letter on separation of church and state, he said separation of church and state, he makes it very clear, separation of church and state will keep the government from stopping a public religious activity.
In fact, the records of Congress do note the request for use of the House of Representatives for church services. Here is the entry marking the occasion:
Note that the Speaker informed the assembled representatives that the Chaplains proposed to hold services in the Chamber. Apparently, it was agreeable to the House of Representatives since there is no recorded objection or vote on the matter. The Senate chaplain was Dr. Thomas John Claggett, an Episcopalian, and the House chaplain was Rev. Thomas Lyell, a Methodist. Both had begun their appointments in November, 1800.
Barton said that John Trumbull was the Speaker of the House but it was Theodore Sedgwick who raised the matter to the House on December 4, 1800. Jefferson was indeed President pro tempore of the Senate. However, according to the records of the Senate that same day (general business and the executive committee), nothing was mentioned about use of the Capitol building as a church.
As it turns out, the Senate did not need to approve the matter since the request went directly to the House for their Chamber. There was no vote, affirmation or acknowledgement by the Senate. So, unless Barton can demonstrate otherwise, technically it would be incorrect to say that Thomas Jefferson "approved" the church services in any "official capacity," however he certainly did not object to it, which speaks volumes about the intent of his remarks to the Danbury Baptists in 1802.
Article posted with permission from The Last Great StandDon't forget to Like Freedom Outpost on Facebook, Google Plus, & Twitter. You can also get Freedom Outpost delivered to your Amazon Kindle device here.