<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Obama's Lips Are Moving &#187; separation of church and state</title>
	<atom:link href="http://obamaslipsaremoving.com/tag/separation-of-church-and-state/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://obamaslipsaremoving.com</link>
	<description>What is "How can you tell if Barry is lying?"</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 21 Mar 2011 05:04:11 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>Church, State and Constitutional Anathema</title>
		<link>http://obamaslipsaremoving.com/2008/11/22/of-church-state-constitutional-anathema/</link>
		<comments>http://obamaslipsaremoving.com/2008/11/22/of-church-state-constitutional-anathema/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 22 Nov 2008 19:52:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Civil Rights - An Ironic View]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Religion & Truth]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ummm - Your Intolerance is Showing!]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[constitution]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[establishement clause]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[separation of church and state]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[wall of separation]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://obamaslipsaremoving.com/?p=298</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[For years, the Separation of Church and State issue has been gnawed on even though there is absolutely no such provision in the Constitution of the United States of America.  The &#8220;Establishment&#8221; clause reads: &#8220;Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.&#8221; The current courts&#8217; interpretation has twisted this [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>For years, the Separation of Church and State issue has been gnawed on even though there is absolutely no such provision in the Constitution of the United States of America. <span id="btAsinTitle"> </span></p>
<p><span>The &#8220;Establishment&#8221; clause reads:</span></p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;">&#8220;Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.&#8221;</p>
<p>The current courts&#8217; interpretation has twisted this clause in such a way that the clause is anathema to itself.  It&#8217;s like that commericial that is on TV&#8230; Guy walks into a dry cleaner with a shirt and tells the attendant &#8220;I want it starched and not starched.&#8221; The attendent asks, &#8220;what part do you want starched and what part do your want not starched?&#8221; The man replies &#8220;All of it.&#8221;</p>
<p><span id="more-298"></span>What are these people thinking? You can&#8217;t have it both ways <em>and </em>all of it at the same time!</p>
<p>One article on the subject of Separation describes it this way:</p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;">&#8220;During the last generation, the courts, at all levels, have ruled in ways that essentially guarantee the freedom from religion, instead of the freedom of religion.&#8221; <em><a title="Christian Answers" href="http://www.christiananswers.net/q-wall/wal-g004.html" target="_blank">ChristainAnswers.net</a></em></p>
<p>Establishment -</p>
<p>This word can be used as one of the following, depending on the context*:</p>
<ol>
<li>the act or an instance of establishing. <em>(literal)</em></li>
<li>the state or fact of being established. <em>(literal)</em></li>
<li>the recognition by a state of a church as the state church.</li>
</ol>
<p>So that begs the question: Has government been ruled out of the business of legislating&#8230;</p>
<ol>
<li>&#8230;the act or an instance of establishing a religion?<br />
I think as a literal phrase and in the context of the evacuation of England by our country&#8217;s first founders and citizen, this makes sense.</li>
<li>&#8230;the state or fact of religion being established?<br />
No, the founders were overwhelmingly religious. They were determined to have their churches. They would go on to excercise their religious freedom by establishing churches, having been unfettered by the tinkering of the government. This was the point of the clause. </li>
<li>&#8230;the recognition by a state of a church as the state church.<br />
The founders prayed in private, public, and yes, even government gatherings. The first community schools used the Bible as one of their primary subjects of study. These acts on the part of the founders and early citizens did not constitute recognition of a state church then. </li>
</ol>
<p> Anathema. You can&#8217;t have it both ways.</p>
<address style="PADDING-LEFT: 30px">*These are <a title="Definitions of Establishment" href="http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/establishment" target="_blank">3 of 12 definitions</a> that are either literal, or relate closest in historical context to Constitutional issues.</address>
<address style="PADDING-LEFT: 30px"></address>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://obamaslipsaremoving.com/2008/11/22/of-church-state-constitutional-anathema/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

