Your Company Website

he bible TEACHES that THERE SHOULD NOT BE A SEPARATION BETWEEN THE CHURCH AND STATE.

· In the Old Testament times, the religious and national governments were one and the same (Deut. 19:-20:).

· Kings in the Old Testament who overstepped their bounds were confronted by the religious leaders. Example: II Sam. 12:1-15.

· The church is to obey the government (Rom. 13:1-7) unless it requires things that are contrary to God’s requirements. (Peter and John said, "Judge for yourselves whether it is right in God's sight to obey you rather than God. For we cannot help speaking about what we have seen and heard" Acts 4:19-20 NIV).

The First Amendment never intended to separate Christian principles from the government, yet today we often think of the First Amendment as the separation of church and state. The First Amendment simply states, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.” Obviously the words “Separation, Church and State” are not even found in the First Amendment. Furthermore, that phrase appears in none of the founding documents.[1]

1789: The procedure the founding fathers used to draw up the First Amendment shows us clearly what they wanted to convey. Before they approved the final wording, the First Amendment went through nearly a dozen changes and many thorough discussions. Those discussions are recorded in the U.S. Congressional records from June 7 - September 25, 1789. The Founders were saying, “We do not want in America what we had in Great Britain. We do want God’s principles but we don’t want one denomination as the official church of the nation. We do not want government to place any rules or restrictions on religion.” This intent was well understood as we can see by court rulings which followed.[2]

In 1799 a court declared, “By our form of government the Christian religion is the Christian religion and all sects and denominations of Christians are placed on the same equal footing.” [3]

In 1801, the Danbury Baptist Association of Danbury, Connecticut, heard a rumor that the Congregationalist church was about to be made the national denomination. That rumor was of great concern to the Danbury Baptist. Consequently, they sent a letter to President Thomas Jefferson voicing their disapproval. On January 1, 1802, Jefferson wrote the Danbury Baptist assuring them that, “The first amendment has erected a wall of separation between church and state XE "separation between church and state" .” His letter explained that they need not fear the establishment of a national denomination and that while the wall of the First Amendment would protect the church from government control there always would be open and free religious expression of all orthodox religious practices. For true religious duties never threaten the purpose of government. The government would interfere with a religious activity only if that activity was a direct means (access) to the government or a threat to the overall peace and good order of society. [4] Today all that is heard of Jefferson’s letter is the phrase “a wall of separation between church and state.” This phrase is mentioned without the context and without the explanation that Jefferson gave in his letter. (It should be noted that Jefferson was in France when the Constitution was drafted. He was not a member of the Congress that passed the First Amendment. He did not sign the Constitution, nor was he a part of any of the state legislatures that ratified it.) [5] In response to a newspaper article, Jefferson said, “One passage in the paper you enclosed me must be corrected. It is the following, ‘And all say it was yourself more than any other individual, that planned and established it,’ i.e., the Constitution. I was in Europe when the Constitution was planned, and never saw it till after it was established.”[6] Jefferson explained that his influence on the Constitution was very small. “On receiving it [the Constitution while in France] I wrote strongly to Mr. Madison urging the want of provision for the freedom of religion, freedom of the press, trial by jury, habeas corpus, the substitution of militia for a standing army, and an express reservation to the States of all rights not specifically granted to the union... This is all the hand I had in what related to the Constitution.”[7]

Thomas Jefferson said, “No power over the freedom of religion...[is] delegated to the United States by the Constitution.” [8]

When James Madison offered the First Amendment, in its original form, to Congress in 1789, he was asked what it meant. He said that he apprehended the meaning of the words to be, that Congress should not establish a religion and enforce the legal observation of it by law, nor compel men to worship God in any manner contrary to their conscience.[9]

Later Supreme Courts identified potential religious activities in which the government might interfere. Things like human sacrifice, bigamy or polygamy, the advocating of immorality or licentiousness and so on. If any of these activities were to occur in the name of religion, then the government would interfere, for these are activities which threaten public peace and safety. But with orthodox religious practices the government would not interfere. The clear understanding of the First Amendment for a century and a half was that it prohibited the establishment of a national denomination by the government and denied the government any right to interfere with orthodox Christianity.[10]

Again, no where in the Constitution or any of the founding documents is the idea of separation of church and state to be found.[11]

In 1811, a court made a ruling with regards to a man that had gone into a fit of profanity. He had even taken the time to write it out and distribute it. In that writing he had attacked Jesus Christ, declaring that Jesus Christ was so and so. God was so and so. The Bible was such and such and he continued through a string of accusations and profanities against Jesus Christ and the Word of God. This man was sentenced to 3 months in prison and a $500 fine [12] for attacking the country by attacking Jesus. When this ruling was referred to by the U.S. Supreme Court . That court declared, “Whatever strikes at the root of Christianity tends manifestly to disillusionment of civil government.” The Court explained that the problem with his writings was that an attack on Jesus Christ was an attack on Christianity. An attack on Christianity was an attack on this foundation of the country. Therefore, an attack on Jesus Christ was an equivalent to an attack on our country. And notice the date of that case, 1811, only twenty years after the First Amendment was in place.[13]

In 1844, a school in Philadelphia announced that it would teach its students morality but not religion. The school believed that it didn’t need Christianity and the Bible and that it could teach morality without them. This policy, among others, caused this case to come before the U.S. Supreme Court. (Some of the Justices on the court at this time had been appointed by James Madison, the father of the Constitution.) Notice what the Supreme Court asked that school. “Why may not the Bible and especially the New Testament be read and taught as a divine revelation in the schools and its precepts expounded and its glorious principles of morality invoked? Where can the purest principles of morality be learned so clearly or so perfectly as from the New Testament?”[14]

The Supreme Court of the United States ruled that schools could teach Christianity and the Bible, the source of morality.

In 1853, XE "1853" some people requested congress to separate Christian principles from the government. They desired a so called separation of church and state and wanted Christian chaplains removed from the congress. Their petition was referred to the house and the senate judiciary committees which investigated for almost a year to see if it would be possible to separate Christian principles from the government. Both the House and Senate judiciary committees returned with their reports. The following are excerpts from the house report delivered on March 27, 1854. The Senate report was very similar. The house report stated, “Had the people,”(the founding fathers) “during the revolution had any suspicion of any attempt to war against Christianity that revolution would have been strangled in its cradle.” At the time of the adoption of the Constitution and its amendments, the universal feeling was that Christianity should be encouraged but that no one sect or denomination should receive special privileges. The report continued, “In this age there is no substitute for Christianity. That was the religion of the Founders of the republic and they expected it to remain the religion of their descendants.” Two months later, the judiciary committee made this strong declaration. “The great, vital and conservative element in our system, the thing that holds our system together, is the belief of our people and the pure doctrines and the divine truths of the Gospel of Jesus Christ.” The committees explained that they could not separate these principles from our government because it was these principles which had made this country so successful. These principles were our foundation, our basis.[15]

In 1877, another group challenged specific Christian principles in government. Jefferson’s letter had remained unused for many years, but now the plaintiffs resurrected Jefferson’s letter hoping to use it as an issue to their advantage. At that time, the court printed a lengthy segment of Jefferson’s letter and then used it to again prove that it was permissible to maintain Christian values, principles and practices in official policy. For the next 15 years, during that legal controversy, the Supreme Court used Jefferson’s letter to insure that Christian principles remained a part of government. Following this controversy Jefferson’s letter again fell into disuse.[16]

In 1892, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled: “Our laws and our institutions must necessarily be based upon and embody the teaching of the Redeemer of mankind. It is impossible that it should be otherwise. And in this extent our civilization and institutions are emphatically Christian.” The court provided 87 different historical incidences to support its conclusions. The court quoted the founding fathers, the acts of the founding fathers, the acts of the congresses, the acts of the state governments and so on. At the end of 87 precedences the court explained that it could continue to cite many additional precedences but that certainly 87 were sufficient to conclude that our laws and our institutions must be based on and must include the teachings of Christ. Courts base their decisions on precedences. To the court, it is important to go back and both examine history and rulings on previous cases so that the court can continue to be consistent in its present rulings. [17]

In 1931, the Supreme Court ruled, “We are a Christian people, according to one another the equal right of religious freedom, and acknowledging with reverence the duty of obedience to the will of God.”[18]

In 1947 the Court, for the first time, did not sight Jefferson’s entire letter but selected only eight words from it. The court then announced that the First Amendment erected a wall of separation between church and state and that the wall must be kept high and impregnable. This was a new philosophy for the court.[19]

In 1958, one of the judges was so tired of hearing the phrase, “separation of church and state” he wrote a warning that if this court did not stop talking about the separation of Church and state people were going to think it was part of the Constitution.[20]

June 25, 1962, the Court delivered its first ever ruling which completely separated Christian principles from education. The Court struck down school prayer. In this case, the Court redefined the meaning and application the a single word “church.” For 170 years prior to that case, the word “church” as used in the phrase “separation of church and state” was defined to mean a federally established denomination. However, in 1962 the Court explained that the word “church” would now mean a religious activity in public. No longer would the First Amendment simply prohibit the establishment of a federal denomination. It would now prohibit religious activities in public settings.[21]

Note: The following list was taken from David Barton, Original Intent, WallBuilders Press, Aledo, TX, 2000, pp. 14-17.

· PRAYER AT GRADUATION OUTLAWED: It is unconstitutional for a school graduation ceremony to contain an opening or closing prayer. HARRIS v. JOINT SCHOOL DISTRICT, No. 241, 41 F. 3d 447 (9th Cir. 1994); GEARON v. LOUDOUN COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD, 844 F. Supp. 1097 (U.S.D.C., Va 1993); ROBET E. LEE v. DANIEL WEISMAN, 112 S. Ct. 2649, 120 l. Ed. 2d 467 (1992); KAY v. DOUGLAS SCHOOL DISTRICT, 719 P XE " " . 2d 875 (Or.App. 1986); GRAHAM v. CENTRAL COMMUNITY SCHOOL DISTRICT OF DECATUR COUNTY, 608 F Supp. 531 (U.S.D.C., Ia. 1985).

· STUDENT LEADERS’ PRAYER: When a student addresses an assembly of his peers, he effectively becomes a government representative; it is therefore unconstitutional for that student to engage in prayer. HARRIS v. JOINT SCHOOL DISTRICT, 41 F.3d 447 (9th Cir.1994).

· VOLUNTARY prayer: A verbal prayer offered in a school is unconstitutional, even if that prayer is both voluntary and denominationally neutral. ENGEL v. VITAL, 370 U.S. 421 (1962 ); ABINGTON v. SCHEMPP, 374 U.S. 203 (1963); COMMISSIONER OF EDUCATION v. SCHOOL COMMITTEE OF LEYDEN, 267 N.E. 2d 226 (sup. Ct. Mass. 1971), cert. denied, 404 U.S. 849.

· private lunch prayer: If a student prays over his lunch, it is unconstitutional for him to pray aloud. REED v. VAN HOVEN, 237 F. Supp. 48 (W.D. 1965).

BIBLE READING IN SILENCE OUTLAWED: In Omaha, Nebraska, a student was prohibited from reading his Bible silently during free time, or even to open his Bible at school. (GIERKE v. blotzer, cv-88-0-883 (U.S.D.C. Neb. 1989).

SINGING OUTLAWED: A school song was struck down because it promoted values such as honesty, truth, courage, and faith, in the form of a “prayer.” Interestingly, the song occurred as a part of voluntary extracurricular student activities. DOE v. ALDINE INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT, 563 F. Supp. 883 (U.S.D.C., S.D.Tx.1982).

WRITING RESEARCH PAPERS ON JESUS OUTLAWED: In a high-school class in Dickson, Tennessee, students were required to write a research paper using at least four sources. The students were permitted to write about reincarnation, witchcraft, and even the occult. Brittney Settle chose to write her paper on the life of Jesus Christ. Due to the fact that she chose Jesus as her subject her teacher gave her a zero. Brittney Kay Settle v. Dixon COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD, 53 F.3d 152 (6th Cir. 1995), cert. denied, 64 L. W. 3478 (1995); See also Dallas Morning News, “Court rejects case of girl who wrote Jesus paper,” November 28, 1995, 4-A; picked up on wire service from Los Angeles Times.

It is unconstitutional for a classroom library to contain books which deal with Christianity, or for a teacher to be seen with a personal copy of the Bible at school. ROBERTS v. MADIGAN, 702 F. Supp. 1505 (D.C.Colo. 1989), 921 F.2d 1047 (10 Cir.1990), cert. denied, 112 S. Ct. 3025; 120 L. Ed. 2d 896.

FREEDOM OF SPEECH AND PRESS OUTLAWED: Freedom of speech and press are guaranteed to students and teachers--unless the topic is religious, at which time such speech becomes unconstitutional. STEIN v. OSHINSKY, 348 F. 2d 999 (2nd Cir. 1965) cert. denied, 382 U.S. 957; COLLINS v CHANDLER UNIFIED SCHOOL DIST., 644 F.2d 759 (9th Cir. 1981), cert. denied, 454 U.S. 863. BISHOP v. ARONOV, 926 F. 2d 1066 (11th Cir. 1991); DURAN v. NITSCHE, 780 F. Supp. 1048 (E.D. Pa. 1991).

CHRISTIAN MINISTERS SPEAKING ON SECULAR SUBJECTS IN PUBLIC SCHOOLS OUTLAWED: A high ranking official from the national drug czar’s office who regularly conducts public school anti-drug rallies was prohibited from doing so in Nacogdoches, Texas. The federal judge pointed out that even though the speaker was an anti-drug expert, he was also known as a Christian minister and thus was disqualified from delivering a secular anti-drug message. ALEXANDER v. NACODOCHES SCHOOL DISTRICT, Civil Action 991CV144 (U.S.D.C., E.D. Tx. 1991).

· It is unconstitutional for students to see the Ten Commandments since they might read, meditate upon, respect, or obey them. STONE v. graham, 449 U.S.39 (1980); RING v. GRAND FORKS PUBLIC SCHOOL DIST., 483 F. Supp. 272 (D.C. ND 1980); LANNER v. WIMMER, 662 F.2d 1349 (10th Cir. 1981).

· Despite the fact that they are the basis of civil law and are engraved in stone on the U. S. Supreme Court building, they may not be displayed at a public courthouse. HARVEY v. COBB COUNTY, 811 F. Supp. 669 (N.D. Ga. 1993); affirmed, 15 F.3d 1097 (11th Cir. 1994) cert. denied, 114 S. Ct. 2138 (1994).

· In DeFuniak Springs, Florida, a judge ordered the courthouse copy of the Ten Commandments to be covered during a murder trial for fear jurors would be prejudiced against the defendant if they saw the command “Do not kill.” (Olean Times Herald, Monday, April 6, 1992, p. A-1; see also State of Florida v. George T. Broxson, Case no. 90-02930 CF (1st Jud. Cir. Ct., Walton County, Fl., 1992).

(Notice what James Madison , the chief architect of the Constitution said about the Ten Commandments. He said, “We have staked the whole future of America’s civilization, not upon the power of government, far from it. We have staked the future of all of our political institutions upon the capacity of each and all of us to govern ourselves according to the Ten Commandments of God.”[22] As stated earlier, the roots of American Democratic law are in the Bible. The Ten Commandments are specifically named in 47 of our states’ constitutions.)[23]

· WAR MEMORIALS IN THE SHAPE OF A CROSS:
It is unconstitutional for a war memorial to be erected in the shape of a cross. LOWE v. CITY OF EUGENE, 451 P XE " " . 2d 117 (Sup.Ct. Or. 1969), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 876.

· PLANTER IN THE FORM OF A CROSS: It is unconstitutional for a public cemetery to have a planter in the shape of a cross, for if someone were to view that cross, it could cause “emotional distress” and thus constitute an “injury-in-fact.” WARSAW v. TEHACHAPI, CV F-90-404 EDP (U.S.D.C., E.D. Ca.1990).

· Even though the wording may be constitutionally acceptable, a bill becomes unconstitutional if the legislator who introduced the bill had a religious activity in his mind when it was authored. WALLACE v. jaffree, 472 U.S. 38,86 (1985).

· Because a prosecuting attorney mentioned seven words from the Bible in the courtroom--a statement which lasted less than five seconds---a jury sentence was overturned for a man convicted of brutally clubbing a 71-year-old woman to death. COMMONWEALTH v. CHAMBERS; 599 A. 2d 630-644 (Sup. Ct. Pa. 1991), cert. denied, case no. 91-1597, May 26,1992, petition for rehearing denied August 18, 1992.

REFERRING TO GOD IS OUTLAWED: It is unconstitutional for a Board of Education to use or refer to the word “God” in any of its official writings. STATE OF OHIO v. WHISNER, 351 N. E. 2d 750 (Sup. Ct. Ohio 1976).

GIVING HONOR TO OUR RELIGIOUS HERITAGE IS OUTLAWED: In a city seal composed of numerous symbols representing various aspects of the community (e.g., its industry, its commerce, its history, its flora, its schools, etc.), it is unconstitutional for any of those symbols to depict the religious heritage or any religious element of the community. ROBINSON v. CITY OF EDMOND, 68 F. 3d 1226 (10th Cir. 1995); Harris v. CITY OF ZION, 927 F. 2d 1401 (7th Cir. 1991), cirt. denied, 112 S. Ct. 3054 1992); KUHN v. CITY OF ROLLING MEADOWS, 927 F. 2d 1401 (7th Cir.1991), cert. denied, 112 S Ct. 3025 (1992); FRIEDMAN v. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, 781 F. 2d 777 (10th Cir. 1985), cert. denied, 476 U.S.1169 (1986).

GIVING HONOR TO SCHOOL OFFICIALS BY RELIGIOUS GROUPS IS OUTLAWED: It is unconstitutional for school officials to be publicly praised or recognized in an open community meeting if the meeting is sponsored by a religious group. JANE DOE v. SANTA FE INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT, Civil Action No. G-95-176 (U.S.D.C., S.D. Tx. 1995).

RELIGIOUS ARTWORK OUTLAWED XE "ARTWORK OUTLAWED" : Artwork may not be displayed in schools if it depicts something religious--even if that artwork is considered a historic classic. WESHEGESIC v. BLOOMINGDALE PUBLIC SCHOOLS, 813 F. Supp. 559 (W.D. Mi., S.D. 1993); affirmed, 33 F.3d 679 (6th Cir. 1994); cert. denied, 63 U.S.W.L. 3786 (May 1,1995).

· NATIVITY SCENE OUTLAWED: It is unconstitutional for a nativity scene to be displayed on public property unless surrounded by sufficient secular displays to prevent it from appearing religious. COUNTY OF ALLEGHENY v. ACLU, 106 L. Ed. 2d 472 (1989).

· EXCHANGING CHRISTMAS CARDS OUTLAWED: In Alaskan public schools, students were prohibited from using the word “Christmas” at school, from exchanging Christmas cards or presents, or from displaying anything with the word “Christmas” on it because it contained the word “Christ.” (The New American, June 20, 1988, p. 19, “America Without God.”)

· ASKING WHOSE BIRTHDAY IS ON CHRISTMAS DAY IS OUTLAWED: It is unconstitutional for a kindergarten class to ask whose birthday is celebrated by Christmas. FLOREY v. SIOUS FALLS SCHOOL DISTRICT, 464 F. Supp. 911 (U.S.D.C., SD 1979), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 987 (1980).

RELIGIOUS LICENSE PLATES ARE OUTLAWED Although States print hundreds of thousands of custom license plates purchased and ordered by individual citizens, Oregon refused to print “PRAY.” Virginia refused to print “GOD4US,” and Utah refused to print “THANK GOD,” claming that such customized license plates violated the “separation of church and state.” GLORIA IVERSON v. FORBES, 93-3-232 (Or.Cir.Ct. 1993); TERRY REIDENBACH v. PETHTEL, 3:93CV632 (E.D. Va. 1993); BEBOUT v. LEIMBAUGH, 93-C-1079 J (C.D. Ut. 1993).

Many people in the younger generations are naive to the fact that the Bible was once taught as part of the curriculum in our public schools. I will soon be 62 years old. I remember distinctly that my teachers read from the Bible and we always offered prayer at the beginning of each school day.

· The first American schools were founded primarily to teach Christianity from the Bible.

· The best read book in the Colonies, next to the Bible, was the “New England Primer” which could have been called the Christian’s Bible Primer. It had under “A, In Adam’s fall we sin all,” and under “Z, Zacchaeus did climb a tree, our Lord to see.”

· A book from 1946 illustrates how the Bible was taught in public schools. This book is titled, “Bible Study Course Of The New Testament For Dallas High Schools.” On the cover page it explains that this book was authorized by the Board of Education on April 23, 1946, and was printed in the Dallas public schools print shop. The introduction further explains that this is a credit course toward graduation in Dallas high schools. Lesson one begins with chapter one of the Gospel of John and studies the preexistence of Christ. Notice the questions based on John chapter one:

This text book continues throughout the lesson with detailed questions as just illustrated. At the end of lesson one is memory work. Memorize the preexistence of Christ. “In the beginning was the Word. The Word was with God and the Word was God. All things were made by him and without him was not anything made that was made.” This was a text book for public schools in 1946.[24]

Now I want to ask, What damage did lessons like this do to the students? Let me ask another question. Could it just be possible that if we began again teaching Bible lessons like, “Thou shalt not kill” that we reduce the school shootings? If we taught the Bible lesson, “...fornicators, their part (shall be) in the lake that burneth with fire and brimstone; which is the second death” (Rev 21:8 ASV), could we reduce the problem of unwed mothers? If we taught the Bible lesson, “‘I hate divorce,’ says the LORD God of Israel” (Mal 2:16 NIV), is it possible that it could have an effect on our nation’s problem of broken homes? “Do not be deceived: God cannot be mocked. A man reaps what he sows” (Gal 6:7 NIV).

FELLOW AMERICANS, WAKE UP! Funneling more federal money into our schools has not helped and will not help! More testing is not the answer. The fear of the LORD is, (was, and always will be) the beginning of wisdom, and knowledge of the Holy One is understanding (Prov 9:10 NIV).

· There should be no separation between church and state XE "separation between church and state" !

· There must not be any rules or restrictions placed on religion unless its activities threaten public peace and safety!

[1] David Barton, America’s Godly Heritage, an audio-cassette speech.

[2] David Barton, America’s Godly Heritage, an audio-cassette speech.

[3] David Barton, Original Intent, WallBuilders Press, Aledo, TX., 1996, 2000, p. 63.

[4] David Barton, Original Intent, WallBuilders Press, Aledo, TX., 1996, 2000, pp. 63-46.

[5] John Eidsmoe, God & Caesar, Crossway Books, a division of Good News Publishers, Westchester, IL., p. 21.

[6] David Barton, Original Intent, WallBuilders Press, Aledo, TX., 1996, 2000, p. 264.

[7] David Barton, Original Intent, WallBuilders Press, Aledo, TX., 1996, 2000, p. 205.

[8] Philip C. Clarke, Our Founding Fathers on Religion, http://hawaiiforalankees.homepage.com/founding.htm p. 10.

[9] David Barton, Original Intent, WallBuilders Press, Aledo, TX., 1996, 2000, pp. 23,24.

[10] David Barton, America’s Godly Heritage, an audio-cassette speech.

[11] David Barton, America’s Godly Heritage, an audio-cassette speech.

[12] David Barton, Original Intent, WallBuilders Press, Aledo, TX., 1996, 2000, pp. 54, 55.

[13] David Barton, America’s Godly Heritage, an audio-cassette speech.

[14] David Barton, Original Intent, WallBuilders Press, Aledo, TX., 1996, 2000, pp. 56,57.

[15] David Barton, America’s Godly Heritage, an audio-cassette speech.

[16] David Barton, America’s Godly Heritage, an audio-cassette speech.

[17] Supreme Court , 1892, Church of The Holy Trinity vs. United States.

[18] The Biggest Lies of the 20th Century, p. 5.

[19] David Barton, America’s Godly Heritage, an audio-cassette speech.

[20] David Barton, America’s Godly Heritage, an audio-cassette speech.

[21] David Barton, America’s Godly Heritage, an audio-cassette speech.

[22] David Barton, America’s Godly Heritage, an audio-cassette speech.

[23] James Burton Coffman, The Influence Of The Bible In The Building Of America, Lambert’s Book House, Box 4007, Shreveport, LA., p. 7.

[24] David Barton, America’s Godly Heritate, an audio-cassette speech.

SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE