1 2
#1080698
Freethinker
Yes, you may freely exercise you religion. But The government does not and is not obligated to help you in any way, by making laws and such.
And the First amendment goes both ways: STOP SHOVING YOUR RELIGION IN MY FACE. plzkthxbye
12/28/2009 8:52:12 AM
#1080704
So Free Exercise requires Establishment in the government?
Are you suggesting Establishment of Islam, Buddhism, Hindu, Judaism, Orthodox Catholicism, or any other number of religions would not interfere with the Free Exercise of your brand of Christianity?
12/28/2009 8:57:52 AM
#1080706
Titania
a swing and a miss
12/28/2009 9:01:23 AM
#1080711
History Teacher
Read it, but also learn how and why it has been interpreted the way it has. Essentially the Establishment clause (and words after it do not negate it's existence, moron) and the Free Exercise clause are in constant tension. Most of the religion cases the Supreme Court has heard involve the tension between them. One side is arguing that against some form of Establishment (even just in a government entity showing favoritism through a religious display or allowing some religious practice in the public sphere) and the group in favor of or doing the establishing arguing for their own free exercise.
The Court has consistently ruled in favor of prohibiting establishment which means that people have to move their free exercise of religion to private property. As a person of faith, I have no problem with this. And those people of faith who do need to get over themselves.
Oh...and if we're quibbling over phrases, anyone think he wants to talk about the "well-regulated militia" phrase in the Second Amendment???
12/28/2009 9:03:20 AM
#1080754
MK
Mostly right, EXCEPT for the "there is no establishment clause" part. That would be because the REST of the statement essentially says there is an establishment clause. So... you're a moron, Jeff.
12/28/2009 10:01:26 AM
#1080764
Swede
Shouldn't the constitution be read through and discussed in schools?
Religion is a private matter, something between you and your god, or just you and your conscience. As such it should be kept on private ground or in closed circles, like churches, mosques and synagogues.
The larger religions should be taught (as objectively as possible) in schools, so that people can make up their own minds which, if any, makes the most sense.
12/28/2009 10:11:54 AM
#1080776
History Teacher
@Swede--
The Constitution is taught in schools. But the Fundies do not like the way we teach it and many of them do not send their children to school.
12/28/2009 10:26:46 AM
#1080783
John
Which basically nullifies the first part of the sentance.
No it doesn't. They're two separate things. The government can't endorse religion, and it can't interfere with it either. So it says you can believe whatever you want (and promote your beliefs to others if you wish), but you can't use the government to promote your beliefs.
12/28/2009 10:32:47 AM
#1080786
smartz
If you know anything about the Constitution, then you would know that the two clauses stand alone, not contradict each other. It says that the government cannot establish laws FOR religion AND the government cannot establish laws AGAINST religion. It has to remain totally neutral.
12/28/2009 10:39:23 AM
#1080796
Papabear
So then if I form a religion in which the basic tenet is to kill Christians it would be alright for me to freely exercise that religion?
12/28/2009 10:51:52 AM
#1080802
Which basically nullifies the first part of the sentance.
Wow, so much fail in nine words including one misspelling.
The original intent was to neither endorse or prohibit.
You are correct here. Unfortunately, this statement contradicts your golden nugget of crap above.
People need to READ their constitution.
ie. Yourself.
12/28/2009 11:02:55 AM
#1080804
Doctor Whom
Which basically nullifies the first part of the sentance.
You fail both Constitutional law and reading comprehension forever.
12/28/2009 11:04:40 AM
#1080805
lisamariefan
So not prohibiting somehow nullifies not endorsing?
...the stupid, it burns!!!
12/28/2009 11:07:23 AM
#1080825
aaa
How much paint do you huff again?
12/28/2009 11:25:11 AM
#1080842
Osiris
Learn to read. The first part means the government can't establish a religion. This is the establishment clause. It has everything to do with protecting the free exercise of religion.
12/28/2009 11:36:18 AM
#1080848
Professor M
The style of interpretation in which the first half of any sentence is merely decorative is certainly gaining popularity on the right. It's already the accepted right-leaning interpretation of the 2nd, so it was only a matter of time until it was applied to the 1st.
12/28/2009 11:39:49 AM
#1080857
Doubting Thomas
Why is it that these Christian fundies think that "free exercise" of religion gives them the right to take away other people's rights just because they believe they should?
It's "freedom of religion," dumbass, not "freedom of Christianity."
12/28/2009 11:54:22 AM
#1080858
Somebody failed both Civics and US History classes.
12/28/2009 11:54:53 AM
#1080859
Dane
Constitution Fail
12/28/2009 11:56:45 AM
#1080860
El Zorro
Is he seriously suggesting that a part of a sentence in a legal document would nullify the previous part? Why bother writing the first part, then?
12/28/2009 11:57:27 AM
#1080880
GodotIsWaiting4U
CORRECT! One cannot prohibit the FREE EXERCISE OF RELIGION! But YOURS ISN'T THE ONLY GAME IN TOWN ANYMORE. If the government endorses one religion, it marginalizes others. Free exercise of religion should not require you to force the government to make laws; if it does, you're doing it wrong.
12/28/2009 12:25:29 PM
#1080882
Nathan the Wise
I'll say what I always say. You think church and state shouldn't be separate, you should have no problem when the state takes over your church.
12/28/2009 12:30:11 PM
#1080887
You need to read as well. Which constitution would include, in the first sentence, statements that contradict each other?
12/28/2009 12:41:44 PM
#1080966
Mister Spak
"People need to READ their constitution. There's no excuse, it's freely available on the Internet and many organizations will give you a printed one free."
Then what's your excuse? Do you not know how to read?
12/28/2009 1:10:14 PM
#1081001
Old Viking
People may exercise their religion freely because of the establishment clause.
12/28/2009 1:49:48 PM
1 2