I have heard of the letters. Knowing a bit of the history at the times it was more that they didn't want the state in church business not the other way around. If I am wrong, please quote the source and where I could go to confirm your assertion.
?
Favorite Answer
Separation of church and state never appears in any of our founding documents. The only thing the founders were after was that a state religion not be established. We were founded on Judeo-Christian values and prayers were held before most assemblies. The Constitution also says freedom OF religion not freedom FROM religion. And no the Constitution doesn't say anything about God but it does refer to the ONE CREATOR. This was meant to acknowledge that we have a Creator and to establish where our rights came from. GOD not the government.
Arizona Knight Wolf
The Free Exercise Clause is the accompanying clause with the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. The Establishment Clause and the Free Exercise Clause together read:
“ Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof... ”
In 1878, the Supreme Court was first called to interpret the extent of the Free Exercise Clause in Reynolds v. United States, as related to the prosecution of polygamy under federal law. The Supreme Court upheld Mr. Reynolds' conviction for bigamy, deciding that to do otherwise would provide constitutional protection for a gamut of religious beliefs, including those as extreme as human sacrifice. The Court said (at page 162): "Congress cannot pass a law for the government of the Territory which shall prohibit the free exercise of religion. The first amendment to the Constitution expressly forbids such legislation." Of federal territorial laws, the Court said: "Laws are made for the government of actions, and while they cannot interfere with mere religious beliefs and opinions, they may with practices."
Jehovah's Witnesses were often the target of such restriction. Several cases involving the Witnesses gave the Court the opportunity to rule on the application of the Free Exercise Clause. Subsequently, the Warren Court adopted an expansive view of the clause, the "compelling interest" doctrine (whereby a state must show a compelling interest in restricting religion-related activities), but later decisions have reduced the scope of this interpretation.
In Sherbert v. Verner, 374 U.S. 398 (1963), the Warren Court applied the strict scrutiny standard of review to this clause, holding that a state must demonstrate a compelling interest in restricting religious activities. In Employment Division v. Smith, 494 U.S. 872 (1990), the Supreme Court retreated from this standard, permitting governmental actions that were neutral regarding religion. The Congress attempted to restore this standard by passing the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, but in City of Boerne v. Flores, 521 U.S. 507 (1997), the Supreme Court held that such an attempt was unconstitutional regarding state and local government actions (though permissible regarding federal actions).
Not Buying It
There was a tradition of the state taking control of its major religions with the head of state being the head priest or some such thing. It happened in ancient Egypt, where the Pharaoh was considered a god in charge of everything. It happened in Japan, where the Emperor was a god in charge of everything. In England, the Queen is still considered the head of their Anglican religion. At other times throughout history, the religious leaders took control of governments. The best example for Europeans is the roman catholic pope giving orders to various European kings and emperors through the centuries. It's gone back and forth with the religious authorities alternating power and control with the civil authorities, and the result of mixing the two was always bad. That's the thought which drove the U.S. founding fathers to say in the Constitution that the Congress will not establish an official U.S. religion as did some many of the European kings and queens, e.g., Henry the VIII, Bloody Mary, James 1, Philippe of Spain, etc.
raine
It's the first amendment of the Constitution.
"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."
The founding fathers were very aware of how religion was such a strong force in Europe, and some of the founding colonies. It could unite people against each other, and lead to a loss of strength in the region. They also knew that it had led to terrible wars within countries because the state sponsored religion was not always the one that people wanted. At the time of the start of the US, most major religions had their headquarters and leaders in Europe, and this could lead to the power of the US being controlled by a foreign power that didn't have our best interests in mind.
I hope this helps,
Raine
twoasonesfl
It is questions like this that further proves that teachers are not making history fun. It is basic grade school stuff. No offense, but you are not smarter than a 5th grader.
The Constitution is very clear on this, in the 1st Amendment:
http://www.usconstitution.net/const.html#Am1
Amendment 1 - Freedom of Religion, Press, Expression. Ratified 12/15/1791.
Congress SHALL MAKE NO LAW RESPECTING AN ESTABLISHMENT OF RELIGION, OR PROHIBITING THE FREE EXORCISE 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.
That means that NO religion has either the power or right to make laws that are based in and support of ONLY their religion's beliefs or doctrine; that NO religion has the right to force their beliefs on others and NO religion has the power or right to deny anyone the same rights and freedoms that they enjoy.
It is also the evidence that the United States has never been a "Christian" nation and has always been a SECULAR nation, respecting, by law, ALL religions.
It also means that not only can the state not interfere with church canons (where those canons ONLY apply to church members), but the church cannot interfere in state laws or the rights of people not of that religion.