On 01-15-98, DAVID HARTUNG declared to ROBERT PLETT:
DH> DH> Do you believe that those who follow non Christian faiths don't enjoy
DH> DH> equal protection under our law?
DH> RP> Of *course* they do!  That fact has nothing whatever to do with the
DH> RP> fact that ours is country established on the Christian faith, and 
whose
DH> RP> laws incorporate the principles of that faith.
DH> Good to hear it! I was beginning to wonder if you had slipped your
DH> clutches, but then that is something all of us in this echo can be
DH> accused of from time to time! :)
Moi?
It's apparently easy in discussions of this sort for folks to have
problems distinguishing between government philosophical underpinnings,
which is what I've been addressing, and lawmaking as regards religious
establishments.  The Constitution cannot be rightly understood without
recognition of its grounding in Biblical beliefs, it's philosophical
underpinning.  Without that, it becomes completely fluid in its meaning
as we have seen happen to our dismay and the erosion of our liberty.
It is not a contradiction to insist government remain true to its
foundation and openly and forthrightly acknowledge, honor, and submit to
the God of the Bible, which it originally was designed to do, yet deny
it the ability to make laws establishing a national church.  Conscience
CANNOT be compelled, and Biblical Christianity, which this nation was
founded on, fully recognizes that fact, and is at the root of why
freedom of conscience has always been such a fundamental and cherished
concept in this country.  Throw out our unique Christian heritage, and
freedom of conscience gets tossed too.  If anyone doubts that, all they
need do is consider PC, and/or the status of free speech, most
especially religious speech, in most any non-Christian or apostate
country.
Also, I think some folks get hung up on the word "respecting" in the
First Amendment, some deliberately, misconstruing it completely.  As
used there, that word does NOT mean the federal government may not
respect a particular religion, generalized Biblical Christianity in this
instance, and conform itself to it.  What it DOES mean is, that with
respect to religion, the federal government is forbidden to make any
laws establishing a national church, or prohibiting the free exercise of
religion, be it Christianity in any of its forms, or something else
entirely.
That prohibition, along with the specific statements that no religious
test shall be a requirement for voting or holding public office, denys
the federal government the ability to dictate compulsory membership
and/or worship, and/or direct financial support of any religious
institution (church), and/or make it a requirement for ownership of
property or conducting business, all of which is what freedom of
religion is about.  When a president proclaims a national day of prayer
for whatever reason, even if he calls upon the name of Christ in his
proclamation, that is not a law establishing a religion, nor is there
anything whatever compulsory about it, nor does it deny anyone their
free exercise rights in connection with another religion or absence of
one.
Anti-Christian zealots, however, choose to ignore the free exercise part
and attempt to do what the First Amendment specifically prohibits, which
is to deny Christians that right, particularly any Christian in public
office of any kind.  Our Founding Fathers would never have stood for
such for a moment.
DH> DH> Question, suppose the State of Oklahoma were to make Shinto the
DH> DH> official State religion, how would you react?
DH> RP> I'd be upset about it and about the loss of our heritage, but that
DH> RP> wouldn't make it unconstitutional.
DH> That settles it! No way you could be a liberal, you are to consistent!
DH> 
How could you possibly even consider using the word "liberal" in a
sentence containing a reference to me?  |-)
Bob     /\-/\   - proud Ilk   homebody@galstar.com
C.A.T. ( o o ) Chapter Ilks
       == ^ ==
Green Country - Oklahoma      http://www.galstar.com/~homebody/
 * SLMR 2.1a * Never try to outstubborn a cat.
---------------