Oregon Senatorial Race 2004,Oregon Senator
Home PagePhilosophy
Church & StateBible & SexualityMarket ForcesAbortionSupreme Court CoupLegislating MoralityReverse Everson Bill Christian LegislationHomosexual MarriageChristian NationBeheading Video CounselIslamMilitant Islamic Verses Creation v EvolutionMilitant Islam Threat
  A Bill: Reversal of Everson, re: Church-State Separation  
 

Please go to updated essay at: http://www.drsenator.com/ReverseEversonABill.html

 A Bill: "Reverse Everson"

A Bill Clarifying the Historical Perspective on
the Founderís True Intent Regarding the Separation of Church and State
and Reversing those Court Decisions Restricting the States' Right to Support & Allow Christian Activity 

  • Whereas the Founding Fathers and Framers of the Constitution engaged in supporting overtly Christian activities as Acts of Congress, and expressed clear words in their writings regarding their desire for these United State to promote and intimately mingle the practice and teachings of Christianity in the educational, governmental, business, and private sectors of society;
  • Whereas the Founding Fathers and Framers of the Constitution chose to omit any explicit reference to their intent for the society to be a Christian Nation, but instead chose to allow each person to choose their particular relationship to God, just as God has allowed complete Freedom of choice in religion;
  • Nevertheless, understand that the Framers intended this to be a Christian nation by the free will choice of its people.  They intended that all the tools and resources of  Federal and State government were to be mobilized in support of the passing their Christian values, beliefs, and culture from generation to generation.  They intended that the laws of the government were to reflect the character and essence of non-denominational Biblical Christianity.  They chose to establish no religion, rather than risk the virtually inevitable doctrinal tyranny that would accompany the explicitly naming of an official State religion, even as general as "Christianity". 
  • Be it understood that the Framers intended that the First Amendment stating that "Congress shall make no law establishing a religion" was meant to restrict the US Congress from establishing a National Religion in its most literal sense.  At the time, the debate was largely about how to harmonize the various denominations.  Thus, the phrase, "no law establishing a religion" was most properly contextualized to refer to a specific Christian Denomination.  The Founders wished to insure that there was no National religion/Christian denomination and its associated statement of faith established by the US Congress.  Such tests of orthodoxy had been clearly shown to be the tools of theocratic tyrants and pharisees.  It was intended that the States could pass laws to support religious activities of their choosing.  Likewise, Congress can pass bills supporting Christian efforts, such as printing Bibles and sending them to Afghanistan to help the missionaries spread the gospel.  Such acts were engaged by the writers of the First Amendment, giving clear indication of their intent to avoid establishing an official governmental Christian Doctrine, but still desiring to promote general, non-denominational, whole-Word Christianity both domestically and abroad.
  • Note: that the 1947 Everson v. Board of Education ruling, used the phrase about erecting a high and impenetrable "wall of Separation" between church and state.  This non-Constitutional cliche (written by Thomas Jefferson to the Danbury Baptist Association in 1802) was originally used to convey assurances that government would never interfere with the authority of the Church in matters of worship.  The Everson decision declared that a County's decision to reimburse bus fare for children traveling to a Catholic school was equivalent to Government authorizing a religion.  This was a historically inaccurate judgment.  The Founders even allowed the States to establish a State religion.  There was certainly no prohibition against the States supporting an individual denomination in their worthy efforts to educate their children in the precepts of Christianity.
  • The drum-like repetition of the mantra "separation of Church and State"  has created a reflexive reaction in the Court against any God-related/religion-related activity supported by government.  The concept of an absolute separation of any Christian religious activity in government, and government supported institutions is historically wrong.  The acts and words of those men who wrote the Constitution is the most revealing view into the intent of the Framers as to the "Constitutionality" of an act of the States or Congress.
  • Thus, the States may authorize, support, fund, or promote the practice of any Christian religion.  The Founders desired that Christianity be promoted in preference to all other religions.  A State denomination may be established by the State legislature, by referendum, or by initiative.  Prayer, Bible reading, compensation for busing, proselytizing & witnessing, public displays of worship on governmental property, displays of religious icons, and ceremonies, and all other religious activities shall be allowed at the discretion of the States.  There is no requirement for equal compensation or consideration for other non-Christian religions.  The Founders intended this to be a Christian nation.  Other religions are welcome to participate in our society, but they have no right to dominate or be considered as equal in their influence in the legislation of public policy.


 


Philosophical Foundation | Home Page | Church & State | Bible & Sexuality | Market Forces | Abortion | Supreme Court Coup | Legislating Morality | Reverse Church/State | Christian Legislation | Homosexual Marriage | America as a Christian Nation | Beheading Video Counsel | Islam | Militant Islamic Verses | Creation vs Evolution | Militant Islamic Threat