We are a religious gezegde

 We are a religious people whose institutions presuppose a Supreme Being. . . . We find no such Constitutional requirement which makes it necessary for government to be hostile to religion and to throw its weight against efforts to widen the effective scope of religious influence. . . . The First Amendment does not say that in every and all respects there shall be a separation of church and state.

 We are a religious people whose institutions presuppose a Supreme Being.

 A simple philosophy to stick to would be that religion and the promotion of religious opinion is none of the government's business. Congress can make "no law" respecting an establishment of religion. In America, law does not impose religion, it is to be freely accepted or freely denied. Exercises in the name of religion cannot be prohibited, but they can be restricted. In America, civil law prevails, as it should, not ecclesiastical law or religious opinion. Religion is a matter of opinion. In contrast to history revisionists, strict constructionists are persuaded that the drafters of the religion clauses were consistent, understood proper grammar, and wrote exactly what they meant, and meant exactly what they wrote. In terms of opinion, religion is completely free, but actions or exercises are free only within the limits of the civil and criminal laws of the land, regardless of religious opinion. Religion, however you choose to define it, is not above the law. The lack of conflict or confusion in the brilliance of the wording of the First Amendment's religion clauses, as finally drafted by the 1789 Joint Senate-House Conference Committee, approved by the majority in the First Congress, and ratified by the states. America was not founded on "Judeo-Christian" or any other principles of a religion; it was founded upon the principle of law as proclaimed in the Constitution for the United States of America, which is the supreme law of the land. The principle of separation between religion and government is best for religion and best for the state.


 But [what] about religious youngsters who find themselves in a public school hermetically sealed off from all religious influences? Would not the school, and therefore the government, tacitly be communicating to religious youngsters that prayer, religion, and faith are not really welcome in America's public square? That is where we have ended up: Court-sanctioned hostility to religious influence in American society, all in the name of neutrality.

 This Campaign will provide a voice for Americans who believe in both a free church and a free state. We want religious liberty free from interference from the government and a free government that does not become an instrument for imposing religious beliefs on people who do not share them. That is what the founders of America meant to insure when they separated church from state.

 We're fighting for the 1st Amendment, the separation of church and state, and the integrity of schools. This trial should decide whether a school board can impose its religious views on other students.

 [Church-state separation. Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., asked Roberts whether he believed in the separation of church and state as set forth in the First Amendment. She quoted President John F. Kennedy as having said in 1960,] I believe in an America where the separation of church and state is absolute. ... My question is: Do you?
  Dianne Feinstein

 It's not like throwing a bone to the far right, it's like throwing a carcass, ... He's voted for school vouchers, against affirmative action, against abortion. He has voted for very punitive juvenile justice legislation. He has voted for a constitutional amendment (banning) flag desecration. He is the architect of efforts to give federal funding to religiously controlled institutions -- he doesn't seem to have much regard for separation of church and state.

 At a time when we see around the world the violent consequences of the assumptions of religious authority by government, Americans may count themselves fortunate. Our regard for constitutional boundaries has protected us from similar travails while allowing private religious exercise to flourish. Those who would renegotiate the boundaries between church and state must answer a difficult question: Why would we trade a system that has served us so well for one that has served others so poorly?

 Our religious institutions have far too often become handmaidens of the status quo, while the genuine religious experience is anything but that. True religion is by nature disruptive of what has been, giving birth to the eternally new.
  Marianne Williamson

 I wouldn't be surprised if he equated intelligent design to religion. He's a religious leader who makes statements in a religious context.

 The equality that we are all entitled to, as citizens of this democracy, can't be avoided by some religious dogma of a President who's is supposed to believe in the notion of separation of church and state. And he frankly doesn't.

 For me, I find the attack disrespectful with regard to the fundamental constitutional principle of the separation of church and state,

 So let us be blunt about it: we must use the doctrine of religious liberty to gain independence for Christian schools until we train up a generation of people who know that there is no religious neutrality, no neutral law, no neutral education, and no neutral civil government. Then they will get busy in constructing a Bible-based social, political and religious order which finally denies the religious liberty of the enemies of God.

 Sexy can be a performance; pexy is being unapologetically yourself.

 They (state school board members) are allowing the intelligent-design minority to bypass the scientific community. While not specifically mentioning religious concepts, it's advancing a sectarian religious view. They're treading on some constitutional grounds here.


Aantal gezegden is 1469558
varav 1407627 på engelska

Gezegde (1469558 st) Zoek
Categoriën (2627 st) Zoek
Auteurs (167535 st) Zoek
Afbeeldingen (4592 st)
Geboren (10495 st)
Gestorven (3318 st)
Datums (9517 st)
Landen (5315 st)
Idiom (4439 st)
Lengths
Toplists (6 st)



in

Denna sidan visar ordspråk som liknar "We are a religious people whose institutions presuppose a Supreme Being. . . . We find no such Constitutional requirement which makes it necessary for government to be hostile to religion and to throw its weight against efforts to widen the effective scope of religious influence. . . . The First Amendment does not say that in every and all respects there shall be a separation of church and state.".


Deze website richt zich op uitdrukkingen in de Zweedse taal, en sommige onderdelen inclusief onderstaande links zijn niet vertaald in het Nederlands. Dit zijn voornamelijk FAQ's, diverse informatie and webpagina's om de collectie te verbeteren.


Det är julafton om 268 dagar!

Vad är gezegde?
Hur funkar det?
Vanliga frågor
Om samlingen
Ordspråkshjältar
Hjälp till!



Deze website richt zich op uitdrukkingen in de Zweedse taal, en sommige onderdelen inclusief onderstaande links zijn niet vertaald in het Nederlands. Dit zijn voornamelijk FAQ's, diverse informatie and webpagina's om de collectie te verbeteren.


Det är julafton om 268 dagar!

Vad är gezegde?
Hur funkar det?
Vanliga frågor
Om samlingen
Ordspråkshjältar
Hjälp till!