Because some religious butthead in Texas is squealing about religious freedom, in quotes here because we are not against religious freedom but question whether this fellows idea of it is out of bounds .... we have been researching the literature surrounding the First Amendments path to ratification, and came across two items well worth the time to read and ponder. The first one is this note from Cornell University Law Schools archives on analysis of the Bill of Rights, which among other things, cites dissent from an argument made in Lee v. Weisman, 112 S. Ct. 2649, 2678, 2683–84 (1992) by Justices Scalia and Thomas (see the footnotes). Also, here is a selected passage from Madison written while the text of the First Amendment was under consideration .... which uses this language: “The civil rights of none shall be abridged on account of religious belief or worship, nor shall any national religion be established, nor shall the full and equal rights of conscience be in any manner, or on any pretence, infringed.” Its my thinking that the phrase on any pretence was deliberate, and chosen to highlight the fact, evident in history, that those wanting government interference in religious matters would resort to any pretence to make their case. That they would, in other words, stop at nothing, to build a case for the necessity or desirability of government establishment of religion. These texts are not particularly easy reading, but I think its a good idea for people interested in the subject of religious freedom and separation to familiarize themselves with the long and well documented history of the subject in America.
Posted on: Fri, 03 Oct 2014 18:28:26 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015