And Justice for All….
R.I.P. Religion
“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, of prohibiting the free exercise thereof.”The first amendment of our constitution was established to protect religious freedom, “the congress shall make no laws,” in other words -congress, hands off religion. Faith is the quintessential element for the religious belief in God and that is the problem with secularist Statists who believe in nothing, therefore they tend to believe in anything. For ages secularists have been trying desperately to remove religious symbols from public places of assembly with great success. Another irony in the successful persecution of the Christian faith is by sighting a bigoted Supreme Court judge’s opinion who interjecting into the constitution his opinion the phrase known as “separation of church and state.” This is how the whole deception purposely happened; notice I said purposely happened, because it had a very specific purpose indeed. But first, this is especially a hard pill to swallow because it proves alleged amendment is a bogus fabrication of a misunderstood conversation, which ACLU lawyers use to manipulate the court cases. These cases ostensibly are quoting the constitutional law, however it is a complete lie, a hoax conjured up by a supreme the court justice Hugo Black in the monumental Supreme Court case of Everson v. Board of Education.
Here is how it all began, Supreme Court Justice Hugo Black Jr. was a known member of the Ku Klux Klan in the 1920s, at the time the Klan’s resented the people’s faith in the Catholic Church. The church was growing across the country and the vindictive Klan needed a weapon too stunt its growth. Supreme court justice Black’s father agreed with and supported the KKK loathe for Catholicism, relating his passion to Justice Black Jr. his son who later wrote this about his father: “The Ku Klux Klan and Daddy, so far as I could tell, had one thing in common. He suspected the Catholic Church. He used to read of Paul Blanchard’s books exposing the power abuse in the Catholic Church. He thought the Pope and the bishops had too much power and property. He resented the fact that rented property owned by the Church was not taxed; he felt they got most of their revenue from the poor and did not return enough of it.” Black’s father’s influence worked its magic, on the KKK member with the power of a Supreme Court justice. Black had an obvious mission against the Catholics Church, which was to erect the well known, yet none existent wall separating Church and state, a wall that was not in the constitution, nor was it amended to be in the constitution, the Emerson case provided justice Black with the opportunity to make a law through his powerful position as Supreme Court Judge by legislating from the bench which, a Judge is not in the position, nor has the power to do.
This is what actually transpired, in response to congratulation from the Baptist community of Danbury Connecticut on his election to the presidency Jefferson wrote a letter in reply merely explaining why he did not follow in traditions of his predecessors Washington and Adams in calling for a day of national fasting and thanksgiving and in conclusion of the letter Jefferson uses this dread metaphor, he said this;
“I contemplate with sovereign reverence that the act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should make no laws respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting free exercise thereof,”
Thus building a wall of separation between Church and State.
What Jefferson was saying is, in other words, congress hands off the church, make no laws, do not touch the Church, if you can’t resist the temptation, then build a make believe wall between the YOU and the Church, so that YOU- keep your law making paws off religious freedom. And not that there is or should be a wall separating to two –the wall meant as a metaphor it was a recognition by Jefferson agreeing with the American people ordering legislators to stay away from religion, and that is all so, the wall simply does not exist. This misunderstood metaphor has haunted the Supreme Court since 1947 by allowing legal decisions and the passing of laws that threatened the religious liberties, which is exactly opposite of what the first amendment sought to insure against. The court, under Justice Black should have been protecting the sanctity of religious freedom, instead, the wall opened the door to religious persecution by secularist’s socialists elitist from the 1960s that desperately want to, once again, declare “God is dead” and set in motion a nationally established religion of statist.
Frustrated by justice Black opinion in the Everson v the board of education case justice Rehnquist wrights in 1985 of the dilemma Blacks decision caused the Supreme Court since then:
“It is impossible to build a sound constitution doctrine upon a mistaken understanding of constitutional history,” expressly freighted with Jefferson’s misleading metaphor for nearly forty years.
“Thomas Jefferson was of Corse in France at the time the constitutional Amendments known as the bill of rights were pressed by Congress and ratified by the States.
His letter to the Danbury Baptist Association was a short note of courtesy, written fourteen years after the Amendments were passed by Congress.
He would seem to any detached observer as a less than ideal source of contemporary history to the meaning of the Religion Clause of the First Amendment.”
The founders, our fore fathers understood the necessity of keeping government from intervening in religion and the liberty human beings possess that was endowed by our creator, freedom to worship and pray to our God, anywhere in public or in private.
Ronald Regan said this: “The constitution was never meant to prevent people from praying: its declared purpose was to protect their freedom to pray.” A freedom we are losing the battle to defend as the minority of secularists press for the suppression of the majority, by attacking religious freedom in schools and places of assembly while invoking the dread wall of unconstitutional separation, hence forth robbing our religious liberty with a twisted metaphor, from a racists hypocrite.
Though Thomas Jefferson was considered to be the father of the Democratic Party he knew that judicial activism, invoked by Justice Black a century later, would lead to tipping the balance of the political scales shifting too much power to the judiciary where laws are enforced. Concerned with the potential abuse of judicial power he wrote to William Jarvis in 1820 with angst this:
“To consider the judge as the ultimate arbiters of all constitutional questions is a very dangerous doctrine indeed, and one which places us under the despotism of an oligarchy.
Our judges are honest as other men and not more so.
They have with others the same passions for party, for power, and the privilege of their corp.….and their power the more dangerous as they are in the office for life and not responsible, as the other functionaries are, to the elective control.
The constitution has elected no such single tribunal, knowing that to whatever hands confided, with the corruption of time and party, its members would become despots.
It has more wisely made all the departments co-equal and co-sovereign within themselves.”
Jefferson’s fears were correct; as was his outstanding not to Jarvis 190 years hence, America now finds itself under the despotism of a judicial oligarchy, entrenched in their official positions, unfortunately for life. Judges he states are people, with the same passions for party, power and privilege that need not fear the elective control of the people. Rehnquist understood the devastation caused by Justice Hugo Black’s bios and bigoted decision, yet the wall of separation between Church and state stand, ironically in total opposition to the constitutional intent written by our founding fathers creating an oxymoron, instead of keeping legislators out of religion matters we have kicked Judo-Christian religion out of our society.
