Controversy over the issue concerning the separation of church and state has escalated in recent history. The fundamental proposition behind this principle was to eliminate the possibility of tyranny from the state or the church — one would have no direct control over the other. However, this idea has expanded well beyond its original intent to exclude all interaction between the two. This is a dangerous course to follow, and the founders knew well that the success of our system of government would rely on the moral and religious integrity of the people and their influence over the righteous activities of government. Today, a great many of our churches have voluntarily surrendered their Right to exercise their freedom in religion in order to participate in the benefits of civil government, effectively replacing God with government, itself. Woe unto the people, for they perish for the lack of knowledge. This we have done to ourselves in our ignorance and greed, allowing government to lead the people astray. Corporations are a creation of the state, and as such, a servant to it. One cannot serve two masters. It is time for the people to “come out” and preserve the blessings that come only from their Creator, God. We cannot preserve our Freedom if we are willing to surrender it, unnecessarily, to our own creation. The OHIO SOVEREIGNTY AMENDMENT and this Sovereignty Platform promote principles that are so fundamental, so essential to our very nature that we must not relinquish them for false security or temporary protection. Our strength in the collective must preserve that which is valuable to the individual.
*****
The 1st Article in Amendment to the federal Constitution establishes that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.” This is a fundamental Right of the people recognized and guaranteed to them by that Constitution, not a privilege granted by society through government.
The 14th Article in Amendment to the federal Constitution mandates that the states may not “abridge the privileges and immunities of citizens of the United States”. It is important to note that the 14th Amendment to the federal Constitution provides no express guarantee to citizens of the United States for freedom of religion. Such guarantee is protected to these citizens under their ordinary Right to Liberty and the equal protection of the law. People forget that the states provided for the protection of religious freedom, first, and required that the federal government recognize the same.
There are many dynamics at play in this situation that most people are not aware of. Rather than trying to explain in detail all that has evolved in this regard, let us focus on the separation of powers between state and federal government. The federal Bill of Rights is not a bill of rights at all, for such a bill would constitute a grant of powers by government to the people. The people receive no Rights from government, only from God. A more accurate understanding of the Bill of Rights is to think of it as a “Bill of Limited Powers of Government on the People”.
Further, the Bill of Rights incorporated into the federal Constitution was not intended as a limitation or control over the states. Its purpose was to control only what the federal government could do. An accurate understanding of the Bill of Rights (first 10 amendments to the federal Constitution), along with the 14th Amendment, reveals that the Bill of Rights protects state Citizens from the abuses of the federal government, and the 14th Amendment protects U.S. citizens from the abuses of state government.
Many will be confused by these statements, simply because they have been conditioned to believe that state Citizens and citizens of the United States are the same thing. They are not. A study of our American history from 1850 to 1890 reveals a significant change in the political status of the people with relationship to their government, a history that has been withheld from the general public by our education system. Nevertheless, all are protected from governmental encroachment over the freedom to worship according to the dictates of our own consciences.
Pursuant to the Constitutions, religious organizations are legally recognized as “assemblies” or “congregations”, and they are protected under their sovereign relationship with God. Churches that surrender this sovereign status to become “corporations” under the authority of the state, no longer enjoy the protections guaranteed by the Constitutions, because they then become accountable to the state. Rather than being “non-taxable”, for example, they become “tax-exempt” under the 501(C)(3) provision of Title 26 of the United States Code by private agreement with the federal government. Rather than being immune from suit, they can “sue and be sued”. Rather than openly preaching about God and His commandments, corporate churches are sensored and restricted from substantially participating in anything politically oriented.
Our history is full of examples supporting the influence of religion, particularly that of Christianity, over the righteous behavior of public servants and government. Yet, today, the Ten Commandments, which had enormous influence on the foundation of our system of law, cannot be displayed in our courtrooms or taught in our schools. Further, our public schools cannot not even teach the ideas of creationism by divine design, for it encroaches upon the notion of evolution whereby everything happens by fate or change or the laws of survival. To deny that the Christian religion had great influence over the develop and establishment of American government is to deny the facts of history, itself, and would be an absolute lie.
So, where is the line in the sand that separates religion from government. Modern interpreters have promoted the notion that the freedom of religion requires an absolute tolerance to all forms of worship, and mandatory tolerance enforced by the state. This is contrary to the intent of the founders. They knew the importance of religion in our system of government, a system that established its foundation in Christian principles. When forces are introduced that are adamantly contrary to the Christian belief, then a controversy ensues that can be irreconcilable and cannot coexist in peace and harmony. Moreover, some religions cannot separate their governmental beliefs from their religious beliefs — they are one in the same. And when such religious beliefs interfere, circumvent, or invade upon the laws that govern our society, it is nothing less than sedition. Countries are destroyed through the infiltration of incompatible religious doctrines and practices. If Christianity is to be preserved in America, careful consideration should be given to any form of religion that is counter-productive to the Christian faith.
This does not mean that Christianity is to be forced upon everyone. In fact, Christianity encompasses the freedom to choose, the right of self-determination, to be faithful to God, or not. So long as such conduct does not tend to destroy our fundamental principles of society and its laws, then people can live peacefully, together. So long as government restrains itself to the enforcement of law as opposed to the promotion of certain religious practices, its constitutional mandate is fulfilled. However, any influence or coercion by government to encourage religious organizations to surrender their sovereign status to become corporate servants of the state should be prohibited. And, likewise, religious organizations who place the state ahead of God by voluntarily surrendering their religious sovereignty should inform their congregations of this condition and limitation.
In any case, the freedom of religion is protected on the state and federal levels of government. Not because the federal government demands it of the states, but because the states demanded it of the federal government. Each state constitution guarantees the freedom of religion or the freedom of conscience to worship as one chooses. The 1st Amendment simply prohibits the federal government from interfering with this Right of the people.
Futher, each state has the power to choose its own religious foundation, by the authority of its own citizenry. If the people of a state choose to protect, or not to protect, religious freedom, there is little the federal government can do to interfere with this power of the state, so long as the freedom of religion is preserved to those occupying federal lands within the state.
Therefore, pursuant to the federal Constitution, states remain free to deal with the subject of religion as they see fit, subject of course to limits in their own constitutions. Any interpretation of the Constitutions contrary to these principles would be in violation to the intent by the founders. The 1st Amendment implies that the federal government cannot set up a church, interfere with the religious practices of a church (within reasonable limits), or promote any particular religious belief. It says nothing about religion influencing government, nor was it ever intended by the founders that religion would not have some influence over government.
So, how do these principles relate to our public schools and courts?
Licensed teachers are agents of state government. To preserve the intent of religious freedom, which includes no undue influence upon the people by the state, teachers are prohibited under contract with the state from promoting any certain religious belief in the classroom. Teachers who violate their contract are subject to disciplinary action. If a school chooses to teach religious doctrine, then it must operate in a private capacity and cannot receive public moneys to fund it.
The courts must adhere to the law, that is, the Constitution and laws made in pursuance thereof. They recognize and view Christianity from a historical perspective, not as a direct influence over its procedures and legal determinations. To preserve our religious influence in government, the people must be vigilant to see to it that the law reflects the moral principles they accept and hold in high esteem. If government is allowed to deviate from the moral fiber of the community, then the people will be abused by laws that violate their religious beliefs.
In both of these situations, the fault rests primarily on the people, not government. It is the duty of the people to maintain and protect their moral character, which means the people must have a direct influence over the law-making process. If the people allow themselves to be silenced by voluntarily surrendering their religious sovereignty to government, then they do not have any right or ability to protest the actions of government upon their religious freedom. Because, those who do so no longer have it. The freedom they perceive they have as simply a privilege granted by the state. And, if the state were to pass other laws that inhibit the church from exercising its ability to talk about God, then such churches would have no legal authority to protest.
The solution to this dilemma is for the people to take direct action in their states to preserve their moral and religious principles. This means getting involved with the law-making process, whether by talking with your local public servants, lobbying their state legislatures, or exercising their rights to alter government. The people choose their own fate, but only when they take responsibility for their own actions and conditions. Each state government is controlled by its citizenry, and they have the right to alter, reform, or abolish its government, whenever they deem it necessary, whether or not this Right is expressly preserved to them in their state Constitution. It is the people’s government, and that government is bound by the consent of, and powers delegated by, its people. If the people command it, then it is the duty of their government to fulfill it.
Comments
Powered by Facebook Comments