home
***
CD-ROM
|
disk
|
FTP
|
other
***
search
/
ShareWare OnLine 2
/
ShareWare OnLine Volume 2 (CMS Software)(1993).iso
/
infor
/
tyranny1.zip
/
CHURCH.TXT
< prev
next >
Wrap
Text File
|
1993-03-02
|
20KB
|
315 lines
CHURCH AND STATE
The school all recited in unison ". . .that one Nation,
indivisible, under God, shall not perish from this Earth."
"Now, let's give thanks to the Father for all the
blessings we have received in the pursuit of our studies.
Mr. Jones, will you lead us in the prayer?"
Mr. Jack Jones, the minister of our local Methodist
Church gives a short but inspiring prayer. The entire class
of students respond with a sincere 'Amen'.
They hold the opening ceremony each day in the audi-
torium. Following the prayer, the entire school sings a
song from the hymnal. They are accompanied by the church
organist. No student has ever complained that they didn't
enjoy these morning sessions. Students are excused and go
to their respective classrooms.
The school, sponsored by our church, gains its support
from members of the church who have children attending the
school. Parents became disenchanted with our public school
system. They finally agreed they should have input in
determining the teaching of their children.
In the lower grade public schools, rowdiness had become
an accepted fact of school life. The teachers had simply
lost control over the students. It had become obvious that
teaching was to accommodate slower students. Other students
with more and faster learning abilities were held back.
They were becoming bored and restive.
In junior and senior high schools, the same problems
existed and drug use is becoming evident. Physical violence
is becoming an everyday occurrence. These problems were all
on the minds of parents when they decided to form a school
under the sponsorship of the church. Throughout the history
of this country, churches were in the forefront of educa-
tion. Some of the oldest colleges in the east were started
in the same manner.
In his study and interpretation of the history of
education in the United States, Elwood P. Cubberly (1868-
1941) demonstrated that in the United States the school
arose everywhere as a child of the church. James F.
Messenger (b. 1872), in his study of the history of
education, points out at time of the framing of the
Constitution of the United States, in 1787, education was
regarded as a matter of church control. (Encyclopedia
Americana)
Back to our school. Several parents had been teachers
in the past and they were hired for the new school. The man
hired as principal also coordinated the lesson plans for all
the classes. The student body had grown to 45 in the past
year alone.
Scholastically, our students scored appreciably higher
than students of the same grades in public schools of our
city. The students were proud of their achievements. The
teachers were proud of their students as were the parents.
Our school was gaining a reputation for good, solid educa-
tion. No frills, no pampering, no nonsense.
That our students scored much higher than students in
the public system obviously upset local and state education
authorities. Efforts were started to close the school.
First attack was on the teachers . . . they were not state
accredited.
The school answered that this was a private school and
of no concern to educational authorities. Nevertheless, it
was apparent these people had become concerned. Our
students were learning to become God-fearing, questioning
and upright citizens. They were not robots as were being
churned out in the state run system.
State authorities were not so easily dissuaded and
filed suit in a local court to have the school closed. Our
minister and principal ignored the court order and the
school continued. For a short while, anyway. The local
sheriff came by the church and school with an order for the
school to close down. However, the minister had received a
call from friends and the doors are locked barring their
entry.
Finally, in a show of police power, they forced their
way into the buildings. They actually arrested the minister
and principal for contempt of court.
What was that? They forced their way into the church
and school to arrest the minister and the principal? Is
this still America? Just where do these knotheads find the
authority to pull such a stunt?
Separation of church and state, is their argument.
Where do they find such a statement? They insist our
Constitution guarantees separation of church and state.
Religion belongs to the church and education is a state
function.
Cow paddies! Our Constitution says NO such thing.
These are words of demented idiots. These people are
parroting words which were taken completely out of their
context. This statement is attributed to Thomas Jefferson
and used by bleeding hearts out of it's intent and meaning
for many years.
Let's take a look at what our Constitution has to say
about church and state.
The First Amendment is part of our Bill of Rights.
This specifically prohibits the government from interfering
in special areas such as religion, press, free speech, etc.
The introductory statement or preamble to the Bill of
Rights makes the intent crystal clear . . .
"THE Convention of a number of the States, having
at the time of their adopting the Constitution,
expressed a desire, in order to prevent mis-
construction or abuse of its powers, that further
declaratory and restrictive clauses should be
added: And as extending the ground of public
confidence in the Government, will best ensure the
beneficent ends of its institution:" (Also from
Documents Illustrative of the Formation of the
Union)
Not any question about the intent of the First Congress
when it submitted the first twelve amendments to the states
for their approval, is there? Further restraining and
confining clauses to prevent the misunderstanding or abuse
of its powers. This was the high fence around the powers.
They also confined the misuse of those powers by the federal
government.
Back to the First Amendment . . . separation of church
and state? Not a chance. Here is what it has to say about
our RIGHT to religious freedom, opening and operating
schools, etc:
"Congress shall make no law respecting an es-
tablishment of religion, or prohibiting the free
exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of
speech, or of the press; or the right of the
people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the
Government for a redress of grievances."
Can you read anything in there which allows them to
close a school or arrest a minister or principal? Of course
not. They would prefer you didn't know what our rights are
so they say we are guaranteed "separation of church and
state."
We are GUARANTEED the right to establish any religion
and to practice it freely as our hearts and consciences
dictate. Our Founding Fathers were religious and Christian
and believed religion was something between an individual
and his Maker.
In 1789, Congress passed an ordinance which declared
that: Religion, morality, and knowledge, being necessary to
good government and the happiness of mankind, schools and
the means of education should ever be encouraged. (Encyclo-
pedia Americana) Religion most certainly not an issue in
which the government could stick its nose. This is one of
those restrictive clauses to prevent an abuse of power!
Is it possible that those who work for government don't
know what our Constitution says either? It is not only
possible but very definitely true. This even though we have
ordered ALL persons who work for a government entity, at any
level, to take an oath to support the document.
Being men of wisdom, the Founding Fathers specified
that no religious test be a qualification to office. (Art
VI, Sec 3) They were firm believers in religious freedom.
For the sake of illustration, let's say that you and
three or four friends get together. You all decide to
worship Isis or a stone or a jaguar, . . . . the idol is
unimportant. The fact remains our Constitution says you
have that RIGHT! And further you have the right to exercise
your religious belief freely.
Your friends may not agree with you or your belief and
I may not agree with you. Even government may also disagree
with that belief. Yet they cannot interfere with your
doctrine or the free exercise thereof. First Amendment
guarantees that. There are no changes further on in our
Constitution to say they can obstruct your belief. This is
why they want you to believe there is a guarantee of
separation of church and state.
Going back to our opening illustration, the right to
establish and practice a religious belief was violated.
Also the right to freedom of speech and of the people to
peacefully assemble. All First Amendment guarantees.
How do they get away with it? Because they feel power
and might makes right! And we are fast becoming illiterate
and ignorant concerning our Constitution. At the same time
we are becoming a nation of wimps. It's becoming apparent
as we look around there are no real men anymore. No one has
enough starch in their backbones to tell these people enough
is enough. What has happened to the "land of the free and
the home of the brave?"
These people are seizing and assuming powers which we
did not grant to government at any level. Can you imagine
this happening in this country let's say 200 or even 100
years ago? People would have been up in arms. And rightly
so.
A quote from an encyclopedia might shed some light on
what our government has in mind for the United States . . .
"In Russia, education is a state monopoly. No
religious schools (apart from a few seminaries for the
special purpose of training priests) or private schools of
any kind are permitted to exist. (And we've seen what is
going on there. They have people who don't know how to wind
a watch.)
Teaching in the schools must emphasize scientific
materialism and exclude any consideration of the super-
natural." (Encyclopedia Americana) God is a no-no!
If you have a chance to see the original or true copy
of our Constitution, you will see WE THE PEOPLE on the first
line of the Preamble. We agreed to and established the
Constitution giving permission and authority for our
government.
This is a fixed and immutable document changeable only
by the ones who gave the authority for government . . . WE
THE PEOPLE. (Art V) There is nothing in the document which
gives the right to anyone in government to enlarge their
sphere of power or authority.
By our permission, they were given authority and
jurisdiction to govern. When they exceed granted powers,
they are breaking the law and violating the trust we imposed
in them. By such an act their jurisdiction ceases. Alex-
ander Hamilton pointed out in the Federalist Papers (No. 78)
that 'No legislative act, therefore, contrary to the Consti-
tution can be valid.'
Let's take a look at how the federales are observing
this guaranteed right to free exercise of our religious
beliefs. Would it surprise you to hear that they don't
believe we have it?
The Internal Revenue Service, part of the executive
branch, have regulations which have a direct or implied
consent of the Congress. They can decide if a church
doesn't conform to what they term is a conventional
religious belief. By a simple letter they can then say you
are not a church and take away your tax exempt status.
Further restrictive clauses mentioned in the preamble
to the Bill of Rights has a hollow ring. I'll have to admit
it really generates confidence in our government, doesn't
it?
Looking a little further in our Bill of Rights, two
more amendments will make our point. The Ninth and Tenth
are clear to anyone that no power or authority not expressly
granted can be seized. These were included just in case
someone in government decided our Constitution and Bill of
Rights didn't mean what they say. Let's see what they say
and you will understand why governments really wish they
didn't exist.
Article IX
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain
rights, shall not be construed to deny or
disparage others retained by the people.
Article X
The powers not delegated to the United States
by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the
States, are reserved to the States respectively or
to the people.
Not difficult to understand, are they? Then why were
the people arrested or the church and school closed? We
have to reassert ourselves and assume the power of directing
our governments to their intended roles. We have elected
people to Congress who break the law by violating constitu-
tional restrictions and the oath they took to support the
document. Throw them out of office! Drastic? Not at all.
Look at what they are doing to us. Those appointed deserve
to have civil suits filed in federal courts for violation of
our constitutional rights.
Relying on Supreme Court decisions as a guide to filing
suits in court is normally a false hope. First, the Supreme
Court has NO authority under our form of government to make
law. Their decisions are just that . . . decisions . . .
only opinions! The basis for federal suits are the
Constitution and what our Founding Fathers determined and
established for our new government.
Nevertheless, there are many older decisions which do
substantiate our stand. Intensive research will find those.
By staying strictly within constitutional authority, they
have no where to turn to disagree or argue against.
Petitions for Redress of Grievances can be effective.
Send them to all members of Congress together with anyone
else in the bureaucracy with a suggestion of power. This is
First Amendment right. Send any Petitions for Redress of
Grievances via certified mail. It wouldn't be the first
time bureaucrats have 'lost' mail when they haven't had to
sign for it. Phone calls and letters to members of Congress
are a must. Ask questions about assuming powers we did not
confer . . . about the oath they have taken to support the
document etc.
Before someone takes me to task for the statement that
the Founding Fathers were Christians, let me point out the
last page of the Constitution. When the delegates affixed
their signatures before it was sent to the Congress for its
submission to the states we find:
"DONE in Convention, by the Unanimous Consent of
the States present the Seventeenth Day of
September in the Year of Our Lord one thousand
seven hundred and Eighty seven . . . ."
The opening illustration was not hypothetical.
Incidents like this are occurring with frightening regular-
ity. Media reports show there are over 6000 cases now
pending between religious organizations and the federal
government.
To allow these people to destroy our country and form
of government, all good people need to do is nothing! What
will you tell your posterity? How will you justify it? Or
is it simply that you don't want to become involved . . .
let your children or grandchildren worry about it them-
selves?
There is a point where the exercise of their power
stops . . that's when we stand firm and say don't cross this
line.
Young minds are fertile ground. The state wants
control of education to mold these minds to their view.
They WANT robots. Let's deny them the power.
PLEASE SUPPORT SHAREWARE BY REGISTERING WITH THE AUTHOR.
