Home Archives Random Quotes Latest Comments Top 100 Submit Quote Search Log In

Quote# 89616

As Associate Justice Joseph Story wrote in his monumental work on the Constitution, “The real object of the First Amendment was not to countenance, much less to advance Mohammedanism, or Judaism, or infidelity, by prostrating Christianity, but to exclude all rivalry among Christian sects and to prevent any national ecclesiastical establishment.” In other words, the First Amendment was not written to establish policy for any faith tradition other than Christianity. The Founders were simply not dealing with Islam or Hinduism or Buddhism or any other religion. This is why the Supreme Court in the 19th century could deny Mormon claims to polygamy, even though they argued for it on First Amendment grounds.

The purpose of the First Amendment then, is clear, according to Story. Its purpose is to prevent Congress from picking one Christian denomination and making it the official church of the United States, and to prevent the federal government from interfering in any way with the right of states to regulate religious expression as they see fit.

Thus, writes Story, “The whole power over the subject of religion is left exclusively to the State governments, to be acted upon according to their own sense of justice and the State constitutions.” In other words, according to Story, if we apply the Constitution as given by the Founders and not as mangled by the courts, states may prohibit the building of mosques if they choose to do so.

While this clearly does not represent the current understanding of the courts, according to the longest service associate justice in Supreme Court history, it is the correct one. And of course it is far from the only issue on which the courts have strayed far from the meaning of the Constitution as given by the Founders.

And while we may be years away from returning to an originalist standard of applying the First Amendment, the longest journey still begins with the smallest step and Story’s words may be that first step.

It’s worth noting in summary that, while I am speaking just for myself, these ideas are not my own. They come from noted prosecutor Andy McCarthy, prominent lawmaker Geert Wilders and eminent constitutional historian Joseph Story. While of course there are many who disagree vigorously with these thoughts, perhaps it’s time for a vigorous debate since so much is at stake.

While these steps will not protect us from the Muslims already among us who wish to do us harm in the name of Allah, these practical steps would stem the tide and create two large moats - the Atlantic and Pacific oceans - to protect the castle of American freedom from the very real threat of Islam. There is no time to lose.

Bryan Fischer, Rightly Concerned 66 Comments [9/17/2012 3:24:21 AM]
Fundie Index: 56
WTF?! || meh
Username:
Comment:



1 2 3
Leighton Buzzard

Geert Wilders? Isn't he a fascist asshat? Oh, wait, so is Bryan ...

9/18/2012 2:33:19 AM

gravematter

You really can't think very highly of the founding fathers if you think they were too stupid to write "Christianity" instead of "religion".

9/18/2012 6:10:50 AM

Dr.Shrinker

I guess Bryan wasn't getting enough attention by portraying gay people as "the enemy."

9/18/2012 6:25:38 AM

TheLastCenturion

"but to exclude all rivalry among Christian sects and to prevent any national ecclesiastical establishment"

oh yeah,that makes sense. im sure that is why all the little sects all still hate eachother anyways

"Its purpose is to prevent Congress from picking one Christian denomination and making it the official church of the United States"

is that what "no law(s) regarding religion" means?

"if we apply the Constitution as given by the Founders and not as mangled by the courts, states may prohibit the building of mosques if they choose to do so"

you mean the one that says that no laws will be made regarding religion? i believe that the US constitution supercedes state law, does it not? so the whole "no law regarding religion" thing applies to state governments too. you cant pick and choose which ammendments to uphold. thats why the supreme court exists.

9/18/2012 6:51:55 AM

Anon-e-moose

@Alencon

We had far worse done to us by Hitler's Luftwaffe/V1s/V2s during WWII; also, what the IRA tried (and ultimately failed) in 30 years. So where do these paranoid fundie cuntbrains think that Al-Qaeda could succeed where the IRA and Hitler FAILED?

...and wasn't it some of said fundie cuntbrains, who used to fund the IRA...?

9/18/2012 7:50:54 AM

JohnTheAtheist

Who listens to this fucking guy?

9/18/2012 7:57:02 AM

Filin De Blanc

It occurs to me that the Founding Fathers are a lot like Jesus in that wingnuts don't give a damn about what they actually believed as long as they said something that can be vaguely construed as hating the same stuff wingnuts hate.

9/18/2012 9:14:30 AM

MarylandBear

Okay, Bryan, you think the Constitution gives the individual states the power to regulate religion?

You'd then be fine with a state declaring The Metropolitan Community Church to be the official denomination of the state? They are Christians.

9/18/2012 9:30:03 AM

Ebon

Lying about history for Jesus?

9/18/2012 4:54:28 PM

tracer

"This is why the Supreme Court in the 19th century could deny Mormon claims to polygamy, even though they argued for it on First Amendment grounds."


So Mormons aren't Christians now? Does't the Bible condone polygamy, except among deacons of the church?

9/18/2012 6:46:11 PM



1811-1845 I think his opinion is out of date.

9/18/2012 7:49:35 PM

Dewey Cheatham

#1448388
farpadokly

Best summation of the various strains of "turn back the clock to some other idealized time" I've heard.

The only one you left out was a return to ca. 1946, before the "coons" had equal access to education and commerce.

9/19/2012 4:36:18 PM

Cuneas

I see Squealer is making some additions to the Seven Commandments again.

10/14/2012 9:25:46 PM

Kirook

Until the Constitution actually says, "Congress can make no law respecting an establishment of religion (unless it's True Christianity™) or prohibiting the free exercise thereof (unless it's Islam)" I'll keep right on telling you to die in a fire.

Heck, I'll probably do it anyway.

4/18/2013 9:09:04 AM

Quantum Mechanic

bullshit

7/2/2013 10:32:28 AM

GigaGuess

I guess you need the magical X-ian Reading Glasses (patent pending) to see how the line reads that it grants the freedom to worship Jesus however you choose. I guess my poor agnostic eyes just see how it is meant to eliminate any government sponsored favoring or persecution of any religion at all.

7/2/2013 10:51:59 AM
1 2 3