Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

phantom power

(25,966 posts)
Tue Apr 1, 2014, 02:07 PM Apr 2014

Louie Gohmert: ‘Separation of church and state’ means ‘church plays a role in the state’

Remember, most people are ignorant of history, and so they'll believe this kind of horse shit if they hear a Very Serious Person saying it.

Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-TX) said this week that the constitutional separation between church and state was meant to be a “one-way wall” where the “church plays a role in the state.”

In a World Net Daily-sponsored promotion for an upcoming Christian TV event called “Washington – A Man of Prayer,” Gohmert recalled that the U.S. House of Representatives once met in what is now known as National Statuary Hall.

“On Sundays this became the largest non-denominational Christian church in the Washington, D.C. area,” he explained. “People came in here and prayed, they sang hymns, they worshipped God. It was part of our history.”

...

“But it was to be a one-way wall, where the state would not dictate to the church,” the Texas Republican insisted. “But the church would certainly play a role in the state.”

“So, that’s a little different idea than a lot of people have about separation of church and state now,” he added. “Including some of our esteemed Supreme Court, who are not quite as familiar with our history as they probably should be.”

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/04/01/louie-gohmert-separation-of-church-and-state-means-church-plays-a-role-in-the-state/
15 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies

stopbush

(24,398 posts)
4. The Founders provided an amendment process to The Constitution.
Tue Apr 1, 2014, 02:27 PM
Apr 2014

Isn't it time we used that process to amend the First Amendment and remove the language that pertains to religion? Why should religious freedom get an exceptional carve out to other examples of freedom of speech? It's all freedom of speech, which is freedom to speak what you believe, which goes to ones beliefs.

el_bryanto

(11,804 posts)
8. I suppose it made sense at the time
Wed Apr 2, 2014, 08:25 AM
Apr 2014

Given the religious wars of Europe and the like. And also the Churchs' role in society was much greater than it is today - but clarifying what separation of Church and State means would probably help in situations like this.

Because it seems like he's arguing that while the State can't dictate to the Church, the Church should be able to dictate to the State; and that doesn't make any sense on a number of levels.

Bryant

stopbush

(24,398 posts)
15. Why not replace the word "religious" with "ideology?"
Wed Apr 2, 2014, 06:39 PM
Apr 2014

That's more inclusive and takes religion down from a pedestal it doesn't deserve.

haele

(12,690 posts)
6. Ummm, it was noted that George would go to church with Martha, but not stay for Communion.
Tue Apr 1, 2014, 03:13 PM
Apr 2014

And Washington was very private about what his personal religion was (or wasn't), even as he used rhetoric of his time in his speeches, which tended to use a lot of common classical and religious references.
I suspect from what has come down from him is that he was a casual believer "at best", and was potentially a deist or similar humanists/agnostic bent.
Otherwise, he would have most likely not have joined the revolutions; good CoE parishioners were encouraged to remain loyal to their King, anointed by God...and many did. The American Revolution certainly did not have as universal a following as people get their history Disney-fied like to believe, and there were many conservative, god-fearing, and wealthy planters and tradesmen - social peers of Washington, Madison, and Jefferson - in the Tidewater and Chesapeake Bay who were actively against the Revolution.

This is the truth the Liberty University type "historians" such as David Barton (and that great academian Louis Ghomert) would happily burn archival records and historic personal documents to eradicate from American History.
Remaking history and people in their own image, just as they remake their god in their own image.

Haele

siligut

(12,272 posts)
14. Interpreting The Constitution the same way they interpret the bible, very conveniently
Wed Apr 2, 2014, 08:57 AM
Apr 2014

These fuckers want a theocracy, where what they say is law, simple as that.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Louie Gohmert: ‘Separatio...