-
-
States' Liberty Party Online Store
-
\
|
Let Freedom Ring |
One Nation Under God must Erect Wall of Separation between Constitution and Bad Court DecisionsThis week's federal appeals court decision striking down the Pledge of Allegiance for the included phrase "under God" should bring the court some unexpected complications. The court stated that a professing of "under God" is identical to "under Jesus", "under Vishnu", "under Zeus", and "under no god". "because none of these professions can be neutral with respect to religion," The Constitution prohibits Congress from "establishing religion". Jesus and Vishnu represent a religion where God is common to both. In fact, God is universal to all religions by definition. The court's next example, "Zeus", is mythology, not religion, and the last example, "no god", is not religion. "God", necessary to all religions, is neutral with respect to religion, contrary to the court's professions, but is equal to "no god" with respect to the establishment of God. Congress is not prohibited from passing laws establishing "no religion" or prohibiting it's free exercise, but the establishing of no religion may inhibit the free exercise of religion.. The Establishment Clause does not protect the free exercise of "no religion". It the curious that the court includes Greek Mythology in the presentation and equates it with "God". The court is perhaps stating that religion is mythology, in which case the court has defined "under God" as mythology, and thus is not a religion by court definition. The court's judgement will be flawed, because Congress is not prohibited from passing a law establishing mythology. Perhaps the court has instead redefined religion to a broader definition than was previously applied: "A cause, principle, or activity pursued with zeal or conscientious devotion" (dictionary.com). Given this, the court equating "God" with "no god" legitimizes "no god" as religion. That being true, the court has made new law effectively stating: "Congress shall make no law establishing 'no god", and a wall of separation must be erected between government and no god.. This will translate to a banning, from public institutions, causes and principles professing or not professing God as well as those professing no god, like Freud, Marx, Hegel, Nietzsche, and any social or political idea pursued with zeal. Inclusive, should be civil and female rights, and ethnic and cultural studies, so that the government does not partake in the establishing of these religions, and students are not compelled to hear doctrines of which they do not agree. If the court has chosen to change the meaning of religion and of the intent of the founding fathers so that "God" is, by law, a universal religion, then the court has defined "no god" and "Zeus", as a religion, and all philosophies and societal causes and principles must be separated from government. --States' Liberty Party June 30, 2002 E-mail Comments and criticisms to writeus@statesliberty.org If you'd like to see more articles like this published, click here. |
Send mail to
webmaster@liberty-ca.org with
questions or comments about this web site.
|
