Can someone tell me where is "separation of church and state" in the Constitution? I can't seem to find it!

Question

I have to show some friends. They say it is not in there, but its got to be there. The liberals say its there, so it has to be there right! I may be looking at the wrong Constitution. Please liberals help!

Answer 1

It was something said by Thomas Jefferson referring to the first amendment and in itself is not in the constitution but rather an idea.

Answer 2

No, it's not there.

Answer 3

Look in the first amendment. That's where it is.

Answer 4

The First Amendment.   Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting  the free excercise there of.

Answer 5

The constitution was constructed so the government could endorse or force a particluar religion on people. It was never meant to build a wall between religion and state.

Answer 6

Danburry Papers  . . . google it they'll correct the spelling for me (sorry not a speller)  . . . and judicial review . . . wickipedia will have the relevant court cases.

Answer 7

LOL.... you won't find it.

You have to use the Liberals'  "King James" version of the Constitution to come up with c**p like "separation of church and state" and.... "smoker's rights"..... and "g*y rights".... and "fat people's rights on an airplane"....

LOL... keep asking.  Maybe one of the Commies from the ACLU is reading.

Answer 8

You will not find those exact words. You have to use deductive reasoning to figure out that that is the intent of the First Amendment establishment clause and the the "No religious" test" clause  The "no religious test" clause of the United States Constitution is found in Article VI, section 3, and states that:

“ ...no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.

Also, knowing that the founders were well aware of all the problems in England  over religion, especially in the English Civil War, and wanted to avoid that situation helps,

Answer 9

first ten amendments to the  us constituiton are known as the bill of rights.

Amanement 1 is said to separate church and sate.  Remember in england, from where we came, the church and the state were one and the same.

There's alot to these words, don't just skim over them and think ou know what they mean.  Jefferson meant it so (please no nit-picky arguments abou madison he was a discple of jeffersern the bill of rights would not have been there if not for jefferson, and the constitution would not have been ratified if not for jefferson).  

Lately in court law the first amdndment has come to mean that the state shall not sacntion christian rituals and symbols which are part of our early heritiage.  Lest, we offened atheists or others, who find them offensive.  Is this what the right entails?

The argument of questioning if this is what the founding fathers intened is species, a right means what it means now, and most of the founding fathers unfortuantely as most of our people today did not give a hang about such things.  

Are we better off as a country having the first amendment intrpretd in such a manner as to have fromal group prayer illimnated fo schools.   Many do not htink so.  I would tend to agree with them.  We probably are not better off as a  whole.  

However, a rigth is a right.  a right can be thought of as givng indviduals the free chocie that God gives.

Prior to the enlightenment, the people only had the rights that the government said they had.  I think chriistianity and the country can survive having these symbols stripped from govenment sanctioned events and public bulidings etc.  It should actually serve to strengthen christianity.  

However, those who would seek to impsoe their brand of chistianity on others are the ones who are afraid and offened.  They are much like the old goverment and chuch of england -- they want to impose their beilfs on the rest of us, as if these belifs which they call "values" were offically sanctined by the govenrment.  They go further by suggesting that just because there are those of us who do not believe they should be part of the public sector, and believe that christianity can survivie this, and that the early tradition while probably benifical are certainly counter to the the right oulined in amendement one.  

These like the old goernment and church of Englad, these fundies question our christianity, our values, our beliefs, our intlellegence, and indeed our understanding of histroy, which dare say is a lot deeper better understoodand  more thought out then their own knee jerk reaction of offense and attack on our lord when their children are not able to impose their "Lord's Prayer" out loud and instead must silently "in ther closets" (hearts) speak to our lord, and in a fashion that lest we forget is offesive to a degree to us cathlolics should their "Lords Prayer" be said out loud and thus sacntioned by the state.  (".. for thine is the kingdom and the power and the glory ...") as a catholic I would just as soon not have to explain these words that they added to the Lord's prayer to my child, until I am ready to do so.  

And have MY CHILD silently pray the rosary on school grounds or off AS WE HAVE DONE FOR CENTURIES OF PROTESTANT STATE SANCTIONED RELIGOUS PERSECUTON, THAT STILL GOES ON EVEN TODAY IN PLACES LIKE BELFAST.

To an extent chrstian symbols and rituals were sanctioned by the government in the past, but that does not remove this right and it's application today is correclty being modified.

Certainly I think the right can be construred in such a manner as for us to be rid of all christain symbols from the public sector, which in no way restricts chrisianity or it's free practice as the fundies fear.

Also, remember that when dealing with a "right" we are not just dealing with a written law, it is something more it is something that God has given each individual, we can discover what these are and it is the duty of govenments to protect these and the free excesize thereof, hence we have the 9th amendment.  

The ninith amandment should always be included when quoting any of the others so there will be no conffusion that the rights mean what we say they mean today not yesterday, the intent of the so called founding fathers notwithstanding.

In fact this was exactly Jefferson's intent.

Amendment -1

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment 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.

Amendment - 9

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

Kirk Spock - I am not a commie form the aclu, but i know what the 9th amendment means.  And I do undestand the natural rights of man, which I find in no way in conflict with my christianity, in fact, quite the contrary.

Answer 10

It isn't written verbatim in the constitution.  It was inferred by Thomas Jefferson to an 1802 letter by Thomas Jefferson to the Danbury Baptists.

Answer 11

It is in the First Amendment. You know the part about how Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion. Take that and then add to it the process of judicial review and voila you get separation of church and state.

If that is not good enough for you and your neocon friends maybe you should just start telling everyone about the part of the constitution that says we are a Christian nation. I can't find that section myself but the conservatives all say it is there, so it has to be there right? Perhaps I am looking at the wrong Constitution myself. Maybe it is in the King George version of the Constitution.

What you thought only Conservatives could be smart a$$e$?

Answer 12

It's in the first amendment in the Bill of Rights. This amendment in essence states freedom of speech, religion, the press, and assembly. It also states the government may not establish or even advocate or favor one religion. So, you see, this is the implied "separation of church and state." All of these politicians trying to enact laws in regard to morality are trying to blur the implied separation. Their efforts are clearly unconstitutional. The founding fathers and early colonists fled from religious persecution, they didn't want the Constitution to precipitate more of this.

Answer 13

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;

You can read more about how the founding fathers felt this "wall of separation" between church and state here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seperation_...

Answer 14

We all know it's not there.

1st Amendment

CONGRESS SHALL MAKE NO LAW RESPECTING AN ESTABLISHMENT 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.

That's the closest you'll come to it.