• Pratai
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    Make an argument with a person that more than likely thinks that the Establishment Clause and the Free Exercise Clause are Santa’s origin story and a non-profit cardio fitness program he created to stay fit during the slow months?

    Impossible!

    • Neuromancer@lemm.eeM
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      10
      ·
      1 year ago

      I am an atheist, but at least I know the history of our country. Obviously, you didn’t know several states had state religions until the 1800s. Nobody thought it was a conflict.

      Your position seems to be you don’t know the history of the country or case law.

      You probably didn’t realize the lemon law wasn’t until the 1970’s. Until then it wasn’t even thought of odd that the two mingled. Nor did you realize that in 2022, Kennedy vs Bremeton, Lemon was abandoned.

      You just look silly not know the history or caselaw.

      • Pratai
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Separation of church and state was part of the origin story of America, that states were violating it since- doesn’t unwrite the constitution.

        This isn’t about how much you can say to sound like you know what you’re talking about- it’s about the simple fact that separation of church and state was there from the beginning.

        • Neuromancer@lemm.eeM
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          9
          ·
          1 year ago

          No, it really wasn’t. That is a basic history lesson you must have missed. Religion has always been tied heavily to our government.

          If it was unconstitutional, as you claim, then you think the founding fathers would have stopped it right away. They didn’t.

          The founding fathers were deeply religious men and knew the two would mingle, but they didn’t want a government church like the Episcopalians in England or the Lutherans in Sweden.

          Many were only nominally Christian, as Diest was the day’s rage. The phrase separation of church and state is not in the Constitution.

          Here is a nice breakdown of the pro/cons of the arguments. It sounds like you have never read the Constitution since you think the phrase is in there.

          https://undergod.procon.org/questions/did-the-founding-fathers-support-a-separation-of-church-and-state/

            • Neuromancer@lemm.eeM
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              8
              ·
              1 year ago

              Actually they are not incompatible. George Washington attended church and was a deist.

          • Pratai
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            Look up the Establishment Clause. Then get back to me.

            • Neuromancer@lemm.eeM
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              5
              ·
              1 year ago

              I have. I also cited you an explanation of the legal aspects of it. I suggest you read them to become more educated on the topic.

              • Pratai
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                4
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                The federal government of the United States and, by later extension, the governments of all U.S. states and U.S. territories, are prohibited from establishing or sponsoring religion

                  • Pratai
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    4
                    arrow-down
                    2
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    So… like a typical conservative- you’re just going to skip over the part that applies, and argue against the one that doesn’t?

                    We’re done here kid. I’m not wasting my time with you anymore, so I’m going to block you now. Based on your comment history- I’m not going to be missing any quality content from you in doing so.