Ginsburg’s Commandment
In the recently announced United States Supreme Court decision, Cutter v. Wilkingson, the Supreme Court held that the Religious Land Use and and Institutionalized Persons Act permits any prisioner, regardless of their religous persuasion, be afforded the artifacts necessary to worship as they please (excluding legitimate safety concerns of the prison administrators). This unanimous opinion is important, not in its judicial blessing of Satanists and witches to practice their devilish creeds, but that it further engrained the distasteful rhetoric of separation of church and state.
Justice Ginsburg, the radical feminist who hates Mother’s Day, wrote the unanimous opinion. The separation of church and state is a court-created doctrine, a Justice’s liberal spin on a letter authored by Thomas Jefferson to the Danbury Baptists. Ginsburg and others on the Court desire its continued entrenchment in the constitutional decision-making of the Court and other governmental bodies. Here’s the separatist quote:
The Religion Clauses of the First Amendment provide: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.” The first of the two clauses, commonly called the Establishment Clause, commands a separation of church and state.
This is a great example of how liberal jurists construct a statute or constitution for their ideological benefit. The Establishment Clause does not command a separation of church and state. In fact, it makes no such reference to separation or church or state. The First Amendment only says that Congress shall not make a law that establishes a religion. Justice Ginsburg’s transmogrification of the constitutional text into a secular commandment of the state imposes even more deeply a chasm that was not intended by the text of the First Amendment nor by the Framers.
Cutter: The welcoming of Satanists and Wiccans into protected status among the other mainstream religions (i.e., Christianity, Judiasm) and the continued legitimatization of Everson and the separation of church and state. Not good. Not good at all.
June 9th, 2005 at 8:36 pm
>The First Amendment only says that Congress shall not make a law that establishes a religion.
Wrong. First of all, it says that Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion.
Second, it says much more. It also says that Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech, the freedom of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble and to petition the government for a redress of grievances. There’s a whole lot of liberty you have simply disregarded.
June 10th, 2005 at 11:13 pm
Yes, I agree that I omitted the other freedoms specifically listed in the First Amendment. However, I did not overtly omit the other freedoms listed in the First Amendment. Rather, my intent was to focus on the clause of the First Amendment that specifically mentions “establishment” and how the Supreme Court has wrested its language to impose a separation of church and state on our Nation. This judicial imposition is not grounded in the history of our Nation nor is it warranted by the text of the First Amendment that addresses religious freedom.