SUPREME COURT: SUPREMELY UNCONSTITUTIONAL

The Lie of Separation of Church and State and the U.S. Supreme Court’s Usurpation of Power

http://freedomoutpost.com/2013/03/the-lie-of-separation-of-church-and-state-the-u-s-supreme-courts-usurpation-of-power/

Freedom Outpost – Publius Huldah – 3/11/2013

Publius Huldah lays out in detail in a very long post how the Supreme Court usurped the power of the American people and instituted rules on speech the Court doesn't like.

11. So! The First Amendment (1) prohibits Congress from establishing a national denominational religion, (2) prohibits Congress from interfering in the States’ establishments of the religions of their choice, or dis-establishments thereof, and (3) prohibits Congress from abridging the Peoples’ freedom of speech.  Everyone understood that no one in the federal government had any authority to cancel, abridge, restrain or modify rights of any denomination or the States’ essential rights of liberty of conscience.

12. But in Gitlow v. People (1925), judges on the Supreme Court asserted – without any justification in Law or Fact – that the 14th Amendment (which applies to the States) 4

incorporates the First Amendment so that the First Amendment now restricts the powers of the States!  They said:

…we may and do assume that freedom of speech and of the press which are protected by the First Amendment from abridgment by Congress are among the fundamental personal rights and “liberties” protected by the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment from impairment by the States. We do not regard the incidental statement in Prudential Ins. Co. v. Cheek 5 .…that the Fourteenth Amendment imposes no restrictions on the States concerning freedom of speech, as determinative of this question. (p. 666) [emphasis added]

The judges’ new interpretation of the 14th Amendment became the weapon the Court has used to silence Christians and to seize Power over States & local governments. By claiming that the First Amendment restricts the powers of the
States & local governments, the Court set itself up as policeman over the States, over counties, over cities & towns, and even over football fields & court-house lawns!  In this way, the Bill of Rights, which was intended to be the States’ and The Peoples’ protection against usurpations of power by the federal government, became the weapon the Supreme Court used to usurp power and force their wills on all People in Our Land.

How the Supreme Court Re-defined the Historic Term,  “Establishment of Religion”.

13. We have seen that Benjamin Franklin, Alexander Hamilton, and James Madison said the distinguishing characteristic of an “established religion” was that the “established” denomination was supported by mandatory taxes or tithes, whereas “tolerated” denominations were supported by voluntary offerings of their adherents.

 14. Now let us see how judges on the Supreme Court re-defined “establishment of religion” in order to ban prayer in public schools.  Engel v. Vitale (1962), is the case where six men outlawed non-denominational prayer in the public schools.  A public school board in New York had directed that the following prayer be said at school:

Almighty God, we acknowledge our dependence upon Thee, and we beg Thy blessings upon us, our parents, our teachers and our Country.

Any student was free to remain seated or leave the room, without any comments by the teacher one way or the other.

But six men on the Supreme Court said this short, non-denominational and voluntary prayer constituted an “establishment of religion” in violation of the First Amendment!  They (Hugo Black 6 Warren, Clark, Harlan, Brennan, and Douglas) admitted that allowing school children to say this prayer did not really “establish” a “religion”!  They admitted that the prayer:

…does not amount to a total establishment of one particular religious sect to the exclusion of all others — that, indeed, the governmental endorsement of that prayer seems relatively insignificant when compared to the governmental encroachments upon religion which were commonplace 200 years ago…(p.436)

BUT THESE SIX MEN DIDN’T WANT CHILDREN PRAYING IN SCHOOL.   SO, THEY JUST REDEFINED “ESTABLISHMENT OF RELIGION” TO MEAN, “A RELIGIOUS ACTIVITY“, “A PRAYER” (P.424), HAVING PUBLIC SCHOOL CHILDREN HEAR OR RECITE A PRAYER THAT “SOMEBODY IN GOVERNMENT COMPOSED” (PP.425-427), “WRITING OR SANCTIONING
OFFICIAL PRAYERS“(P.435), AND “GOVERNMENT ENDORSEMENT OF A PRAYER” (P.436).

THESE SIX MEN ALSO ADMITTED THAT EVEN THOUGH NO COERCION WAS PRESENT, AND EVEN THOUGH THE PRAYER WAS “DENOMINATIONALLY NEUTRAL”, IT STILL CONSTITUTED AN UNLAWFUL “ESTABLISHMENT OF RELIGION”:

Lawlessness on the Court.

a) Even though the First Amendment expressly restricts only the law-making powers of Congress, and thus was intended to be the States’ and the Peoples’ protection from Congress; the supreme Court reversed the purpose of the First Amendment so that it became the tool the Court uses to silence speech they don’t like and to suppress the free exercise of a religion they don’t like, all throughout the States, counties, towns & villages, all the way down to football fields & county courthouse lawns.

Northwoods Patriots - Standing up for Faith, Family, Country - northwoodspatriotscomm@gmail.com