Stinger said:
Where is that located in Biblical teachings and since that is not necesarrily a prinicple unique to nor indicative of Christians in no way "makes us a Christian nation"
James Madison took it from Matthew 22:21. The boy had a lot of Baptist in him for an Anglican. I suspect Jefferson got it from the same source. Haven't you ever head of Soul Liberty?
Stinger said:
The arguement made was that we are founded on Christian principles
The Separation of Church and State is a Christian Principle. James Madison said so in his Detached Memoranda.
Stinger said:
So go down the list I have posted twice now and tell me where they are in the Bible.
Why? It is not my list, it is yours.
**********************
Texans Loved the Separation of Church and State in 1845
Read the excerpts presented below to learn what the delegates to the Texas Constitution said about the Separation of Church and State at the 1845 Constitutional Convention.
Mr. Baylor spoke in support of the proposed ban on members of the clergy serving as State Legislators and said that the ban was calculated to keep clear and well defined the
distinction between Church and State, so essentially necessary to human liberty and happiness. Page 163, Debates of the Texas Convention. Wm. F. Weeks, Reporter, published by authority of the convention, Houston, Published by J.W.Cruger, 1846.
Mr. Davis said The only reason why I rise is that during my canvass in Liberty County, I was accused of wishing to unite
Church and State, in consequence of my opinions upon this subject. I deny that it is uniting
Church and State to permit ministers of the gospel to participate in the legislation of the country. Page 167, Debates of the Texas Convention.
Mr. Davis expressed his view that if an effort is desired to be made by the religious portion of the community to unite
Church and State, may it not as well be made by the members of the churches as ministers of the gospel? Page 167, Debates of the Texas Convention.
Mr. Love pointed out that Protestants marked out a different line of policy. They said
it was wrong to unite church and State, wrong that the law should settle the rule of faith, and regulate the religion of Jesus Christ. They would not admit that men should be subject to human authority in matters of opinion: they denied the right to control the conscience, it claimed the right to worship as they pleased; although they submitted to the authority of the law, necessary to prevent crime and preserve the good order of society. It was the cause of the success of Protestantism. Page 170, Debates of the Texas Convention.
Mr. Brown said that
religion and politics are things that must forever run in parallel lines which never meet; for whenever they meet, there is contamination, and religion has in it much more of earth than heaven. Page 177, Debates of the Texas Convention.
Mr. Brown I am not willing upon any consideration to relinquish the principle that
Church and State, by every mode that can enter into the imagination of this body,
should be kept separate, that neither may become corrupt, that religion should have its, powerful sway and benefit influence over private life, and that political affairs should rest in the hands of political men: This, sir, is a discrimination which I feel bound to observe. Page 177, Debates of the Texas Convention.
Mr. Brown - It seems to me safer and better for the institution of
religion and better for the institution of government, that the two bodies, both grasping at power, both capable of forming contributions, formidable to liberty on the one hand and to religion on the other,
should be kept forever separate and distinct. Page 177, Debates of the Texas Convention.
Mr. Evans stated they have declared in that Bill of Rights that all men have a natural and indefeasible right to worship God according to the dictates of their own consciences: that no man shall be compelled to attend or support a place of worship, or to maintain any ministry against his consent that no human authority ought, in any case whatever, to control or interfere with the rights of conscience: and that no preference shall ever be given by law, to any religious societies, or mode of worship. Is not that article amply sufficient guard and security against the union of church and state? If not, I will go with any gentleman to make it stronger. But how does the exclusion of the ministers of religion from our legislative halls tend to defeat the
ruin of church and state. What bearing has such an exclusion upon it? I say it has none at all. Page 184, Debates of the Texas Convention.
Mr. Love - In no county has there been a set of preachers who have more zealously striven to do their duty, and they have done it. Why have they done it? Because they have
not mixed politics with religion. Page 172, Debates of the Texas Convention.
Mr. Broward said he was in favor of excluding ministers of the Gospel from any participation in the affairs of government. He saw, however, no necessity of expressing a reason and if there should be any he would have it a just one. If he should vote for the section, it was not f
or the sake of preserving the church pure and uncontaminated but for the sake of political security. He would move to strike out that part of the section relating to their "dedication to God, and the care of souls." Page 165, Debates of the Texas Convention.
http://tarlton.law.utexas.edu/constitutions/pdf/pdf1845debates/00000016.pdf
********************