[Bryan Fischer is referring to a Black Mass held by Satanists in the Oklahoma City Civic Center.]
Can city leaders constitutionally block this mass? If we were still using the Constitution given to us by the Founders, the answer would be an unequivocal yes.
The Satanists' argument is quite simple: the First Amendment guarantees the "free exercise" of "religion" to everybody, and thus the Constitution prohibits discrimination of any kind against the disciples of the Prince of Darkness.
This means a discussion of the meaning of the word "religion" in the First Amendment is unavoidable.
Now if by "religion" the Founders meant "any system of belief in a supernatural power," it's hard to see how the satanists can be denied.
But if by "religion" the Founders, as historian Joseph Story has written, meant "Christianity" and its various denominations, then the answer to this problem is quite simple. Oklahoma can ban this satanic mass if it chooses.
27 comments
Anything any historian may allege they meant by their choice of words is meaningless in the face of the meaning the founders, themselves supplied when asked about the issue. Or are you actually willing to go so far as to say that they didn't understand their own intention but you do? Probably are, knowing you.
"But if by "religion" the Founders, as historian Joseph Story has written, meant "Christianity" and its various denominations, then the answer to this problem is quite simple. Oklahoma can ban this satanic mass if it chooses."
Religious freedom has very little (if any) meaning if it only applies to one religion. That's like saying "we believe in racial equality, which is why we support segregation and lynching."
And if by "religion" the Founders meant pizza then that means the government can clearly ban spaghetti if it so chooses.
You can try to change the words all you want Bryan boy, but it doesn't change the fact that the writers of the Constitution had the opportunity to install a national religion like every other state at the time, and made the conscious decision not to. All of the founders were relatively well educated men, so I'm pretty sure if they had meant "Christianity" when they wrote "religion" they would have bloody well wrote Christianity instead.
"But if by "religion" the Founders, as historian Joseph Story has written, meant "Christianity" and its various denominations, then the answer to this problem is quite simple. Oklahoma can ban this satanic mass if it chooses."
Ha ha ha, no.
But if by "religion" the Founders, as historian Joseph Story has written, meant "Christianity" and its various denominations, then the answer to this problem is quite simple. say "Christianity" instead of "religion" when they were writing the 1st Amendment?
Rather than rely on a Supreme Court justice, why don't we just look at what the Founders themselves said about their intentions? They clearly meant all religions, as shown to George Washington's acceptance of the Jews, and John Adams hosting an Islamic dinner.
Since the Deist/Freemason/nominal Christian/Unitarian Founders meant the first definition, you're entirely screwed, Fischface.image
Sadly, your ilk, many citizens, many in the Government & even some of the Founders themselves, fell short of those beautiful ideals. We should be like Norway, right now...but, NOOOOOOOOO.....you guys.....*ARGH!*
"But if by "religion" the Founders, as historian Joseph Story has written, meant "Christianity" and its various denominations"
Which it in no way fucking does, to paraphrase an actual founding father, in any way shape or form.
The Treaty of Tripoli invalidates your arguement if you had an argument in the first place but you did not. The first anendment you still fail it. Your non existent argument was invalid before you presented it. In fact by having your religion be endorsed against the first amendment, other religions are doing this now to your chagrin. You and other theocrats are at fault. Your only hope is to stop whining and begging your religion be endorsed. Checkmate Fischer. You have no more moves.
what the framers meant has no relevance. we can't, in the general case, know that --- we can't read their minds. the constitution, like any law, means only what it says , and if the framers meant differently then they should've written a different law. when the law says merely "religion", then, it means ANY religion. cope with it.
Can city leaders constitutionally block this mass? If we were still using the Constitution given to us by the Founders, the answer would be an unequivocal yes.
You mean, back when Christianity had special preference and before numerous court cases decided it should be otherwise?
Now if by "religion" the Founders meant "any system of belief in a supernatural power," it's hard to see how the satanists can be denied.
But if by "religion" the Founders, as historian Joseph Story has written, meant "Christianity" and its various denominations, then the answer to this problem is quite simple. Oklahoma can ban this satanic mass if it chooses.
If they meant "Christianity" they would have fucking written "Christianity," you brain-dead theocrat.
"If we were still using the Constitution given to us by the Founders, the answer would be an unequivocal yes."
Unfortunately for your lot, Bryan, the founders of the United States weren't like this:
image
They were not fucking prophets and the Constitution is not religious scripture. It can be changed, it can be molded and it can be altered in order to fit the needs of the society in the future. The authors of the document intended it to be that way, which is why constitutional amendments are things.
Oh and by the way, the U.S. is not a Christian nation, and that constitution provides protections for all followers of all faiths, whether you like it or not.
Unless they're committing sanctionable crimes, allowing their persecution would also allow yours. Then of course, if your God cannot protect you from the Devil, or if you believe in the supernatural, you have other problems, but it's not the law...
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.
