Most people are surprised to know that the Costitution does not contain the words "Separation of Church and State". So, what's its origin? At the time of the constitution, many citizens were concerned that one particular christian denomination would become the official denomination of the USA. The Danbury Baptists sent a letter to President Jefferson addressing their concerns.(Althought the states encouraged Christianity, they would not allow an exclusive state-sponsored denomination.) To calm thier fears, he replied in a letter to them:

"I contemplate with solemn reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," thus building a wall of separation between church and state."

Why did he select this particular phrase to reassure them?

Recall that he was adressing a group of Baptists, a denomination of which he was not a member. In writing to them, he sought to establish a common ground necessary between an author and the group he was adressing. By using the "wall of separation" he was actually borrowing the words of the Baptist's own prominent ministers; Roger Williams. For William's words had been:

"When they have opened the gap in the hedge or wall of separation between the garden of the church and the wilderness of the world, God hath ever broke down the wall itself...And therefore if he will ever please restore his garden and paradise again, it must of necessity be walled in peculiarly unto himself from the world..."

According to Williams,the "wall of separation" was to protect the "garden of the church" from the "wilderness of the world". That 'wall' was originally introduced as, and understood to be a one-directional wall protecting the church from government. This was also Jefferson's understanding, as conveyed through statements he made concerning the First Amendment (statements now ignored by the court)

Kentucky Resolutions of 1798: No power over the freedom of religion is delegated to the United States by the constitution.

Second Inaugural address: In matters of religion I have considered that its free exercize is placed by the Constitution independent of the powers of the Federal Government.

A letter to Samuel Miller: "I consider the government of the US as prohibited by the Constitution from intermeddling with religious institutions, their doctrines, discipline, or exercises. This results not only from the provision that no law shall be made respecting the establishment or free exercise of religion, but from that also which reserves to the States the powers not delegated to the US. (10th Amendment) Certainly, no power to prescribe any religious exercise, or to assume authority in religious discipline, has been delegated to the General Government. It must then rest with the States, as far as it can be in any human authority."

Contrary to Jefferson's explanation of the intent, such power no longer rests with the states. In 1947, in Everson v. Board of Educ., the court reversed 150 years of established legal practice under the Constitution and decided that it did have the right to rule on an individual state's decisions regarding religious practice. Prior to that reversal, the courts had left the decisions as Jefferson and all other Founding Fathers had planned it-"resting with the states." State legislatures have been passing laws since the 1600's allowing the free exercise of religious practices in schools and public affairs: voluntary prayer, bible reading, the use of the 10 commandments, etc. These laws had been enacted with the "concent of the governed" and through representatives elected "of the people, by the people and for the people."

Jefferson's words to the Baptist Association were soon forgotten since the rumor of a certain denomination becoming 'the official US church" never became fact. The letter remained in obscurity until 76 years later when it appeared in a case of Reynolds v. United States. The court did not use the words form the letter to separate church and state, but used them in an opposite manner. In that case, Mormans claimed that the first amendment's "free exercise of religion" promise and the "separation of church and state" principle should keep the state out of their 'religious' exercise of polygamy. Using the letter, the court showed that while the government was not free to interfere with opinions on religion, which is what frequently distinguishes between one denomination and another, it was responsible to enforce civil laws oaccording to general Christian denominational differences, not to basic christian principles. On that basis, they ruled polygamy was a violation of the Constitution because it was a violation of basic Christian principles. 70 years after that case, in the 1947 Everson case, the court took 8 words out of Jefferson's letter (A wall of separation of church and state) and adopted that phrase as its new battlecry. It announced for the first time the new meaning of separation of church and state- a separation of basic religious principles from the public arenas. The court did not bother to present the context of Jeffersons phrase and how it had been originally used, nor revealed that it had been applied in an opposite manner in previous Supreme court cases. Those 8 words, now taken out of context, concisely articulated the court's plan to divorce Christianity from public affairs. There is no other instance in american history where the words spoken by an individual becomes the law of the land. His remark carries more weight in judicial circles than does the writing of any other founder. Doesn't it seem unreasonable that the Justices bypass all the other founding Fathers in order to find some words with which they could agree? And even then, they selected someone who was not a part of the convention that formed the Constitutional proceedings or was even in the nation at the time. And on top of that, they used his words in a manner in which he would not have approved! George Washington had much to say about the relationship of christianity to schools and government. Why doesn't the court quote him? The simple answer is that the Justices have found in Jeffersons 8 words what they want the First Amendment to say, and not what our Founding Fathers framed it to say, and not even what Jefferson understood it to say.

There is no 'wall of separation' in the Constitution, unless it is a wall intended by the Founding Fathers to keep Government out of the church. Jefferson's words have been twisted to mean the opposite; now, the state must be "protected" from the church!

There is nothing so absurd but if you repeat it often enough people will believe it. It is amazing what continually hearing about separation of church and state can do to a nation!!!!

Merry CHRISTmas to everyone!!!

The problem is created when somehow we think that government (public places) SHOULD Celebrate religion and only one particular religion at that. First of all, it is not their place to celebrate or promote any religion, yet alone a specific one.

That being said, there is a whole secular side of both Christmas and Easter. Those can be celebrated in public places without the religious aspects.

And the religious aspects of these holidays can and should be celebrated in places of worship. They can be beautifully decorated with all the religious music to accompany it. And your homes can be similarly decorated. What I don't understand is why isn't that enough?

I don't need or want my government promoting my or anyone else's religion. I and my places of worship are more than capable of doing that.

Besides why would anyone who believes the government can't get anything right want their hand in religion?

Merry Christmas to all and may you all have health and happiness in the New Year.

The problem is created when somehow we think that government (public places) SHOULD celebrate religion and only one particular religion at that.

Government and public places used to celebrate Christmas and did so since the beginning of the formation of this nation. This is a Christian nation, and therefore it should be the faith that gets predominance here.

First of all, it is not their place to celebrate or promote any religion, yet alone a specific one.

That's your opinion. I believe it is their place, because this nation was formed by Christians and for Christians and our declaration of independence deems God as our Creator. The government should not set up any one Christian church as a National or State church. This I agree with. Putting a Manger scene on the Town Green is NOT setting up a National religion that all should adhere to.

That being said, there is a whole secular side of both Christmas and Easter. Those can be celebrated in public places without the religious aspects.

Christmas is Christmas, whether you celebrate it with a manger scene and a play with sheep, or a santa and a tree, It's still celebrating 'Jesus' birth. That's why it is celebrated in this country. That's why it's a NATIONAL holiday.

And the religious aspects of these holidays can and should be celebrated in places of worship. They can be beautifully decorated with all the religious music to accompany it. And your homes can be similarly decorated. What I don't understand is why isn't that enough?

It's not enough for me and plenty of others who feel that the minority has been outspoken and has taken God out of the public arena. This country has always been predominantly Christian, yet this country has not been forceful in demanding that those who live here be of the same faith. (nor should it) They may live here and worship whomever they choose or noone at all for that matter, but understand that this nation is a Christian one and all of the public displays of the Cristian God go along with it. Why can't those of other faiths be accepting of that? Why do they feel that they must move us on out?

I don't need or want my government promoting my or anyone else's religion. I and my places of worship are more than capable of doing that.

On the Capitol building is a scene with Moses and the 10 commandments. We have the bible in the court room for folks to swear upon and the Supreme court has the 10 commandments engraved on their doors and hanging on the wall above the judge. There are scripture verses etched in stone all over the federal buildings and monuments in Washington. Every session of congress begins with prayer by a paid (with our tax dollars) preacher since 1777. The very first Supreme court justice, John Jay, said,"Americans should select and prefer Christians as their rulers." This is obviously a Christian nation. It was from the beginning and still is. If those who are not Christian want to live in America, that is wonderful, all are welcome here in this land of blessings from the Creator, but they need to accept our Heritage and deal with it. So their religion is not foremost and upfront as the Christian faith. So what. They knew this was a Christian nation when they got here. I say live with it. Why should we have to remove little by little over time all aspects of our Christian faith in God from the public arena for the sake of the non- Christians? Why should God be pushed out of the public places for the sake of those who get to live here and have their religious freedom to worship whom they choose? A VERY high majority of Americans believe in Jesus as their God. They should have predominance over other faiths since this is the American heritage that our founding fathers gave to us. (I'm not saying that the government should set up a National church for all to adhere to. That would be wrong, for everyone everywhere should be able to practice any faith they believe in)

Besides why would anyone who believes the government can't get anything right want their hand in religion?

I don't ever want to see the government set up a national denomination for all to follow. You said it. They can't get anything right.

Merry Christmas to all and may you all have health and happiness in the New Year.

Same to you.