No carry in places of worship

imported post

I don't know if carry in churches is allowed in any state, but for the sake of argument I'll go with it's not like here in VA. How can the government get away with banning carry on property that they do not own and shouldn't this be some type of deal where seperation between church and state comes into play? J/w how the state can make that a law. Of course... this is the same government that tells us how many rounds we can carry or what types of weapons we can own.

imported post

The Government can take your frikken property.... There are a bazillion laws that affect private property. BTW you can carry in Church in Va, 'With good and sufficent reason'

imported post

Are you sure this isn't just church policy?

imported post

Nothing against church carry here in PA.

Not that you'd ever catch me in one.

imported post

I don't think there is anything in TN statutes about carry in churches either. Pretty much left up to the churches, themselves.

imported post

can SOMEONE PLEASE FIND "Separation of Church and State" in the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, Articles of Confederation of the Declaration of Independence?

NO YOU CAN'T because it isn't THERE!!!

The wording comes from a LETTER written by Thomas Jefferson to the Danbury Baptists and actually means the COMPLETE OPPOSITE of what most people think it does! It was later quoted by SCOTUS in 1878 and got pretty out of hand after that...

Talk about ABUSED statements??? This is the most abused and misused statement in the HISTORY of the United States and it REALLY PISSES ME OFF!

<rant off>

imported post

True about the "sufficient reason" lol. It came up in conversation w/ a guy from a church I attended a while back. We were talking about a lot of the guys that deal with the money carry there.

As far as the "seperation of church and state" part... I didn't know, that's why I was asking. I don't claim to know exactly where or when it originated or why or how it applies. Hence the question of if it would have anything to do with carrying there... Take a breath. It's going to be okay.

imported post

MSC... I wasn't trying to be a jerk w/ that statement. Didn't mean to get you heated. lol

imported post

MSC 45ACP wrote:

can SOMEONE PLEASE FIND "Separation of Church and State" in the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, Articles of Confederation of the Declaration of Independence?

NO YOU CAN'T because it isn't THERE!!!

The wording comes from a LETTER written by Thomas Jefferson to the Danbury Baptists and actually means the COMPLETE OPPOSITE of what most people think it does! It was later quoted by SCOTUS in 1878 and got pretty out of hand after that...

Talk about ABUSED statements??? This is the most abused and misused statement in the HISTORY of the United States and it REALLY PISSES ME OFF!

<rant off>

Click to expand...

It would be interesting to debate which has done more damage to the country, the mythical "Separation of Church and State", or the court's constant mis-interpretation and wholesale abuse of the Commerce Clause.

TFred

imported post

the bill of rights, ratified dec. 15, 1791. the 1st 10 amendments to the constitution. #1 congress shall make no law respecting an establishment religion, or prohibiting the free excercise thereof...

these are the words that seem to create the "seperation of church and state".

washington state law does not prohibit carrying into a church, its private property and they can set thier own rules.

imported post

No. The wall between church and state dates from a Thomas Jefferson letter of 1802 to a Baptist congregation.

The Establishment Clause of the 1A prohibits 'embracing' and/or a national church depending on which Justice is read or which SCOTUS decision.

Remember that when you hear 'Another brick in the wall, Teacher! Leave that kid alone.'

imported post

can you cite that for me, master doug? i think it all grows out of the 1st!

the founders wrote lotsa letters, how many were ratified by the congress of the united states of america?

imported post

proud_to_serveUSAF wrote:

MSC... I wasn't trying to be a jerk w/ that statement. Didn't mean to get you heated. lol

Click to expand...

I am way OT here.
Humble apologies to all...

Proud:

You didn't bother me. Thank you for your service to our country. You weren't a jerk at all. The thing that bugs me is when politicians, political commentators and others that are overly full of themselves (usually demoncraps)use statements in the exact OPPOSITE way in whichthey were originally intended.

Its just a bunch of morons and idiots trying to impress people with "look how smart I am" talk; In reality, they are pretty stupid...
They don't bother to LOOK IT UP! They just open their cumdumpsters without engaging their brains.Typical behavior oftheir mindset: They quote famous authors all day long, but they don't know WHO wrote a particular quote, when it was inspired or what it actually means.

Reminds me of the indignant French woman that demanded to know where she was supposed to be and what timeher eventstarted at the Yorktown Day Celebration. When I told her where she could get directions and asked what her "number" was for the parade lineup, she got REALLY pissed off and left. How dare I not know where SHE was supposed to be and what time she was supposed to be there! :shock: I wasn't the one that was lost and late, but it darn sure was MY FAULT!!!

Just ask the guy that's running around the world apologizing for our country's history and bowing to EVERY other world leader.

P.S. The leader of this country bows to no one, nor do we EVER "dip" our colors to another country until they dip theirs FIRST...
In Japan, the deeper the bow, the more "deep" the apology or the more subsurvient you are to their leader.
SimplyfugginAMAZING...

imported post

1245A Defender wrote:

can you cite that for me, master doug? i think it all grows out of the 1st!

the founders wrote lotsa letters, how many were ratified by the congress of the united states of america?

Click to expand...

Amendment 1

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Reading a separation of Church and State into that line is no different than readingthe rightto arm the National Guard into this one.

Amendment 2

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

You can't pick and choose which of the Bill of Rights are to be taken literally and which are to be translated. They are either to be read how they are written or not, all or none.

Making no law does not mean denying or ignoring any recognition of it.

imported post

1245A Defender wrote:

can you cite that for me, master doug? i think it all grows out of the 1st!

the founders wrote lotsa letters, how many were ratified by the congress of the united states of america?

Click to expand...

Someone else has quoted 1A including the Establishment Clause prohibiting "respecting an establishment of religion."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wall_of_separation

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wall_of_separation#Jefferson.2C_Madison.2C_and_the_.22wall_of_separation.22

1. ^ "Mr. Cotton's Letter Lately Printed, Examined and Answered," The Complete Writings of Roger Williams, Volume 1, page 108 (1644).^ Feldman, Noah (2005). Divided by God. Farrar, Straus and Giroux, pg. 24 ("Williams's metaphor was rediscovered by Isaac Backus, a New England Baptist of Jefferson's generation, who believed, like Williams, that an established church -- which he considered to exist in the Massachusetts of his day -- would never protect religious dissenters like himself and must be opposed in order to keep religion pure.")^ To Messrs. Nehemiah Dodge and Others, a Committee of the Danbury Baptist Association, in the State of Connecticut. January 1, 1802. Full text available online.

http://www.stephenjaygould.org/ctrl/jefferson_dba.html

Letter to the Danbury Baptist Association To Messrs. Nehemiah Dodge and Others, a Committee of the Danbury Baptist Association,
in the State of Connecticut. January 1, 1802.
by Thomas Jefferson

entlemen, — The affectionate sentiments of esteem and approbation which you are so good as to express towards me, on behalf of the Danbury Baptist Association, give me the highest satisfaction. My duties dictate a faithful and zealous pursuit of the interests of my constituents, and in proportion as they are persuaded of my fidelity to those duties, the discharge of them becomes more and more pleasing.
[align=Justify]Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between man and his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legislative powers of government reach actions only, and not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign 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. Adhering to this expression of the supreme will of the nation in behalf of the rights of conscience, I shall see with sincere satisfaction the progress of those sentiments which tend to restore to man all his natural rights, convinced he has no natural right in opposition to his social duties.[/align] [align=Justify]I reciprocate your kind prayers for the protection and blessing of the common Father and Creator of man, and tender you for yourselves and your religious association, assurances of my high respect and esteem.[/align]
Thomas Jefferson: Writings, New York: Library of America, 1994, p. 510. )
[font="Verdana, Arial"]

[/font]

imported post

In SC the ban on carry in churches is the same as the ban on carry in Hospitals so the separation of Church and state is not even a factor. In both cases the laws says your can't carry without permission of whoever is in charge of it so there is not a ban, only a requirement to get the permission of the owner. This says that both are private property and respects that they are private property.

imported post

SC law used to not define a 'medical facility' allowing the ARC or Dr. Yueh's Mentat Academy to prohibit guns.

imported post

I agree that it violates 1A, by restricting the "free exercise thereof". I also think it violates 5A not just for churches, but also hospitals, bars, private schools, sporting events in privately-owned venues, or any other private property that is statutorily off limits.

imported post

Master Doug Huffman wrote:

SC law used to not define a 'medical facility' allowing the ARC or Dr. Yueh's Mentat Academy to prohibit guns.

Click to expand...

Some have questioned if this applies to Veterinary offices and I don't know.

23-31-215 (M)
(10) hospital, medical clinic, doctor's office, or any other facility where medical services or procedures are performed unless expressly authorized by the employer.

Click to expand...

imported post

Carry every Sun in NC. As long as there is no K-12 school on the property. I have recently had a few discussion about Sunday School not being an actual school as defined by law. I find it amusing the folks blindly assume the word school is what bans guns.