David Barton Quotes

Washington's address is virtually unknown today and has not been seen in most American history textbooks in nearly four decades. Perhaps it is because of all the religious warnings Washington made in his 'Farewell Address.'

It is evident from their writings that the Founding Fathers would never have tolerated the separation that we have embraced today. They knew that religious principles provided morality and self-control - the lifeblood for the survival of any self-governing community.

The current version of... separation of church and state says you can be salt, and you can be light, but only inside the four walls of the church.

You don't have a right to vote, you've got a duty of vote.

The Founders believed that pluralism survived only within the concept of religious liberty espoused by American Christianity.

To support its conclusion that 'this is a religious people.

.. this is a Christian nation,' the Court paraded a veritable litany of precedents from American history: taken from Church of the Holy Trinity v. U.S.; 143 U.S. 457-458 (1892).

In 1962 (Engel v. Vitale), the Supreme Court explained that the word 'church' would no longer mean a federally established denomination; it would now mean a religious activity in public.

In the case Stone v. Graham, the Supreme Court ruled that - under 'separation of church and state' - it was unconstitutional for a student in school to even see a copy of the Ten Commandments.

And you get Thomas Paine, who's the least religious Founding Father saying, you've got to teach creation science in the classroom. Scientific method demands that.

There’s a passage that I love in Romans 1.

… [I]t talks about homosexuality and it says that they will receive in their bodies the penalties of their behavior. … The Bible [is] right every time … and that’s why AIDS has been something they haven’t discovered a cure for or a vaccine for. … And that goes to what God says, ‘Hey you’re going to bear in your body the consequences of this homosexual behavior.’

The Court explained the problem with his writings (People v.

Ruggles. 1811.): an attack on Jesus Christ was an attack on Christianity; and an attack on Christianity was an attack on the foundation of the country; therefore, an attack on Jesus Christ was equivalent to an attack on the country!

The Founders never intended to separate Christianity from government, only to keep a single denomination from running the nation.

The Court abandoned the traditional constitutional meaning of 'religion' as a single denomination or system of worship and instead substituted a new 'modern' concept which even now remains vague and nebulous, having changed several times in recent years.

There should be absolutely no 'Separation of Church and State' in America.

That's exactly what made America so different, we don't have that colonial aspect of let's go conquer somebody else and make our nation bigger and that's because of the faith element.

We do have a Godly heritage in America, but we have been robbed - robbed by the 3 percent.

It is interesting to note that during the last ten years Washington's 'Farewell Address' has begun to reappear in college textbooks - minus the four religious warnings.

Separation of church and state is the big club pulled out to beat back the Christians .

Recent decades clearly demonstrate that the more secular our Public Schools become the less successful they become academically.

The 1947 Court (Everson v. Board of Education) for the first time had used only Jefferson's metaphor - completely divorced from its context and intent.

The Founders intended only to prevent the establishment of a single national denomination, not to restrain public religious expressions.

Only majorities can expand political rights in America's constitutional society.

That wall is a one directional wall. It keeps the government from running the church but it makes sure that Christian principles will always stay in government.

In 1967, in DeKalb v. DeSpain, a court (255 F.Supp. 655. N.D.Ill. 1966.) took a 4-line nursery rhyme used by a K-5 kindergarten class and declared the nursery rhyme unconstitutional. The court explained that although the word 'God' was not contained in this nursery rhyme, if someone were to hear the rhyme, he might think that it was talking about God - and that would be unconstitutional!

In 1965, in Reed v. Van Hoven, a court determined (237 F.Supp. 48. W.D.Mich. 1965.) that it was permissible for students to pray over their lunch at school so long as no one knew they were praying - that is, they couldn't say words or move their lips, but they could pray only if no one knew about it!

Literacy is part of everyday social practice - it mediates all aspects of everyday life. Literacy is always part of something else - we are always doing something with it. Its what we choose to do with it that is important. There are a range of contemporary literacies available to us - while print literacy was the first mass media, it is now one of the mass media.