Posted: Tuesday, December 9, 2008 12:00 am
Founders rejected church and state separation
I am responding to the Dec. 3 letter by Mark Nicholson, "Consider history on church/state issue."
Thomas Jefferson's understanding of the First Amendment, as expressed in his 1802 letter to the Danbury Baptists, is significant; however , I think it should not be made a key element in court decisions involving the relationship of church and state, as some judges have done, beginning in the 1940s and continuing until the present time.
Thomas Jefferson's view of the First Amendment was a minority view among the founders. Most of the founders understood that the First Amendment was intended to uphold the independence of church and state, not the separation of church and state. When the principle of the separation of church and state came to a vote by the constitutional framers, it was decisively defeated.
Thomas Jefferson was not a delegate to the constitutional convention. He did not participate in the debates involving the First Amendment. Jefferson was out of the country, serving as U.S. minister to France during those debates. Why should Jefferson's view of the First Amendment, a minority view among the founders, be given more credence than the view held by the majority of those who participated in the First Amendment debates?
When Jefferson became president, he maintained Christain chaplains in the House and Senate at public expense, as the first Congress had voted. He did not erect any "wall of separation" between church and state.
David R. Prichard, Corvallis
Hate for Mormons evident in letter about creches
I realized (Monday) morning that the Gazette-Times must be sponsoring an essay contest entitled the "Let's hate the Mormons" or maybe "Let's see if we can start a religious war in Corvallis." The second one I can understand; Corvallis would then receive millions of dollars in aid from the U.S. government and the nations of the world.
First off, this country was founded on religious freedom. That is one of the reasons these uninformed are tolerated, along with the asinine and uninformed idiotic utterances and hate. If you are going to bad-mouth my religion, you should investigate it so you have your facts straight. Call for missionary lessons.
Wendy Marie Haber (Letters, Dec. 8, "LDS church words, deeds 'interesting'") either does not know the proper name for the Nativity Scene (which is "creche") or she felt the citizens of Corvallis/Albany didn't. We offer the community the chance to display the cherished objects of their families' Christmas Spirit. We are not the keeper. We just happen to be the only church who cares enough to offer the community a place and theme to display their caring.
If Wendy Marie Haber were protesting "Wal-Mart's" wage policy. I would tell her "Don't work for Wal-Mart." My answer to this intolerant person's gripe is simple: If you don't like the exhibit, don't go see it. If you are angry that Mormons are the only church offering the opportunity to display the Nativity Scenes - creches - have your church do one; we'll contribute.
William P. Bennett, Corvallis
ODOT and the governor's priorities are askew
Where has our compassion for others gone?
The Oregon Department of Transportation could have paid for garbage service and a portable toilet for years for the cost of moving equipment into the homeless camp that they destroyed. A portable toilet service is about $89 per month and a 90-gallon garbage can and recycling service is about $25 per month.
My parents taught us compassion for others and always said, "Do unto others as you would have done to you."
The homeless people living in this camp are not there by choice, and they will have to find another place to live. Gov. Kulongoski's proposed budget takes away health and other benefits from the elderly and low-income families. For shame.
"Benefits" for goverment workers and their families cost more each month than what a person making the minimum wage has to live on. Should cuts be made elsewhere?
Shame on ODOT and Gov. Kulongoski.
Louise Shaw, Philomath
Naysayers, look to God for help remaining optimistic
I am sick of all the people who are predicting doom and gloom. President-elect Obama has not even taken the oath of office, and already Clyde Buckner (Letters, Dec. 5) is pleading to God for help!
Give the man a chance, please, and ask yourself this: where has God been for the last eight years while this country was being raped of natural resources, while Wall Street was allowed to plunge us into a financial crisis, while we were tricked into a war in Iraq with false information?
Instead of wailing "Woe is me!", try thinking positively and thinking about what you can do to help this country recover. It's either that or bury your heads in the sand and let the rest of us see what can be done.
Rebecca Stillwell, Albany
Historical facts on LDS church vs. fiction
Roger Paul, in his Nov. 26 contribution to secularistic diatribe, "A look at church, state separation," incorporates a string of factual errors concerning the rise and progress of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints that I must here expose, lest through shrinking reticence I should allow deceit to flourish and corrupt the minds of the unwary.
First, Mr. Paul suggests that the first revelation to have been received by LDS church founder, Joseph Smith, came on Sept. 21, 1823. Doubtless, he alludes to Smith receiving his first angelic visitation on this date. The truth of the matter is, however, that the first revelation vouchsafed to Smith was a theophany of surpassing splendor in which God the Father and Jesus Christ appeared to him in the spring of 1820 and informed him, among other things, that his name would "be had for good and evil among all nations, kindreds, and tongues." (We can see how well this prophecy has been fullfilled.)
Next, Mr. Paul sets the date of discontinuance for the practice of polygyny in the LDS church at the year 1904. This figure is more than a decade off, however, as the practice altogether ceased in the 1890s.
He then repeats the fallacious and outworn assertion that black males in the church never held the priesthood until 1978. Yet, in point of fact, Joseph Smith himself ordained a black male by the name of Elijah Abel to the priesthood office of elder in March of 1836.
Kevin Taylor, Corvallis