Originally Posted by BroncoBeavis
Ironically it was written to a Baptist Minister in the spirit that his Church was off limits to government meddling. The "Wall of Separation" was meant to protect the Church from the threat of Government more than to protect the Government from the Church. Exactly the opposite conclusion from what the modern progressive professional re-interpreters like to take away.
I always thought if I were a history teacher, I'd require all my students to read the Danbury Baptist letter so students could see the context as it was intended. There'd be more that a few people out there who would complain that reading that very same letter in public school was a violation of their modern SOCAS construction.
Long story short, they only want you to remember 5 words out of that letter.
This nicely illustrates my point.
The first amendment is 'loosely,' or incorrectly, interpreted, whereas the second amendment is by the book.
Separation of church and state is a concept based in the Establishment Clause, found in the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. The Establishment Clause was extended to apply to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment, and prohibits laws dealing with the establishment of religion. Neither the state or federal government may enact laws which aid one or all religions, or give a preference to one religion over another. The Establishment Clause was intended to prohibit the federal government from declaring and financially supporting a national religion.