As stated, it does not matter WHAT MODERN "SCOTUS" opinion you quote from, that opinion does not do away with the actual facts of history. As far as presenting anything from this particular case of Holy Trinity Church v. U.S., United States Supreme Court {143 U.S. 457, 1892}, It is more than superfluous the way you have tried to misdirect away from an "opinion" presented from the Court and in particular one declared in "written" opinion by Justice Brewer. It certainly is "irrelative" just what the case was about or what was ultimately decided...the point being made was that Mr. Brewer was of the opinion, and correctly so, that the United States was indeed a Christian Nation as declared by his own words...."These and many other matters which might be noticed, add a volume of unofficial declarations to the mass of organic utterances that this is a CHRISTIAN NATION". {Associate Justice to the United States Supreme Court, David Josiah Brewer, 1/6/1890 - 3/28/1910} THIS IS A CHRISTIAN NATION.....the language cannot be presented any clearer nor distinct. History confirmed -- Attempted Secular deflection -- found misdirecting and lying.

The footprints of "Blackstone's theory of Law" in US Law are undeniable. Several are already mentioned PREVIOUS, and as far as State Constitutions and how they declared "God" within their writings, why not present the Constitutions themselves instead of depending upon any "opinion" of SCOTUS.....here are but a Few "State Constitutions" that indeed make up the UNTIED STATES OF AMERICA.

God in the State Constitutions - The U.S. Constitution Online - USConstitution.net

There is no conflict. The 14th amendment mandates states to defur to the Fed in matters of constitutional protections and assures equal protection.

This issue is CLEARLY a 1st and 14th amendment issue

__________________
Argue with some..IGNORE the stupid

Yeah it hurts, you have been fucked by an Elephant !

"Happamia, sanoi kettu pihlajanmarjoista kun ei niihin yltänyt" ("Sour, said the fox about rowan berries, being unable to reach them"

The unsupported statement of Justice Brewer in HolyTrinity Church v. United States to the effect that America is a Christian nation was not in any way pertinent to the court’s ruling or even be considered the ratio decidendi of the court’s opinion in the case; and it is been criticized in subsequent decisions by the court. See e.g., Public Citizen v. Department of Justice, 491 U.S. 440 (1989). Even Justice Antonin Scalia, who is not shy about reconciling his legal opinions with his religious convictions, has criticized the Holy Trinity Church case as an example of legislating from the bench. Nor is Justice Brewer’s statement correct. The founders of our country did not intend to create a theocracy. Thomas Jefferson, who wrote the Declaration of Independence - George Washington, who presided over the Constitutional Convention - and James Madison, who drafted the Constitution (and the First Amendment) - all declared that our nation was not founded on religion. The separation of church and state is the founding principle in the protection of religious freedom as provided in the First Amendment to the Constitution; and, moreover, the Supreme Court has so interpreted it. Everson v. Board of Education of Ewing TP. et al., 330 U.S. 1 (1947).

This is gimme, and a no brainer, and when ever it is called into question, the real stupidity of the non secular fanatics shines through.
This is 4th grade social studies stuff

__________________
Argue with some..IGNORE the stupid

Yeah it hurts, you have been fucked by an Elephant !

"Happamia, sanoi kettu pihlajanmarjoista kun ei niihin yltänyt" ("Sour, said the fox about rowan berries, being unable to reach them"

Bluedog - When you maintain that the US is a "Christian Nation" do you mean that in the same sense that Iranians do when they say that Iran is a "Muslim Nation"?

Please explain how any "SCOTUS" decision can do away with actual history. It does not matter what MODERN ideology declares, that ideology can not and does not do away with the fact that this Nation was founded as a Christian Nation and its rule of law was clearly established based upon the principles found in Blackstone's theory of Law. The footprints of this principle can be found in traditional legal procedure, with an oath sworn to God while placing a hand upon the Holy Bible. A persons right to be considered innocent until proven guilty. A persons right to have his accusers face them in court. A persons right to be free with this right coming from the 'transcending' authority of the Creator, just as mentioned in this nation's "Declaration of Independence". A persons right to own personal property. A persons right to protect both life and property.

The very fact that the 1st WAS NOT so interpreted in OPINION ONLY, without referencing Blackstone's Theory as was done by all precedence before the 1920's, to erect an imaginary wall of separation between the church and state for the VERY FIRST TIME in 1947 (almost 200 years after the fact of the amendment being drafted) self professes that US history was ignored in such opinion. If you really want to see Separation of Church and State declared in "actual writing" and not OPINION. Simply look at any constitution that was drafted and used by the USSR, you will have no trouble whatsoever in finding God and religion removed from the government. But if you will notice, The US military still uses men of God and allows its soldiers to be counseled in the ways of God in the fact of the "Chaplin Corps". And the last time I looked these Chaplin's were paid by the US Taxpayer and our US Government in fact did and still does have relations with the ideology of RELIGION. In fact ALL FEDERAL CURRENCY presents the fact that our nation indeed TRUSTS GOD, AND GOD IN TURN FAVORS OUR UNDERTAKINGS "Annuit Copetis" Only the "gullible" fail to actually consider history and blindly accept human secularism and communism without question. Just as another "Air Head" declared.....IT INDEED IS A "NO BRAINER", for that's what you must profess if you believe the secular nonsense, having no brain that is capable of reading and comprehending history actual. BD

ONE DOLLAR BILL

Blackstone’s Commentaries was a review of English common law, and not the basis of our law under the Constitution. In Blackstone’s time, the King was the head of the Church of England, which was the established state religion. This concept was rejected by the founders of our nation. The one thing that can be gleaned from the intent of the framers of our Constitution is that they were determined to establish a secular state. They well knew that the establishment of a state religion would lead to the limitation of religious freedom, and, as recorded by history, religious wars. Indeed, some of the very first to come to America, the Pilgrims, came to escape state-sponsored religious persecution. Our Constitution and Bill of Rights represent a nation of laws and not men. The law, which defines our rights, is based upon secular principles, and not morals or religious doctrine; and the separation of church and state is one of the pillars upon which our nation stands. To make religious doctrine the basis of our law would be to return to the dark days that spawned the horrors of the Inquisition and the iniquities of the Court of Star Chamber; which was not what the founders had in mind.

I mean that in a sense that our entire nation was founded upon the principles found "only" in the historical example of the Judeo-Christian faith, and "incorporated" into the "Declaration of Independence", US Constitution, and Rule of Law, all of which is "very easily proven by historical example". This ideology has nothing at all in common with the parroted ideology of Islam that believes in propagating the spread of that religion at the point of a sword, while as Christianity simply maintains a right to life and liberty, and the God given right to protect both. This nation is not controlled by any one theological doctrine, as very well indeed the constitution was drafted to allow all religious ideologies to have the freedom to be expressed while allowing NONE to have the authority to indoctrinate and corrupt the entire system by theological dictatorship. As this is the clear intent of the 1st, in having freedom of religion not freedom from religion. And as evidenced, our Government to this very day still has relations with religious ideologies but is not controlled by any Church Doctrine. Its seems the "only" doctrine of dictatorship comes from the "JUDICIAL BRANCH" in the form of OPINION derived from some false conclusion of the power of JUDICIAL REVIEW professing to have the power to ignore the US CONSTITUTION in any opinion they wish, even to the point of referencing European Common Law. BD

Okay... I agree with that. But if people have religious freedom and they belong to a church that recognizes gay marriage, then shouldn't a State also recognize that marriage in the same way as they recognize a straight couple's marriage in a Catholic ceremony?

That would be up to each "individual state" and the citizens of that state that make and draft law by the constitutionally mandated concept of being a "representative republic"....see article 4 sec. 4. It's hard indeed to conclude that any "central" Federal Government derives any power of control whatsoever from any of the STATES/PEOPLES Bill of Rights, all of which were drafted to place limits UPON THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT.....not the States, via, misuse of the court systems to legislate more burdens upon such states/peoples. The more you legislate....THE MORE YOU DICTATE. You see, the truth of the matter is...it does not matter how many people believe something is correct, or moral, or righteous, we ARE NOT a "social democracy" we are a "DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC" and we are not to be "controlled" by the belief's of the "mob"....as we all are bound to the "transcending" authority of the rule of law, a rule of law that was in fact derived not from the coffers of mens imaginations, but from the transcending authority of the Creator. Let me attempt to misdirect you and ask the same question. "What if "I" went to a church that declared HUMAN SACRIFICE as righteous, would this fact of my professed faith allow MURDER TO BECOME only a moot point and allowable to be practiced by all citizens? BD