When they had heard these words, they marvelled, and left him,
and went their way.
There is no such thing as privileged faith so weigh faith.
Section 5. All States and Congress shall tax religion. With this
section when State law and article 1 of amendments to the constitution
are in conflict; State law trumps article 1.
Article 1 of amendments to the constitution
“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.”
“when State law and article 1 of
amendments to the constitution are in conflict; State law trumps
This amendment seeks to rectify a problem with
the modern interpretation of the constitution, which separates the
church from the state and thereby removing religion from all aspects of
public service. To understand the effect it is thus best to begin at
where this section and amendment 1 run parallel. Hence
where does congress and states begin to establish a religion? In other
words conflict between the two laws is fine parallel movement is
Certainly the most powerful force of both the
congress and the States is the power of coercion and compulsion and
thus establishment. It is some power below
this that we must seek to find as it relates to religion. When one examines religion and its role in the state the
main focus is to use the state to expand its ranks to proselytize. However establishment proselytizing is
prohibited by the constitution so a lesser standard would be peer
So any law passed by the States that is above
peer pressure proselytizing would put both amendments on a parallel
track and would be unconstitutional. What
is above peer pressure proselytizing is a matter for the High court to
decide but a separation of church and state is the basement standard
coercion the roof, times and circumstances will dictate the range of
“Section 5. All States and Congress shall tax religion.
With this section…”
Taxation with representation vs. no taxation
no representation. The current provision
of the law is religious organizations be tax exempt and that they have no representation in the government they can neither express
political opinions and they may not compete for states funds. Since Congress cannot establish religion it
cannot designate what is religion and which religion should be taxed. The decision is entirely up to the Supreme
Court. However once faith has been defined
and taxed then they have earned the right to participate in the entire
spectrum (national, state and local) of the political process,
especially the financial spectrum of government. Religion must be able
to comment on and bid for state and national spending (Qt) with only state
regulations to regulate the dispursement of these funds and the
national court being the final arbiter of what actions exceed peer
pressure proselytizing. Finally this section would leave the regulation of business and religion almost entirely within the relm of State government.
If one assumes that it is human nature to demand more than one produces (both from an individual and Government standpoint) and the core of all major religions is to delay current consumption in return for a future benefit; then religion must play a vital role in the ability of States to control costs and payouts. However this cannot be at the expense of the consumer goods and services being allowed to freely and fairly participate in market place. Simply put if one sues the State over a religious contract it has to be adjudicated in a State courts up to and including looser pay before one can proceed to Federal Court.