(April 17, 2017 at 1:29 pm)Brian37 Wrote:(April 17, 2017 at 12:54 pm)Jehanne Wrote: Quite the contrary:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Tripoli
I am well aware of that treaty and article 11, not sure what you mean by "Quite the contrary". Combine that with the First Amendment and the Oath of Office "no religious test" that article supports my argument that "secular" does not mean a call to ban religion. "no religious pretext arising from religious opinions shall every produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries".
It isn't banning anything, it is merely saying that religion cannot override common interests, thus the use of the words "tranquility" and "harmony". That seems consistent with "Freedom of religion". "Secular" means neutrality, neither for or against, neutral.
"The United States of America, is not in any sense, founded on the Christian religion" is only saying the official government stance is that our laws are not bible based. It does remain that the individual rights of the citizen are in tact, including the ability to run for public office regardless of religion, but cannot be included or excluded based on a religious litmus test, thus "No religious test".
It is perfectly legal for example for a politician to swear on a bible, but what Christians don't like hearing is that part is VOLUNTARY not mandatory. If a Muslim wants to swear on a Koran, and Kieth Ellison our Muslim Congressman did, they can. If an atheist runs for office they don't have to swear on any holy book. Separation of church and state does not ban participation. I it merely means no lawmaker is allowed to make religious law common law.
Amen, brother!