ADV: New Report on Access to Counsel in Immigration Courts


Dear Beth,

Illegal immigrants and refugees forced to come here in order to get relief from supposed duress
in their country of origin, are not entitled to receive relief other than temporary sustenance and
shelter from the weather, no more.

The Constitution does not say that American citizens are required to support and sustain immigrants/
refugees for any reason, especially when doing so puts support systems designed and implemented
to provide for Americans that may need those services as a hand up, not a handout. Handouts are
what these people are looking for and they are unwilling, for the most part, to follow any of the rules
and requirements that immigrants have to agree to in order to remain in the United States. Especially,
the requirement for everyone of them to assimilate into, and become as one with, and indistinguishable
from all Americans.

Every person in the United States from another country from which free travel into the U.S. is not permitted
must be made to comply with these rules, without exception for any reason, or return to their country of
origin – period.

Islam is not a recognized religion in the United States because it is the antithesis of every form of religion
practiced in the United States when the Constitution was framed and ratified as the foundation law set upon
which government by the people depends and upon which our System of Laws is dependent for
validity.

No amendment to the Constitution has been ratified in accordance with Article V. thereof, that recognizes
religion in forms other than Christianity or Judaism. The Framers lived in societies wherein Christianity was
the primary form of religion (the Church of England) that controlled most everything. Kinda sorta like
Islam. Islam is an ideology of control with failure to comply punishable by death and/or dismemberment.

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the exercise thereof; ….”

I found the following explanation of “an establishment of religion” on the Federalist Papers website.
http://thefederalistpapers.org/current-events/what-freedom-of-religion#comment-5393733

“When the founders first prohibited an establishment of religion, there was little need for them to explain what
was meant by that phrase. Most of the citizens of the new nation had lived under governments with established
churches and had an instinctive knowledge of what exactly was being prohibited by the First Amendment. Now,
more than two centuries later, most Americans read this phrase with little if any comprehension of its true meaning.
To them, the Amendment’s prohibition against an established religion is a nebulous preference for a secular form of
government, but this is not what the founders had in mind.”

“To properly understand what was prohibited by the First Amendment, it is necessary for us to discover how the
founders would have understood the phrase “an establishment of religion.” To do this, let us consider the
explanation proffered by one of the men who argued strongly in favor of having an established church in America,
Thomas Bradbury Chandler. Bishop Chandler wrote that:

“An established religion, is a religion which the civil authority engages, not only to protect, but to support; and a
religion that is not provided for by the civil authority, but which is left to provide for itself, or to subsist on the
provision it has already made, can be no more than a tolerated religion.””

“Here Bishop Chandler makes a very important distinction between religious establishment and religious toleration.
According to his definition the sole distinction between the two is that of monetary support from the government
for a specific religion. This distinction was addressed by James Madison in a letter to Rev. Jasper Adams in 1832.
Madison wrote:

““The simple question to be decided is whether a support of the best and purest religion, the Christian religion
itself ought not so far at least as pecuniary means are involved, to be provided for by the Government rather
than be left to the voluntary provisions of those who profess it.””

“Madison went on to conclude that:

the existing character, distinguished as it is by its religious features, and the lapse of time now more than 50
years since the legal support of Religion was withdrawn sufficiently prove that it does not need the support of
Government, and it will scarcely be contended that Government has suffered by the exemption of Religion from
its cognizance, or its pecuniary aid.”

“Madison’s focus on the pecuniary provision for religion by the government supports Bishop Chandler’s definition
of an established religion as one which receives monetary support from the state, but Madison also mentioned
the exemption of religion from the cognizance of the government, and this seems more in line with the modern
preference for a secular state. To properly understand this statement, however, we must turn to an early 18th
century author named William Warburton. Madison actually recommended to Thomas Jefferson that some of
Bishop Warburton’s books be added to the library of the University of Virginia. One of the Bishop’s books which
was not recommended was a defense of established religion entitled The Alliance Between Church and State. In
that book Bishop Warburton identified six essential characteristics of an establishment of religion.”

“The first three of these six characteristics have to do with the powers wielded by an established church within the
state, and the remaining three describe the powers which the state holds over the church thus established. In the
first category of powers wielded by an established church, Bishop Warburton placed the ability of that church to be
fully funded from the treasury of the state, the right to claim direct representation of the church within the
legislature and the power to establish an ecclesiastical court to try citizens of the state for heresies against the
church. In the second category of powers wielded by the state over the established church, the Bishop identified
the authority of the state to determine who would be eligible to serve in the church, the authority to preside over
church councils and the authority to have the final say in all cases of excommunication. These six characteristics, in
some form or another, can be identified in every recorded alliance between an established church and the state, and
without them there cannot be an establishment of religion.”

“This brings us back to the consideration of the actual wording of the First Amendment. If the founders understood
with Bishop Chandler that the choice was between establishment and toleration, then it follows that the prohibition
against an establishment must be viewed as a preference for toleration to some degree or another. And if they
recognized with Bishop Warburton the six common characteristics of an established church, then it follows that
the bounds of toleration would be limited only from a legal recognition of interactions which fall within those six
areas. In essence, this understanding of the First Amendment would mean that the church and the state are
permitted by the Constitution to enjoy a much greater degree of mutual interaction than is currently recognized.
This explains the tremendous amount of such interactions which occurred during the terms of the first four
Presidents, and it should be our goal to return to an understanding of the First Amendment which does not
criminalize the actions of our own founders.””

Wishing you a great day.

Joseph D. Hollinger
God Bless America

On 9/28/2016 4:23 PM, Beth Werlin wrote:

Dear Joseph D.,

Today, the American Immigration Council released Access to Counsel in Immigration Court, a report based on the first national study on access to counsel in immigration courts. The report analyzes 1.2 million individual removal cases in immigration court between fiscal years 2007 and 2012 and concludes that access to legal counsel is scarce and uneven across geographic locations and nationalities. It also finds that immigrants who are represented by an attorney are more likely to be released from detention, apply for relief, and obtain the relief they seek.

In fact, without an attorney, only two percent of those who applied for relief from deportation succeeded. These alarming findings need to guide us toward creating an immigration system that is true to our country’s commitment to justice and due process. We are thrilled to have partnered with the report’s authors, Ingrid Eagly, Esq. and Steven Shafer, Esq., to bring attention to the inequities in access to counsel and the crucial role that counsel can play in the immigration process.

We hope you too will join us in exposing the facts about our current system and in promoting a fair system that reflects our country’s values. We also invite you to support the Council today.

Beth Werlin
Executive Director

P.S. Help us spread the word about these findings on Facebook and Twitter. You can also read our blog on the report here.

American Immigration Council
1331 G St. NW Suite 200
Washington, D.C., 20005

UNSUBSCRIBE

empowered by Salsa
TrackImage?key=472818646=’472818646′>

The Federalist Papers

The People Who Mean To Be Their Governors Must Arm Themselves With The Power Which Knowledge Gives

A People Who Mean To Be Their Governors Must Arm Themselves With The Power Which Knowledge Gives

Google+RSSTwitterFacebook

You are here: Home / Current Events / What Freedom of Religion?

What Freedom of Religion?

September 22, 2013 By Bill Fortenberry 29 Comments

What Freedom of Religion by Bill FortenberryMuch of the debate on the relationship between church and state has centered around the phrases “freedom of religion” and “separation of church and state.” While these phrases have a very important history and should be studied, their applicability to American government must be understood within the confines of the First Amendment. Unfortunately, the debate on this Amendment has largely focused on whether or not its prohibitions are limited to the US Congress. The real key to understanding the First Amendment lies in unlocking the mystery of the phrase “an establishment of religion.”

When the founders first prohibited an establishment of religion, there was little need for them to explain what was meant by that phrase. Most of the citizens of the new nation had lived under governments with established churches and had an instinctive knowledge of what exactly was being prohibited by the First Amendment. Now, more than two centuries later, most Americans read this phrase with little if any comprehension of its true meaning. To them, the Amendment’s prohibition against an established religion is a nebulous preference for a secular form of government, but this is not what the founders had in mind.

To properly understand what was prohibited by the First Amendment, it is necessary for us to discover how the founders would have understood the phrase “an establishment of religion.” To do this, let us consider the explanation proffered by one of the men who argued strongly in favor of having an established church in America, Thomas Bradbury Chandler. Bishop Chandler wrote that:

“An established religion, is a religion which the civil authority engages, not only to protect, but to support; and a religion that is not provided for by the civil authority, but which is left to provide for itself, or to subsist on the provision it has already made, can be no more than a tolerated religion.”

Here Bishop Chandler makes a very important distinction between religious establishment and religious toleration. According to his definition the sole distinction between the two is that of monetary support from the government for a specific religion. This distinction was addressed by James Madison in a letter to Rev. Jasper Adams in 1832. Madison wrote:

“The simple question to be decided is whether a support of the best and purest religion, the Christian religion itself ought not so far at least as pecuniary means are involved, to be provided for by the Government rather than be left to the voluntary provisions of those who profess it.”

Madison went on to conclude that:

“the existing character, distinguished as it is by its religious features, and the lapse of time now more than 50 years since the legal support of Religion was withdrawn sufficiently prove that it does not need the support of Government, and it will scarcely be contended that Government has suffered by the exemption of Religion from its cognizance, or its pecuniary aid.”

Madison’s focus on the pecuniary provision for religion by the government supports Bishop Chandler’s definition of an established religion as one which receives monetary support from the state, but Madison also mentioned the exemption of religion from the cognizance of the government, and this seems more in line with the modern preference for a secular state. To properly understand this statement, however, we must turn to an early 18th century author named William Warburton. Madison actually recommended to Thomas Jefferson that some of Bishop Warburton’s books be added to the library of the University of Virginia. One of the Bishop’s books which was not recommended was a defense of established religion entitled The Alliance Between Church and State. In that book Bishop Warburton identified six essential characteristics of an establishment of religion.

The first three of these six characteristics have to do with the powers wielded by an established church within the state, and the remaining three describe the powers which the state holds over the church thus established. In the first category of powers wielded by an established church, Bishop Warburton placed the ability of that church to be fully funded from the treasury of the state, the right to claim direct representation of the church within the legislature and the power to establish an ecclesiastical court to try citizens of the state for heresies against the church. In the second category of powers wielded by the state over the established church, the Bishop identified the authority of the state to determine who would be eligible to serve in the church, the authority to preside over church councils and the authority to have the final say in all cases of excommunication. These six characteristics, in some form or another, can be identified in every recorded alliance between an established church and the state, and without them there cannot be an establishment of religion.

Your Family Must Master This 1 Simple Trick in Order To Survive Any Crisis or Disaster – Click Here To Watch

This brings us back to the consideration of the actual wording of the First Amendment. If the founders understood with Bishop Chandler that the choice was between establishment and toleration, then it follows that the prohibition against an establishment must be viewed as a preference for toleration to some degree or another. And if they recognized with Bishop Warburton the six common characteristics of an established church, then it follows that the bounds of toleration would be limited only from a legal recognition of interactions which fall within those six areas. In essence, this understanding of the First Amendment would mean that the church and the state are permitted by the Constitution to enjoy a much greater degree of mutual interaction than is currently recognized. This explains the tremendous amount of such interactions which occurred during the terms of the first four Presidents, and it should be our goal to return to an understanding of the First Amendment which does not criminalize the actions of our own founders.

Bill Fortenberry

About Bill Fortenberry

Bill Fortenberry is a native of Birmingham, AL where he currently resides with his wife and young son. He has been debating and writing in defense of the Christian faith for more than 20 years, and his articles have been featured in publications around the globe. He is the author of Hidden Facts of the Founding Era, a book which answers some of the most difficult challenges to the claim that America was founded as a Christian nation.

Bill is also the founder of the PersonhoodInitiative.com website where his research on ectopic pregnancies has changed the nature of the pro-life debate, and he shares articles on a variety of topics on his personal website IncreasingLearning.com.

Web | Facebook | More Posts (12)

Filed Under: Current Events Tagged With: first amendment, freedom of religion, separation between church and State

Comments

Trackbacks

  1. keachfan | Frenetic Friday says:
    January 23, 2015 at 6:51 pm
    […] In fact an excellent examination of what the establishment clause means can be found here. The Founders saw religion being more than just “pew, heart, and home” but rather […]

    Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Comment

Name *

Email *

Website

NO WAY! Look What Happened During Tim Tebow’s First at Bat in Pro Baseball

NO WAY! Look What Happened During Tim Tebow's First at Bat in Pro Baseball

Senate Overrides Obama; Here’s How The Obama WH Responded

Senate Overrides Obama; Here's How The Obama WH Responded

Trey Gowdy DESTROYS FBI Director Comey Over Hillary Email Case

Trey Gowdy DESTROYS FBI Director Comey Over Hillary Email Case

BREAKING: Democrats HACKED Again

BREAKING: Democrats HACKED Again

Look at the Ratio of Billionaire Donors For Clinton vs Trump…

Look at the Ratio of Billionaire Donors For Clinton vs Trump...

BREAKING: Senate OVERRIDES Obama Veto

BREAKING: Senate OVERRIDES Obama Veto

FBI Email Dump Reveals Role of ‘Confidential’ Clinton Aide

FBI Email Dump Reveals Role of 'Confidential' Clinton Aide

EXPOSED: Huma Abedin’s Radical Islamic Roots

EXPOSED: Huma Abedin's Radical Islamic Roots

BREAKING: Huge Change in Poll Data After First Debate

BREAKING: Huge Change in Poll Data After First Debate

Meme Brutally Exposes Evolution of Protests in the USA Over the Years

Meme Brutally Exposes Evolution of Protests in the USA Over the Years

EXPOSED: Huma Abedin’s Radical Islamic Roots

EXPOSED: Huma Abedin's Radical Islamic Roots

BREAKING: Huge Change in Poll Data After First Debate

BREAKING: Huge Change in Poll Data After First Debate

Meme Brutally Exposes Evolution of Protests in the USA Over the Years

Meme Brutally Exposes Evolution of Protests in the USA Over the Years

Look at The New FBI Stat That DESTROYS Liberal Gun Grabbers’ Agenda

Look at The New FBI Stat That DESTROYS Liberal Gun Grabbers’ Agenda

Delicate Students Call “Hate Response Teams” To Report Christian Cross On Poster

Delicate Students Call

Recent Posts

tebow

NO WAY! Look What Happened During Tim Tebow’s First at Bat in Pro Baseball

September 28, 2016 By C.E. Dyer Leave a Comment

senateobama

Senate Overrides Obama; Here’s How The Obama WH Responded

September 28, 2016 By C.E. Dyer Leave a Comment

gowdycomey

Trey Gowdy DESTROYS FBI Director Comey Over Hillary Email Case

September 28, 2016 By C.E. Dyer 2 Comments

donkeycellphone

BREAKING: Democrats HACKED Again

September 28, 2016 By C.E. Dyer Leave a Comment

sorosclinton

Look at the Ratio of Billionaire Donors For Clinton vs Trump…

September 28, 2016 By C.E. Dyer Leave a Comment

Recent Comments

Testimonial

The Federalist Papers, the education you bring to your readers is immeasurable. Now more than ever, Americans need to learn about their country’s founding and its founders. Keep up the good work. – Buddy Novotney

Testimonial

The Federalist Papers admins do a wonderful job of going through our founding documents (and sometimes others) to find pertinent, timely and always thought-provoking pieces. I have discovered a new admiration for Patrick Henry from their work! Thank you, admins! – Lisa Hoppman

© Copyright 2016 The Federalist Papers · All Rights Reserved
Design by MIDesign & Marketing Consultants

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

I would like to read your comments about my posts.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s