1answer.
Ask question
Login Signup
Ask question
All categories
  • English
  • Mathematics
  • Social Studies
  • Business
  • History
  • Health
  • Geography
  • Biology
  • Physics
  • Chemistry
  • Computers and Technology
  • Arts
  • World Languages
  • Spanish
  • French
  • German
  • Advanced Placement (AP)
  • SAT
  • Medicine
  • Law
  • Engineering
Mashutka [201]
3 years ago
7

The founding fathers protected religious freedom in America and guaranteed it’s free exercise by stating that “congress shall ma

ke no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof” analyze this statement and compare and contrast it to the phrase “separation of church and state” how are these ideas connected? Please help!!
History
1 answer:
lbvjy [14]3 years ago
5 0

Explanation:

To start with, the statement - “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof” is known as the establishment clause.

The clause prohibits government from making laws that respect the establishment of religion. It also prohibits government from establishing an official religion as well as initiating actions that serve to favour a particular religion over another.

From the provisions of the clause, it is obvious that government is meant to remain neutral to all religions as the clause requires that government should neither respect, elevate nor favour religions.  

It is important to note here that provisions of the establishment clause define the concept of separation of church and state. In other words, they are connected and communicate the same message.  

The summary of the message is that the church and government are separate entities. As such, the state or government ought not to do things that show support for a particular religion.  

Neither is it for proper for the state to compel citizens to be steadfast with, or practise a particular religion because it would amount to violation of citizens rights to religious liberty.

You might be interested in
The 19th, 24th, and 26th amendments were all important additions to the Constitution because they
enyata [817]
The 19th, 24th, and 26th amendments were all important additions to the Constitution because they increased the voting rights for Americans. The 19th amendment gave voting rights to women. The 24th amendment eliminated poll taxes. And, the 26th amendment changed the voting age to 18.

Hope this helps! :)
8 0
3 years ago
What was not one of Russia's achievements in the late nineteenth century​ plz help
zlopas [31]

Answer: the adoption of capitalism

Explanation: they didnt adopt capitilism

6 0
3 years ago
Identify the key differences between the Articles of Confederation and the U.S. Constitution. Then explain which document create
Lubov Fominskaja [6]
There were key differences between the two documents in the how they both confided the law. The article of confederation established a unicamy legislature. As opposed to the eventual bicameral system created by the constitution. The articles created a loose confederation of sovereign states in a week central government leaving most of the power with the state governments. The need for a stronger federal government soon became apparent and eventually led to the constitutional convention in 1787.
5 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
Which two objectives are consistent with Wilson's Fourteen Points?
Pachacha [2.7K]

Answer:

The objectives that are consistent with Wilson's Fourteen Points are: Allowing goods created in any country to be sold elsewhere. Independence for former colonies.

Explanation:

5 0
3 years ago
What were the 3 specific things that came out the Great Compromise?
Ratling [72]

Answer:

July 16, 1987, began with a light breeze, a cloudless sky, and a spirit of celebration. On that day, 200 senators and representatives boarded a special train for a journey to Philadelphia to celebrate a singular congressional anniversary.

Exactly 200 years earlier, the framers of the U.S. Constitution, meeting at Independence Hall, had reached a supremely important agreement. Their so-called Great Compromise (or Connecticut Compromise in honor of its architects, Connecticut delegates Roger Sherman and Oliver Ellsworth) provided a dual system of congressional representation. In the House of Representatives each state would be assigned a number of seats in proportion to its population. In the Senate, all states would have the same number of seats. Today, we take this arrangement for granted; in the wilting-hot summer of 1787, it was a new idea.

In the weeks before July 16, 1787, the framers had made several important decisions about the Senate’s structure. They turned aside a proposal to have the House of Representatives elect senators from lists submitted by the individual state legislatures and agreed that those legislatures should elect their own senators.

By July 16, the convention had already set the minimum age for senators at 30 and the term length at six years, as opposed to 25 for House members, with two-year terms. James Madison explained that these distinctions, based on “the nature of the senatorial trust, which requires greater extent of information and stability of character,” would allow the Senate “to proceed with more coolness, with more system, and with more wisdom than the popular[ly elected] branch.”

The issue of representation, however, threatened to destroy the seven-week-old convention. Delegates from the large states believed that because their states contributed proportionally more to the nation’s financial and defensive resources, they should enjoy proportionally greater representation in the Senate as well as in the House. Small-state delegates demanded, with comparable intensity, that all states be equally represented in both houses. When Sherman proposed the compromise, Benjamin Franklin agreed that each state should have an equal vote in the Senate in all matters—except those involving money.

Over the Fourth of July holiday, delegates worked out a compromise plan that sidetracked Franklin’s proposal. On July 16, the convention adopted the Great Compromise by a heart-stopping margin of one vote. As the 1987 celebrants duly noted, without that vote, there would likely have been no Constitution.

Explanation:

5 0
3 years ago
Other questions:
  • Interchangeable parts were first used in what industry?
    10·1 answer
  • In what way was kublai khan more successful than genghis khan?
    12·1 answer
  • which economic activity was the basis for most of the wealth and power of the west African empires of ghana and mali
    13·1 answer
  • Please help me answer these questions
    14·1 answer
  • How was the population of the United States affected by changes in immigration and migration during the 1970s?
    13·1 answer
  • Which nation's legislature refused to join the League of Nations?
    12·2 answers
  • What did Caesar do in regard to large land holding?
    14·1 answer
  • HELLLPPPP<br><br> Where was the U.S citizenship act of 2021 bill introduced?
    6·1 answer
  • Which two of the following are factors of production?
    9·1 answer
  • What was one of the main purposes of the Council of Trent?
    5·2 answers
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!