{"id":5458,"date":"2020-07-10T00:00:02","date_gmt":"2020-07-10T00:00:02","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/regnersmorningcoffee.com\/blogger\/?p=5458"},"modified":"2020-07-10T04:02:01","modified_gmt":"2020-07-10T04:02:01","slug":"another-coffee-break-our-forefathers-covenants-part-31","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/regnersmorningcoffee.com\/blogger\/another-coffee-break-our-forefathers-covenants-part-31\/","title":{"rendered":"ANOTHER COFFEE BREAK: OUR FOREFATHERS\u2019 COVENANTS, Part 31"},"content":{"rendered":"
<\/span><\/div><\/div>
<\/div>\r\n\r\n
\r\n\r\n

<\/o:p><\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n

OUR FOREFATHERS\u2019\r\nCOVENANTS<\/o:p><\/span><\/b><\/p>\r\n\r\n

Part 31<\/o:p><\/span><\/b><\/p>\r\n\r\n

\u00a0<\/o:p><\/span><\/b><\/p>\r\n\r\n

July 10, 2020<\/o:p><\/span><\/b><\/p>\r\n\r\n

\u00a0<\/o:p><\/span><\/b><\/p>\r\n\r\n

Let's see if we can\r\nfinish up with a couple of Supreme Court decisions today -- decisions, that is,\r\nthat took away more of our First Amendment guarantees to religious liberties in\r\nAmerica.<\/o:p><\/span><\/b><\/p>\r\n\r\n

One thing that\r\nI think you will find interesting in this Coffee Break is a link to Justice\r\nWilliam Rehnquist's argument in the Wallace v. Jaffree<\/i><\/b> case; and\r\nI believe that many of you will find his (lengthy, but) complete argument very\r\ninteresting reading.\u00a0 Here's the link: <\/span>http:\/\/www.belcherfoundation.org\/wallace_v_jaffree_dissent.htm<\/span><\/a><\/o:p><\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n

If the\r\ncase we mentioned last week -- Allegheny County v. ACLU<\/i><\/b> -- was a\r\ndeparture from cases predicated on lawsuits seeking to remove prayer, the\r\nreading of the Bible, funding (or more accurately, refunds for expenses) for\r\nreligious education and funding for teachers who also happened to provide some\r\nreligious education, the case of Lee v. Weisman<\/i><\/b> filed with the\r\nCourt on November 6, 1991 certainly was a return to the educational scene.<\/o:p><\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n

In opening\r\nthe case before the Supreme Court, the case read in part: \"Principals of public middle and high schools in\r\nProvidence, Rhode Island, are permitted to invite members of the clergy to give\r\ninvocations and benedictions at their schools' graduation ceremonies.\r\nPetitioner Lee, a middle school principal, invited a rabbi to offer such\r\nprayers at the graduation ceremony for Deborah Weisman's class, gave the Rabbi\r\na pamphlet containing guidelines for the composition of public prayers at civic\r\nceremonies, and advised him that the prayers should be nonsectarian. Shortly\r\nbefore the ceremony, the District Court denied the motion of respondent\r\nWeisman, Deborah's father, for a temporary restraining order to prohibit school\r\nofficials from including the prayers in the ceremony. Deborah and her family\r\nattended the ceremony, and the prayers were recited. Subsequently, Weisman\r\nsought a permanent injunction barring Lee and other petitioners, various\r\nProvidence public school officials, from inviting clergy to deliver invocations\r\nand benedictions at future graduations. It appears likely that such prayers\r\nwill be conducted at Deborah's high school graduation.\"<\/span><\/i><\/b><\/o:p><\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n

Terrible,\r\nisn't it?\u00a0 Praying at High School graduation ceremonies!\u00a0 Why, the\r\nvery thought of it!<\/o:p><\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n

Ohh,\r\nBrotherrrr!<\/o:p><\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n

Here was a\r\ncase based almost entirely on the concept that the Weisman family would be\r\noffended by the thought of a non-sectarian prayer being offered at a graduation\r\nclass.<\/o:p><\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n

Got a\r\nquestion for you.\u00a0 Anybody?\u00a0 Can someone please tell me where it is\r\nfound in our Constitution that an individual has the right NOT to be\r\noffended?\u00a0 Where did we begin to drift so far away from our Constitution and\r\nLaw that we now have somehow derived a right to not be offended?\u00a0 It seems\r\nto me, folks, that if conservatives -- never mind Christians -- rose up and\r\nsaid, ENOUGH!, we might actually have a return to reason and sanity.<\/o:p><\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n

Oh, and in\r\ncase you think I'm just making up this concept of \"being offended,\"\r\nread the following excerpt from the 5-4 majority decision written by Justice\r\nKennedy.<\/o:p><\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n

\"The Establishment Clause was inspired by the lesson that\r\nin the hands of government what might begin as a tolerant expression of\r\nreligious views may end in a policy to indoctrinate and coerce. Prayer\r\nexercises in elementary and secondary schools carry a particular risk of\r\nindirect coercion. Engel v. Vitale, 370 U.S. 421<\/u>; Abington School\r\nDistrict v. Schempp, 374 U.S. 203<\/u>. The school district's supervision and\r\ncontrol of a high school graduation ceremony places subtle and indirect public\r\nand peer pressure on attending students to stand as a group or maintain\r\nrespectful silence during the invocation and benediction.<\/o:p><\/span><\/i><\/b><\/p>\r\n\r\n

\u201cA reasonable dissenter of high school age could believe that\r\nstanding or remaining silent signified her own participation in, or approval\r\nof, the group exercise, rather than her respect for it. And the State may not\r\nplace the student dissenter in the dilemma of participating or protesting.\r\nSince adolescents are often susceptible to peer pressure, especially in matters\r\nof social convention, the State may no more use social pressure to enforce\r\northodoxy than it may use direct means. <\/o:p><\/span><\/i><\/b><\/p>\r\n\r\n

\u201cThe embarrassment and intrusion of the religious exercise<\/u>\r\n(my accent, RAC) cannot be refuted by arguing that the prayers are of a de\r\nminimis character, since that is an affront to the Rabbi and those for whom the\r\nprayers have meaning, and since any intrusion was both real and a violation of\r\nthe objectors' rights.\"<\/span><\/i><\/b><\/o:p><\/span><\/b><\/p>\r\n\r\n

Once\r\nagain, we have a court decision by a bare majority (decided June 24, 1992) who\r\nhave taken upon themselves the right to strip Americans of a God-given right, a\r\nhistorical right, a Constitutional right -- in this case to offer a prayer at a\r\nhigh school graduation ceremony.<\/o:p><\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n

Lee\r\nv. Weisman<\/span><\/i><\/b>,<\/span><\/b> as decided case\r\nlaw, then became the basis for the next court decision in Santa Fe\r\nIndependent School District v. Doe<\/i><\/b>, which was argued before the Supreme\r\nCourt on March 29, 2000.<\/o:p><\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n

Paragraph\r\n1 in Justice Stevens' opinion, writing for the majority, pretty clearly spells\r\nout the case, the reliance on Lee v. Weisman<\/i><\/b> in arriving at its\r\nfindings, and -- once again -- the Court's errant understanding of our nation's\r\nhistorical stance as a Christian nation, and the Constitution's ban in the\r\nFirst Amendment on any legislation restricting both our free speech and our\r\nfree and independent exercise of worship.<\/o:p><\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n

Justice\r\nStevens wrote (in part), \"The Court\u2019s\r\nanalysis is guided by the principles endorsed in Lee v. Weisman, 505 U.S.\r\n577<\/u>. There, in concluding that a prayer delivered by a rabbi at a\r\ngraduation ceremony violated the Establishment Clause, the Court held that, at\r\na minimum, the Constitution guarantees that government may not coerce anyone to\r\nsupport or participate in religion or its exercise, or otherwise act in a way\r\nthat establishes a state religion or religious faith, or tends to do so, id.,\r\nat 587. The District argues unpersuasively that these principles are\r\ninapplicable because the policy\u2019s messages are private student speech, not\r\npublic speech.<\/o:p><\/span><\/i><\/b><\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n

\u201cThe delivery of a message such as the invocation here\u2013on school\r\nproperty, at school-sponsored events, over the school\u2019s public address system,\r\nby a speaker representing the student body, under the supervision of school\r\nfaculty, and pursuant to a school policy that explicitly and implicitly\r\nencourages public prayer\u2013is not properly characterized as \u201cprivate\u201d speech.\r\nAlthough the District relies heavily on this Court\u2019s cases addressing public\r\nforums, e.g., Rosenberger v. Rector and Visitors of Univ. of Va., 515 U.S.\r\n819<\/u>, it is clear that the District\u2019s pregame ceremony is not the type of\r\nforum discussed in such cases. The District simply does not evince an intent to\r\nopen its ceremony to indiscriminate use by the student body generally, see,\r\ne.g., Hazelwood School Dist. v. Kuhlmeier, 484 U.S. 260<\/u>, 270, but,\r\nrather, allows only one student, the same student for the entire season, to\r\ngive the invocation, which is subject to particular regulations that confine\r\nthe content and topic of the student\u2019s message.<\/o:p><\/span><\/i><\/b><\/p>\r\n\r\n

\u201cThe majoritarian process implemented by the District\r\nguarantees, by definition, that minority candidates will never prevail and that\r\ntheir views will be effectively silenced. See Board of Regents of Univ. of Wis.\r\nSystem v. Southworth, 529 U.S. ___, ___. Moreover, the District has failed to\r\ndivorce itself from the invocations\u2019 religious content. The policy involves\r\nboth perceived and actual endorsement of religion, see Lee, 505 U.S., at 590,\r\ndeclaring that the student elections take place because the District \u201chas\r\nchosen to permit\u201d student-delivered invocations, that the invocation \u201cshall\u201d be\r\nconducted \u201cby the high school student council\u201d \u201cupon advice and direction of\r\nthe high school principal,\u201d and that it must be consistent with the policy\u2019s\r\ngoals, which include \u201csolemnizing the event.\u201d<\/o:p><\/span><\/i><\/b><\/p>\r\n\r\n

A religious message is the most obvious method of solemnizing an\r\nevent. Indeed, the only type of message expressly endorsed in the policy is an\r\n\u201cinvocation,\u201d a term which primarily describes an appeal for divine assistance\r\nand, as used in the past at Santa\u00a0Fe High School, has always entailed a\r\nfocused religious message. A conclusion that the message is not \u201cprivate\r\nspeech\u201d is also established by factors beyond the policy\u2019s text, including the\r\nofficial setting in which the invocation is delivered, see, e.g., Wallace, 472\r\nU.S., at 73, 76, by the policy\u2019s sham secular purposes, see id., at 75, and by\r\nits history, which indicates that the District intended to preserve its\r\nlong-sanctioned practice of prayer before football games, see Lee, 505 U.S., at\r\n596. Pp.\u00a09\u201418.\"<\/span><\/i><\/b><\/o:p><\/span><\/b><\/p>\r\n\r\n

Now, I\r\nknow that the overwhelming majority of you who read these Coffee Breaks are not\r\nlegal scholars, and probably find some of this to be pretty boring stuff.\u00a0\r\nNevertheless, any individual with any kind of reasoning ability whatever will\r\nsee what the Court has set out to do in these decisions.\u00a0 They have -- for\r\nall intents and purposes -- created case law out of whole cloth, inventing\r\nconcepts and ideas that are not a part of our nation's foundations, our\r\nfounding fathers' intents, nor indeed anything encapsulated in any way in our\r\nAmerican Constitution.<\/o:p><\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n

The fact\r\nthat they have gotten away with this is a testimony to the passivity of\r\nChristians, and the inaction of those who see the wholesale theft of liberties\r\nour forefathers bled and died for.<\/o:p><\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n

When we\r\nallow minority -- and a very tiny minority at that -- decisions to alter the\r\ncourse of our nation, its history, and the character of our freedom and\r\nliberty, we allow tyrannical suppression.\u00a0 As Jay Sekulow of the ACLJ\r\n(American Center for Law & Justice) has often stated, our Constitution was\r\nestablished so that America would allow for people of various religious\r\npersuasions to worship as they saw fit; but America was first and foremost\r\nestablished as a Christian Nation with Almighty God and the Lord Jesus Christ\r\nas the centerpiece and guiding force of our laws and character.<\/o:p><\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n

When\r\npeople come to America, they come seeking the freedoms and liberties we\r\nhave.\u00a0 Those freedoms and liberties were bought with the lives of people\r\nwho gladly died so that their descendants would be able to freely worship the\r\nLord Jesus Christ, and so that the Lord would be honored as the God of this\r\nnation.<\/o:p><\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n

While we\r\nfreely welcome others who do not know Jesus Christ, their entrance into America\r\nmust recognize that they are living in a nation that honors the Lord.\u00a0\r\nThey are not required to honor the Lord, and they may follow any religious\r\nbelief they so choose.\u00a0 That does not mean that they cannot<\/a>and will not be exposed to the truths of Christianity.\u00a0\r\nWhen you look back at the stated intentions of those early pioneers, this\r\nnation was established specifically for that purpose.<\/o:p><\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n

Do I sound\r\nirrational or out of touch with our history?\u00a0 Didn't think so.<\/o:p><\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n

We've been\r\ncommissioned by the Lord Jesus Christ to <\/span>\"Go into all the\r\nworld and preach the Gospel (make disciples of all nations), baptizing them in\r\nthe name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, teaching them to\r\nobserve all things whatsoever I have commanded you.\"<\/span>\u00a0 (Matthew\r\n28:19-20)<\/o:p><\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n

That's\r\nwhat our founding fathers saw as the prevailing purpose for America's creation\r\nand colonization.\u00a0 While we welcome the stranger and the foreigner into\r\nour land, they have no inherent right to take offense, or to be offended by our\r\nChristian values, and to sue to prevent being offended.<\/o:p><\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n

This, my\r\nfriends, is where our Courts have gone awry.\u00a0 Just because a person is an\r\natheist, a Buddhist, a Muslim, a Hindu, or a member of any religion does not\r\ngive them the right to take away from us the freedoms that give us such\r\nprosperity as the world covets.\u00a0 We have no state-sponsored denomination\r\nin America, but we do -- as a nation -- (or at least we used to) honor the Lord\r\nJesus Christ above all else as He upon whom the government of America rests.<\/o:p><\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n

There was\r\nanother case that wound its way through the courts just a few years ago.\u00a0\r\nThis time another atheist, Michael Newdow, sought to have the phrase\r\n\"under God\" removed from our Pledge of Allegiance as an\r\nunconstitutional endorsement of religion.\u00a0 The Supreme Court did not rule\r\nin Newdow's favor when the case finally reached the Court.<\/o:p><\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n

We are\r\nkeeping today\u2019s Coffee Break a bit shorter than the last few weeks, but I want\r\nto shift gears somewhat in looking at some other court cases.<\/o:p><\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n

Next week,\r\nwe'll wrap up this series and take a look at some decisions that should give\r\nour opponents pause in their wholesale theft of our Christian liberties.<\/o:p><\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n

In case you\r\nare missing out on real fellowship in an environment of Ekklesia, our Sunday\r\nworship gatherings are available by conference call \u2013 usually at about 10:30AM\r\nPacific.\u00a0 <\/span>That conference number is <\/span><\/b>(712) 770-4160<\/span><\/b>, and the\r\naccess code is <\/span><\/b>308640#.<\/span><\/b>\u00a0 <\/span>We are now making these gatherings\r\navailable on video usingZOOM.\u00a0 <\/span>If you wish\r\nto participate by video on ZOOM, our login ID is 835-926-513.\u00a0 <\/span>If you miss the live voice-onlycall, you can\r\ndial <\/span><\/b>(712) 770-4169<\/span><\/b>, enter the same access code and listen in later.\u00a0 <\/span>The video call, of course, is not recorded \u2013\r\nnot yet, anyway.<\/span><\/b><\/o:p><\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n

Blessings on you!<\/o:p><\/b><\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n

\u00a0<\/o:p><\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n

Regner<\/span><\/b><\/o:p><\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n

\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/span><\/o:p><\/span><\/b><\/p>\r\n\r\n

Regner A. Capener<\/span><\/b>
\r\nCAPENER MINISTRIES<\/b><\/o:p><\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n

RIVER WORSHIP CENTER<\/span>
\r\nTemple, Texas 76502<\/span><\/o:p><\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n

Email Contact: <\/span>CapenerMinistries@protonmail.com<\/span><\/u><\/o:p><\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n

\u00a0<\/o:p><\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n

All Coffee Break articles are copyright by Regner A.\r\nCapener, but authorization for reprinting, reposting, copying or re-use, in\r\nwhole or in part, is granted \u2013provided proper attribution and this notice are\r\nincluded intact. Older Coffee Break archives are available .<\/span><\/u> Coffee Break articles are normally published\r\nweekly.
\r\n
\r\nIf you would like to have these articles arrive each morning in your email,\r\nplease send a blank email to: <\/span>AnotherCoffeeBreak@protonmail.com<\/span><\/u> with the word, \u201cSubscribe\u201d in the subject line.\u00a0 <\/span>To remove yourself from the mailing list,\r\nplease send a blank email to <\/span>AnotherCoffeeBreak@protonmail.com<\/span><\/a> with the word \u201cUnsubscribe\u201d in the subject\r\nline. <\/o:p><\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n

\u00a0<\/o:p><\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n

CAPENER MINISTRIES<\/span><\/b>\u00a0<\/span>is\r\na tax-exempt church ministry. Should you desire to participate and covenant\r\nwith us as partners in this ministry, please contact us at either of the above\r\nemail or physical addresses, or visit:\u00a0<\/span>http:\/\/www.RiverWorshipCenter.org<\/span><\/a>.<\/span><\/o:p><\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n

<\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div> \r\n
<\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Let’s see if we can finish up with a couple of Supreme Court decisions today — decisions, that is, that took away more of our First Amendment guarantees to religious liberties in America.
\nOne thing that I think you will find interesting in this Coffee Break is a link to Justice William Rehnquist’s argument in the Wallace v. Jaffree case; and I believe that many of you will find his (lengthy, but) complete argument very interesting reading. Here’s the link: http:\/\/www.belcherfoundation.org\/wallace_v_jaffree_dissent.htm<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[204,1],"tags":[205,65,93],"class_list":["post-5458","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-204","category-another-coffee-break","tag-205","tag-another-coffee-break","tag-july"],"yoast_head":"\nANOTHER COFFEE BREAK: OUR FOREFATHERS\u2019 COVENANTS, Part 31 - Regners Morning Coffee<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/regnersmorningcoffee.com\/blogger\/another-coffee-break-our-forefathers-covenants-part-31\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"ANOTHER COFFEE BREAK: OUR FOREFATHERS\u2019 COVENANTS, Part 31 - Regners Morning Coffee\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Let's see if we can finish up with a couple of Supreme Court decisions today -- decisions, that is, that took away more of our First Amendment guarantees to religious liberties in America. One thing that I think you will find interesting in this Coffee Break is a link to Justice William Rehnquist's argument in the Wallace v. Jaffree case; and I believe that many of you will find his (lengthy, but) complete argument very interesting reading. Here's the link: http:\/\/www.belcherfoundation.org\/wallace_v_jaffree_dissent.htm\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/regnersmorningcoffee.com\/blogger\/another-coffee-break-our-forefathers-covenants-part-31\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Regners Morning Coffee\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2020-07-10T00:00:02+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2020-07-10T04:02:01+00:00\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"coffee\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"coffee\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"22 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/regnersmorningcoffee.com\\\/blogger\\\/another-coffee-break-our-forefathers-covenants-part-31\\\/#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/regnersmorningcoffee.com\\\/blogger\\\/another-coffee-break-our-forefathers-covenants-part-31\\\/\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"coffee\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/regnersmorningcoffee.com\\\/blogger\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/b4475bd1dbeb84d0016274b68e3de28f\"},\"headline\":\"ANOTHER COFFEE BREAK: OUR FOREFATHERS\u2019 COVENANTS, Part 31\",\"datePublished\":\"2020-07-10T00:00:02+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2020-07-10T04:02:01+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/regnersmorningcoffee.com\\\/blogger\\\/another-coffee-break-our-forefathers-covenants-part-31\\\/\"},\"wordCount\":4415,\"keywords\":[\"2020\",\"Another Coffee Break\",\"July\"],\"articleSection\":[\"2020\",\"ANOTHER COFFEE BREAK:\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/regnersmorningcoffee.com\\\/blogger\\\/another-coffee-break-our-forefathers-covenants-part-31\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/regnersmorningcoffee.com\\\/blogger\\\/another-coffee-break-our-forefathers-covenants-part-31\\\/\",\"name\":\"ANOTHER COFFEE BREAK: OUR FOREFATHERS\u2019 COVENANTS, Part 31 - Regners Morning Coffee\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/regnersmorningcoffee.com\\\/blogger\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2020-07-10T00:00:02+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2020-07-10T04:02:01+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/regnersmorningcoffee.com\\\/blogger\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/b4475bd1dbeb84d0016274b68e3de28f\"},\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/regnersmorningcoffee.com\\\/blogger\\\/another-coffee-break-our-forefathers-covenants-part-31\\\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/regnersmorningcoffee.com\\\/blogger\\\/another-coffee-break-our-forefathers-covenants-part-31\\\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/regnersmorningcoffee.com\\\/blogger\\\/another-coffee-break-our-forefathers-covenants-part-31\\\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/regnersmorningcoffee.com\\\/blogger\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"ANOTHER COFFEE BREAK: OUR FOREFATHERS\u2019 COVENANTS, Part 31\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/regnersmorningcoffee.com\\\/blogger\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/regnersmorningcoffee.com\\\/blogger\\\/\",\"name\":\"Regners Morning Coffee\",\"description\":\"\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/regnersmorningcoffee.com\\\/blogger\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/regnersmorningcoffee.com\\\/blogger\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/b4475bd1dbeb84d0016274b68e3de28f\",\"name\":\"coffee\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/regnersmorningcoffee.com\\\/blogger\\\/author\\\/coffee\\\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"ANOTHER COFFEE BREAK: OUR FOREFATHERS\u2019 COVENANTS, Part 31 - Regners Morning Coffee","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/regnersmorningcoffee.com\/blogger\/another-coffee-break-our-forefathers-covenants-part-31\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"ANOTHER COFFEE BREAK: OUR FOREFATHERS\u2019 COVENANTS, Part 31 - Regners Morning Coffee","og_description":"Let's see if we can finish up with a couple of Supreme Court decisions today -- decisions, that is, that took away more of our First Amendment guarantees to religious liberties in America. One thing that I think you will find interesting in this Coffee Break is a link to Justice William Rehnquist's argument in the Wallace v. Jaffree case; and I believe that many of you will find his (lengthy, but) complete argument very interesting reading. Here's the link: http:\/\/www.belcherfoundation.org\/wallace_v_jaffree_dissent.htm","og_url":"https:\/\/regnersmorningcoffee.com\/blogger\/another-coffee-break-our-forefathers-covenants-part-31\/","og_site_name":"Regners Morning Coffee","article_published_time":"2020-07-10T00:00:02+00:00","article_modified_time":"2020-07-10T04:02:01+00:00","author":"coffee","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"coffee","Est. reading time":"22 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/regnersmorningcoffee.com\/blogger\/another-coffee-break-our-forefathers-covenants-part-31\/#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/regnersmorningcoffee.com\/blogger\/another-coffee-break-our-forefathers-covenants-part-31\/"},"author":{"name":"coffee","@id":"https:\/\/regnersmorningcoffee.com\/blogger\/#\/schema\/person\/b4475bd1dbeb84d0016274b68e3de28f"},"headline":"ANOTHER COFFEE BREAK: OUR FOREFATHERS\u2019 COVENANTS, Part 31","datePublished":"2020-07-10T00:00:02+00:00","dateModified":"2020-07-10T04:02:01+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/regnersmorningcoffee.com\/blogger\/another-coffee-break-our-forefathers-covenants-part-31\/"},"wordCount":4415,"keywords":["2020","Another Coffee Break","July"],"articleSection":["2020","ANOTHER COFFEE BREAK:"],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/regnersmorningcoffee.com\/blogger\/another-coffee-break-our-forefathers-covenants-part-31\/","url":"https:\/\/regnersmorningcoffee.com\/blogger\/another-coffee-break-our-forefathers-covenants-part-31\/","name":"ANOTHER COFFEE BREAK: OUR FOREFATHERS\u2019 COVENANTS, Part 31 - Regners Morning Coffee","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/regnersmorningcoffee.com\/blogger\/#website"},"datePublished":"2020-07-10T00:00:02+00:00","dateModified":"2020-07-10T04:02:01+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/regnersmorningcoffee.com\/blogger\/#\/schema\/person\/b4475bd1dbeb84d0016274b68e3de28f"},"breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/regnersmorningcoffee.com\/blogger\/another-coffee-break-our-forefathers-covenants-part-31\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/regnersmorningcoffee.com\/blogger\/another-coffee-break-our-forefathers-covenants-part-31\/"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/regnersmorningcoffee.com\/blogger\/another-coffee-break-our-forefathers-covenants-part-31\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/regnersmorningcoffee.com\/blogger\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"ANOTHER COFFEE BREAK: OUR FOREFATHERS\u2019 COVENANTS, Part 31"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/regnersmorningcoffee.com\/blogger\/#website","url":"https:\/\/regnersmorningcoffee.com\/blogger\/","name":"Regners Morning Coffee","description":"","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/regnersmorningcoffee.com\/blogger\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/regnersmorningcoffee.com\/blogger\/#\/schema\/person\/b4475bd1dbeb84d0016274b68e3de28f","name":"coffee","url":"https:\/\/regnersmorningcoffee.com\/blogger\/author\/coffee\/"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/regnersmorningcoffee.com\/blogger\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5458","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/regnersmorningcoffee.com\/blogger\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/regnersmorningcoffee.com\/blogger\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/regnersmorningcoffee.com\/blogger\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/regnersmorningcoffee.com\/blogger\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=5458"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/regnersmorningcoffee.com\/blogger\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5458\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":5462,"href":"https:\/\/regnersmorningcoffee.com\/blogger\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5458\/revisions\/5462"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/regnersmorningcoffee.com\/blogger\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=5458"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/regnersmorningcoffee.com\/blogger\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=5458"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/regnersmorningcoffee.com\/blogger\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=5458"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}