Why does the 1st Amendment include 2 different laws?

[Gizmo j]

(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.)

Freedom of Religion and speaking up against the Government sounds like 2 different things to me....why did the founding fathers include 2 different laws in a single amendment?

It seems to me that this should be split into 2 different amendments, like this:

1st Amendment: (Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof)

2nd Amendment: (Congress shalt not 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.)

 

[sdifox]

Two girls one cup.



More serious answer, the amendments are occasions. In one occasion multiple changes are allowed.

 

[Fern]

It suggests to me that the Founding Fathers considered the two issues fundamentally connected.

Fern

 

[drinkmorejava]

They're intricately linked. Look up Henry VIII and the Church of England.

 

[lxskllr]

It was a two for Tuesday deal. You don't like getting extra rights?

 

[GagHalfrunt]

It was quill pens back then, they had to write more efficiently.

 

[pete6032]

(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.)

Freedom of Religion and speaking up against the Government sounds like 2 different things to me....why did the founding fathers include 2 different laws in a single amendment?

It seems to me that this should be split into 2 different amendments, like this:

1st Amendment: (Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof)

2nd Amendment: (Congress shalt not 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.)

Perhaps those who wrote the amendment included religion along with speech, press, assembly, and petition because they did not want laws enacted that suppressed these freedoms under the pretense of a religious regulation law.

 

[sandorski]

They all seem inter-related. That being Freedom of Speech and Mind.

 

[K7SN]

They're intricately linked. Look up Henry VIII and the Church of England.

You and Fern have answered OP.

Let's see Charles Carroll who signed the Declaration of Independence couldn't vote because he was a Catholic. You could oppose the appointed officials of the King; you couldn't say things that offended those officials even if they were true. you couldn't assemble in protest so much of the work on the Declaration of Independence was done where you could assemble to drink. You couldn't petition the Government for a redress of grievances such 'we want it you have it we'll take it', 'we needed a crew you were handy get on that ship', I sold you this product, you didn't pay me' and other British Balderdash of the times. If you were from New Amsterdam you had plenty of grievances.

 

[Paratus]

They all seem inter-related. That being Freedom of Speech and Mind.

Not a bad way to put it.

Remember the founding fathers were students of the enlightenment. The enlightenment is best described as the King doesn't own your body or mind and church doesn't own your soul.

 

[FerrelGeek]

Not a bad way to put it.

Remember the founding fathers were students of the enlightenment. The enlightenment is best described as the King doesn't own your body or mind and church doesn't own your soul.

And the king doesn't tell you what/how to worship/not worship.

 

[shira]

(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.)

Freedom of Religion and speaking up against the Government sounds like 2 different things to me....why did the founding fathers include 2 different laws in a single amendment?

It seems to me that this should be split into 2 different amendments, like this:

1st Amendment: (Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof)

2nd Amendment: (Congress shalt not 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.)

Because if the Founders had followed that principle, we'd have 327 Amendments to the Constitution, and Americans are number-challenged.

Do the, er, math.

Edit: And if ATPN'ers followed that principle, I'd have 100,000 posts by now.

 

[WHAMPOM]

(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.)

Freedom of Religion and speaking up against the Government sounds like 2 different things to me....why did the founding fathers include 2 different laws in a single amendment?

It seems to me that this should be split into 2 different amendments, like this:

1st Amendment: (Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof)

2nd Amendment: (Congress shalt not 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.)

Never heard of bundling have you?

 

[piasabird]

You have to realize that many people that settled in the 13 colonies came there because of religious prosecution. They probably had good reason to demonstrate that freedom of speech and religion were both related. This is also why the second amendment is the right to bear arms. Without arms, how can you defend freedom of speech?

 

[sandorski]

You have to realize that many people that settled in the 13 colonies came there because of religious prosecution. They probably had good reason to demonstrate that freedom of speech and religion were both related. This is also why the second amendment is the right to bear arms. Without arms, how can you defend freedom of speech?

Many of those religious groups committed religious persecution themselves. The first amendment wasn't written because Religious groups were noble and understood the error of persecuting people of other faiths. It was written because some religious groups were using State Governments to persecute other faiths.