Quote Originally Posted by O'Callaghan View Post
Please read the 14th Amendment.
I have read it, I know exactly what it says, and I know how the courts have interpreted it. But that still has absolutely nothing to do with the original intent (or the original wording) of the Constitution. The 14th Amendment wasn't ratified until 1868 - almost 80 years after the Constitution was written, and after the Civil War. Virtually every Constitutional scholar agrees that the 14th Amendment radically changed the nature of how the Constitution works. So what does it have to do with the intent of the original document? My comments in this thread were about the original concept of States' Rights.

I would submit that it has been the upholding of individuals' rights granted by the First Amendment and enforced by SCOTUS which have been a deciding factor in the limitation of States' rights to establish policies regarding religion. State policies cannot violate federal constitutional law.
I don't disagree with that, and I hope you guys don't think I'm arguing in favour of any government at any level having the authority to dictate religion. Individual liberty should be paramount, and in that respect I think the courts have done the right thing with respect to holding the States to the limitations of the BoR (despite the unfortunate side-effects of the loss of States' Rights in other areas). But I think you may still be missing the point. State policies cannot violate federal constitutional law, that is true, but under the original wording of the Constitution, and the subsequent SCOTUS ruling of Barron v. Baltimore, a State law that infringed on free speech or other rights specified therein would not have been a violation, since that Amendment was specific only to Congress, not the States. It wasn't until 1947 that it was established that States were bound by it as well.

Again, there is no disagreement that under current law and legal precedent, States are bound by the BoR. And I reiterate that my points in this discussion were pointed towards the original wording/intent of the Constitution. Historically and legally, all the evidence shows that the Bill of Rights was not written with the goal of constraining the States. Only the Central Government. The last part of the Bill of Rights, the 10th Amendment, affirms this.