two thoughts here, none related to the thread topic:
1. . The separation of church and state is implied by the text of the U.S. constitution of 1787, most notably this part:
Quote:
First Amendment to the Constitution
"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..."
|
In 1787, the standard practice in all European countries was to have one state religion imposed on all the inhabitants. People who practiced other religions were tolerated, but discriminated against. I seem to recall that there were heated discussions on whether the U.S. should have a state religion, but this was abandoned in favour of the present text which made it clear that the U.S. government could not favour one religion over another, a quite revolutionary concept at the time;
2. Canada was a British colony at the time. Most of the inhabitants were french catholics. In 1763, when Canada became a British colony, the British guaranteed the French, the free exercise of their catholic religion and guaranteed the legal status of the catholic church. This was also quite unorthodox at the time since the current practice was to force all the inhabitants of a conquered country to convert to the state religion. Of course, the British had done this for practical reasons since they knew it would be dificult to rule Canada without the tacit consent of the
Canadiens. The U.S. rebels made many overture to Canada to join the U.S. Many of these were rebuffed because the
Canadiens did not trust the U.S. leaders to respect their religious freedoms. They had more faith in King George.