Context: Some legal scholars, such as John Baker of LSU, theorize that Madison's initial proposed language—that Congress should make no law regarding the establishment of a "national religion"—was rejected by the House, in favor of the more general "religion" in an effort to appease the Anti-Federalists. To both the Anti-Federalists and the Federalists, the very word "national" was a cause for alarm because of the experience under the British crown. During the debate over the establishment clause, Rep. Elbridge Gerry of Massachusetts took issue with Madison's language regarding whether the government was a national or federal government (in which the states retained their individual sovereignty), which Baker suggests compelled Madison to withdraw his language from the debate.

Question: What is John Baker of LSU's profession?
Answer: legal scholars

Question: Why was a more general "religion" used in the language of the First Amendment?
Answer: to appease the Anti-Federalists

Question: Why was the word "national" a cause for alarm to both Federalists and Anti-Federalists?
Answer: because of the experience under the British crown

Question: Who took issue with Madison's language during the debate over the establishment clause?
Answer: Elbridge Gerry

Question: What was Elbridge Gerry's constituency? 
Answer: Massachusetts

Question: What is John Baker of LLU's profession?
Answer: Unanswerable

Question: Why was a more general "religion" used in the language of the Second Amendment?
Answer: Unanswerable

Question: Why was the word "national" a cause for alarm to neither Federalists and Anti-Federalists?
Answer: Unanswerable

Question: Who didn't take issue with Madison's language during the debate over the establishment clause?
Answer: Unanswerable

Question:  What wasn't Elbridge Gerry's constituency?
Answer: Unanswerable