What's your view on separation of church and state?
This topic is locked from further discussion.
On one side the non-theists argue that taking governmental action based on religious ideals is biased to people of other religions, and that a theocratic government is the signs of an extremist regime. (Then teachers get jailed for naming their teddy bear after a religious figure, etc.) And this argument is totally understandable, because many times throughout history various leaders have done horrible things in the name of their religion.
However, on the other hand, in a modern day and age where we live in a democracy the majority has the right to decide our countries laws. And, indeed, the vast majority of our country follows a faction of Christianity, so it would not be unfair to make laws based on Christian beliefs since the majority are Christian. Also, there is the - ever-going conflict on abortion. Arguments are that even though many pro-life believers follow the side that they do because of their faith, they argue that if the end result is a non-theist legislation, why does the reason for passing it matter? Many moral movements had religious overtones (Civil Rights) so as long as the end results are universally moral, the reason for the means don't matter.
This conflict goes beyond legislation, but also to government funding. Should the government be able to fund religious institutions? What about religious schools and missions? Should prayer be endorsed in public schools? Where should the line be drawn between political correctness and being overly sensitive?
P.S. Don't turn this into another broad religion wars thread. The topic is just about Church and State.
After accidentally posting this in SW, :oops: I decided to post it where it belongs...
(Talking about the U.S.)
I wish those rich ass churches had to be taxed since they're basically a business.kdt55
Thats right. Religion is basically just a business. Anyway, religion and state needs to stay relatively seperated. The law against abortion is completely unconstitutional for instance. practically all the people supporting it are supporting it because it supposedly "goes against their religion." This is ridiculous as religion is supposed to be seperated(as it says in the damn constitution).
Glad you found the right board. But honestly, this country was founded on the idea of seperation of church and state. Saying that we should make laws based on the majority of a religion is unconstitutional. Courts and lawmakers cannot base their reasoning for laws or decision based on "my religion tells me it is so"agent60
It's been a long day :( But I would like to point out that many of our founding documents have terms like "All men are 'created' equal" "Under god" etc.
The country does not have the right to restrict religion as long as it not physically harming another and it cannot promote one religion above all others (ie an official religion). That does not mean however that there is a seperation from religion.
CIoud_S
yes there is a seperation between church and state. The state can make no law respecting or establishing a religion.
It's been a long day :( But I would like to point out that many of our founding documents have terms like "All men are 'created' equal" "Under god" etc.
hamstergeddon
This is what Jefferson also wrote:
" I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," thus building a wall of separation between Church & State."
[QUOTE="CIoud_S"]The country does not have the right to restrict religion as long as it not physically harming another and it cannot promote one religion above all others (ie an official religion). That does not mean however that there is a seperation from religion.
agent60
yes there is a seperation between church and state. The state can make no law respecting or establishing a religion.
Nor can it make a law forbidding the free practice thereof.;)
[QUOTE="agent60"][QUOTE="CIoud_S"]The country does not have the right to restrict religion as long as it not physically harming another and it cannot promote one religion above all others (ie an official religion). That does not mean however that there is a seperation from religion.
Dracargen
yes there is a seperation between church and state. The state can make no law respecting or establishing a religion.
Nor can it make a law forbidding the free practice thereof.;)
True. But thats the argument: Dont like gay marriage? dont get married to another guy.
Making decisions based on one religion, even if the majority believes in it, just isn't right. There's no reason that an atheist such as myself (or anyone of another belief system for that matter) should have to live with somewhere dictated by Christian ideals. I'm not saying that this country is, just why separation of church and state is important. As a politician, what's best for the people should be more important than what your religion says.
As for abortion, pro choice. If someone doesn't want to get one because of their Christian beliefs fine, but don't keep other people from doing it just because you think it's wrong.
[QUOTE="Dracargen"][QUOTE="agent60"][QUOTE="CIoud_S"]The country does not have the right to restrict religion as long as it not physically harming another and it cannot promote one religion above all others (ie an official religion). That does not mean however that there is a seperation from religion.
agent60
yes there is a seperation between church and state. The state can make no law respecting or establishing a religion.
Nor can it make a law forbidding the free practice thereof.;)
True. But thats the argument: Dont like gay marriage? dont get married to another guy.
Well put. As long as individuals keep there beliefs to themselves there's no problem. But when those individuals try to impose their beliefs on others is when it becomes such a controversial topic. Ex. Gay rights, abortion etc.
I wish those rich ass churches had to be taxed since they're basically a business.kdt55should atheist organizations like secular web or the richard dawkins foundation also be taxed?
i believe the idea of separation of church and state is great. but in reality, some parts of the country are VERY religious. There have been debates about how Schools should or shouldnt ban a "moment of prayer." I say, hey let each town's community determine if they want it or not. If a kid wants to just sit there and do nothing fo 10 seconds, big deal, its not like they are forcing him to pray. and saying "one nation under god, ..." in the pledge of allegiance is NOT forcing religion on people. The point is that you are pledging your allegiance to the USA. and really the word "god" is not religion specific. If they said "one nation according to Jesus" or something, then yeah that would be religious. and really when i was in grade school, i could be lazy and just move my lips and nobody would get mad at me. Basing Laws on religion is the stupidest thing a country as big as ours can do. We have SO many different religions, you cannot pick one to decide what laws are "godly" or not. Obviously, if i was brainwashed into some religion, then maybe i wouldnt feel this way, but I just think people need to chill out. but dont force a ban on things because "jesus says so." or any other religion. Thats what makes the USA so great.Talldude80
While I agree that trying to strike "On nation, under god" from the pledge is a case of over-sensitivity, alloting a time to pray in school is directly alienating those who don't pray. So IMO this should be illegal because what's a first-grader going to do when all of his classmates are praying and his parents haven't raised him religiously? Go home and ask his mom, "Mommy, why don't I believe in God?" So such a superliminal (if that's even a word) promotion of religion could almost be construed actively trying to convert kids while they're young.
[QUOTE="kdt55"]I wish those rich ass churches had to be taxed since they're basically a business.Dracargen
How are they a business? Most don't charge, and people choose whether or not to donate money to them.:|
They take in money, pay out to employees, and own structures on land. They should be liable to pay property taxes just like anyone else, as well as an income tax. It doesn't sound unreasonable at all.
Not a business? Tell that to the megachurch owners/builders.
[QUOTE="kdt55"]I wish those rich ass churches had to be taxed since they're basically a business.Dracargen
How are they a business? Most don't charge, and people choose whether or not to donate money to them.:|
Exactly. Churches are funded off of donations...donations which you can write off on your takes BTW. The Bible establishes the tithe as a respect offering to God. God does not need the money. He can make all He wants. He just wants to see the respect offering from your heart. You tithe your 10% and the church is charged with using that money for God's work. For those who do not think Jesus was interested in the tithe, there are specific passages in the Bible detailing accounts where He watched how people gave in the offering at the temple.[QUOTE="Dracargen"][QUOTE="kdt55"]I wish those rich ass churches had to be taxed since they're basically a business.Donkey_Puncher
How are they a business? Most don't charge, and people choose whether or not to donate money to them.:|
They take in money, pay out to employees, and own structures on land. They should be liable to pay property taxes just like anyone else, as well as an income tax. It doesn't sound unreasonable at all.
Not a business? Tell that to the megachurch owners/builders.
They are in the business of growing God's Kingdom, not making a buck. Jesus Himself condoned paying taxes. Christians are commanded to obey the laws of the land, which means paying said property takes, income taxes, etc. That does not mean they stop being a charitable organization, and are instead the next Microsoft in disguise.[QUOTE="Dracargen"][QUOTE="kdt55"]I wish those rich ass churches had to be taxed since they're basically a business.Donkey_Puncher
How are they a business? Most don't charge, and people choose whether or not to donate money to them.:|
They take in money, pay out to employees, and own structures on land. They should be liable to pay property taxes just like anyone else, as well as an income tax. It doesn't sound unreasonable at all.
Not a business? Tell that to the megachurch owners/builders.
no one answered my question.should secular organizations like the richard dawkins foundation or secular web also pay taxes?
[QUOTE="Talldude80"]i believe the idea of separation of church and state is great. but in reality, some parts of the country are VERY religious. There have been debates about how Schools should or shouldnt ban a "moment of prayer." I say, hey let each town's community determine if they want it or not. If a kid wants to just sit there and do nothing fo 10 seconds, big deal, its not like they are forcing him to pray. and saying "one nation under god, ..." in the pledge of allegiance is NOT forcing religion on people. The point is that you are pledging your allegiance to the USA. and really the word "god" is not religion specific. If they said "one nation according to Jesus" or something, then yeah that would be religious. and really when i was in grade school, i could be lazy and just move my lips and nobody would get mad at me. Basing Laws on religion is the stupidest thing a country as big as ours can do. We have SO many different religions, you cannot pick one to decide what laws are "godly" or not. Obviously, if i was brainwashed into some religion, then maybe i wouldnt feel this way, but I just think people need to chill out. but dont force a ban on things because "jesus says so." or any other religion. Thats what makes the USA so great.hamstergeddon
While I agree that trying to strike "On nation, under god" from the pledge is a case of over-sensitivity, alloting a time to pray in school is directly alienating those who don't pray. So IMO this should be illegal because what's a first-grader going to do when all of his classmates are praying and his parents haven't raised him religiously? Go home and ask his mom, "Mommy, why don't I believe in God?" So such a superliminal (if that's even a word) promotion of religion could almost be construed actively trying to convert kids while they're young. Well, no matter what this country as a "melting pot" is becoming, it was formed by Protestants looking for freedom of religion from the oppression in Europe. Our Constitution, money, pledge of allegiance, etc. mention God, not as a side effect, but as a genuine respect and belief of our founding fathers. God, BTW, in the pledge is the Christian God, not some general catch all for any religion. Praying in school, ten commandments in the court house, etc. have never been an issue until the last 10 years or so, when the government has started to adapt a "please all" attitude and lose what it was established as in the first place. Christianity is part of our culture...period. It has and should always be. The one downfall of a "melting pot" is you lose all cultural identity and where you came from. Other countries are very protective of their culture. I for one believe we are giving ours away every time we try to force God out of our every day lives. As for Church and state separation, a belief in God is not something that can be separated like a side hobby or something. Your belief in Jesus and God shape how you behave on an everyday level. If you separate Them from your decisions, then you are no longer a Chrisitian or leading a Christian nation.
[QUOTE="Donkey_Puncher"][QUOTE="Dracargen"][QUOTE="kdt55"]I wish those rich ass churches had to be taxed since they're basically a business.fanofazrienoch
How are they a business? Most don't charge, and people choose whether or not to donate money to them.:|
They take in money, pay out to employees, and own structures on land. They should be liable to pay property taxes just like anyone else, as well as an income tax. It doesn't sound unreasonable at all.
Not a business? Tell that to the megachurch owners/builders.
no one answered my question.should secular organizations like the richard dawkins foundation or secular web also pay taxes?
If they make an income and own property, yes.
[QUOTE="fanofazrienoch"][QUOTE="Donkey_Puncher"][QUOTE="Dracargen"][QUOTE="kdt55"]I wish those rich ass churches had to be taxed since they're basically a business.Donkey_Puncher
How are they a business? Most don't charge, and people choose whether or not to donate money to them.:|
They take in money, pay out to employees, and own structures on land. They should be liable to pay property taxes just like anyone else, as well as an income tax. It doesn't sound unreasonable at all.
Not a business? Tell that to the megachurch owners/builders.
no one answered my question.should secular organizations like the richard dawkins foundation or secular web also pay taxes?
If they make an income and own property, yes.
okay then, but just so you know, they dont pay taxes;)They are in the business of growing God's Kingdom, not making a buck. Jesus Himself condoned paying taxes. Christians are commanded to obey the laws of the land, which means paying said property takes, income taxes, etc. That does not mean they stop being a charitable organization, and are instead the next Microsoft in disguise.-ArchAngeL-777-
To grow God's kingdom....is that what Ted Haggert did, Tammy Fay, and Pat Roberts as well? Let us take a look at the pay checks for all these megachurches shall we? Oh that's right we can't, but the government can't take a look at it. They are making off like bandits with money, and many people in the church are being screwed over themselves by imbezling money through it.
They own land, they should pay a property tax. They rake i millions of dollars a year, they should be taxed. It's just that simple.
[QUOTE="hamstergeddon"][QUOTE="Talldude80"]i believe the idea of separation of church and state is great. but in reality, some parts of the country are VERY religious. There have been debates about how Schools should or shouldnt ban a "moment of prayer." I say, hey let each town's community determine if they want it or not. If a kid wants to just sit there and do nothing fo 10 seconds, big deal, its not like they are forcing him to pray. and saying "one nation under god, ..." in the pledge of allegiance is NOT forcing religion on people. The point is that you are pledging your allegiance to the USA. and really the word "god" is not religion specific. If they said "one nation according to Jesus" or something, then yeah that would be religious. and really when i was in grade school, i could be lazy and just move my lips and nobody would get mad at me. Basing Laws on religion is the stupidest thing a country as big as ours can do. We have SO many different religions, you cannot pick one to decide what laws are "godly" or not. Obviously, if i was brainwashed into some religion, then maybe i wouldnt feel this way, but I just think people need to chill out. but dont force a ban on things because "jesus says so." or any other religion. Thats what makes the USA so great.-ArchAngeL-777-
While I agree that trying to strike "On nation, under god" from the pledge is a case of over-sensitivity, alloting a time to pray in school is directly alienating those who don't pray. So IMO this should be illegal because what's a first-grader going to do when all of his ****ates are praying and his parents haven't raised him religiously? Go home and ask his mom, "Mommy, why don't I believe in God?" So such a superliminal (if that's even a word) promotion of religion could almost be construed actively trying to convert kids while they're young. Well, no matter what this country as a "melting pot" is becoming, it was formed by Protestants looking for freedom of religion from the oppression in Europe. Our Constitution, money, pledge of allegiance, etc. mention God, not as a side effect, but as a genuine respect and belief of our founding fathers. God, BTW, in the pledge is the Christian God, not some general catch all for any religion. Praying in school, ten commandments in the court house, etc. have never been an issue until the last 10 years or so, when the government has started to adapt a "please all" attitude and lose what it was established as in the first place. Christianity is part of our culture...period. It has and should always be. The one downfall of a "melting pot" is you lose all cultural identity and where you came from. Other countries are very protective of their culture. I for one believe we are giving ours away every time we try to force God out of our every day lives. As for Church and state separation, a belief in God is not something that can be separated like a side hobby or something. Your belief in Jesus and God shape how you behave on an everyday level. If you separate Them from your decisions, then you are no longer a Chrisitian or leading a Christian nation.
And I say this meaningfully: Thank god there's some finally some clash in this thread.
One thing that you overlook is that America was first colonized by Protestant colonists, but even before it was established as an independent colony America was settled by various religious groups. In addition, just because a nation was founded on Christianity doesn't mean it has to stay that way. This anti-progressive mindset is the bane of advanced civilizations such as ours.
As for our "culture" it is always changing. Milwaukee, Wisconsin, is a perfect example. Founded by Germans, this is a center for all the beer-swilling, brotwurst eating festivities one can dream of. Wisconsin has it's own independent "culture" and without all those german immigrants it wouldn't be the hub of culture like it is today. Or New York, where you can clearly see the influences in their culture by the heavy amount Jewish and irish immigrants. Or maybe San Francisco, where its Vietnamese section of the city is larger than most towns.
So you make the elitist claim that the american melting pot is diluting our culture? On the contrary, it IS our culture. And as times change, so must our policy, and what was once commonplace in our government is no longer acceptable. If the government fails to adapt to the changing of times, then how effective do you think our government would be :?
This is an age of equality, diversity and tolerance. And if we ask OUR elected officials to put aside their religious ideals for the duration of the day, I don't think its too much to ask. After all, they are the servants of the people. And seriously, drop the elitist crap. You sound like you're reciting a passage out of "Mein Kampf"
Well, no matter what this country as a "melting pot" is becoming, it was formed by Protestants looking for freedom of religion from the oppression in Europe. Our Constitution, money, pledge of allegiance, etc. mention God, not as a side effect, but as a genuine respect and belief of our founding fathers. God, BTW, in the pledge is the Christian God, not some general catch all for any religion. Praying in school, ten commandments in the court house, etc. have never been an issue until the last 10 years or so, when the government has started to adapt a "please all" attitude and lose what it was established as in the first place. Christianity is part of our culture...period. It has and should always be. The one downfall of a "melting pot" is you lose all cultural identity and where you came from. Other countries are very protective of their culture. I for one believe we are giving ours away every time we try to force God out of our every day lives. As for Church and state separation, a belief in God is not something that can be separated like a side hobby or something. Your belief in Jesus and God shape how you behave on an everyday level. If you separate Them from your decisions, then you are no longer a Chrisitian or leading a Christian nation.-ArchAngeL-777-
The founding fathers NEVER intended the US to be a Christian nation. As I stated in a previous post, "Under God" was added in 1954 and "In God We Trust" was added in the 1860s. The founding fathers wanted a specifically secular nation. Some of them weren't even Christian. We are not a Christian nation when the fundamental amendment of our constitution specifically allows for any relgion to be universally tolerated, and makes no mention to Jesus or God. Theocratic ideals are not contemporaries of the founding fathers, and not intended for the United States.
[QUOTE="-ArchAngeL-777-"]
They are in the business of growing God's Kingdom, not making a buck. Jesus Himself condoned paying taxes. Christians are commanded to obey the laws of the land, which means paying said property takes, income taxes, etc. That does not mean they stop being a charitable organization, and are instead the next Microsoft in disguise.Donkey_Puncher
To grow God's kingdom....is that what Ted Haggert did, Tammy Fay, and Pat Roberts as well? Let us take a look at the pay checks for all these megachurches shall we? Oh that's right we can't, but the government can't take a look at it. They are making off like bandits with money, and many people in the church are being screwed over themselves by imbezling money through it.
They own land, they should pay a property tax. They rake i millions of dollars a year, they should be taxed. It's just that simple.
Proper use of the money will be dealt with by God Himself. It is not our responsibility. Point in case being what consistently happens to those who imbezel tithe money. Tammy Fay, Jim Baker, on and on. The downfall of one pastor after another has been paved when he decides to cheat the tithes. The fact is these few are putting a bad name out there for the many thousands that use the tithe money responsibly as God intended. They arent making off like bandits, theiving peoples money, etc. This is no more than income envy. My pastor was showing a visiting pastor different homes in the area. He showed him a nice one owned by a fellow pastor. The visiting pastor says," Well, he should sell that and give it to the poor!" My pastor says, "What a great idea. I will suggest it to him, as soon as you sell yours and give it to the poor." If a pastor brings in millions of dollars a year for the ministry to use, I have no problem with him living in a nice house that happens to cost a small fraction of what he pulls in. Men like Joel Osteen bring in absurd amounts of money, and pump nearly all of it right back into a worldwide ministry and charity. Churches are some of the most giving and generous organizations on Earth. They pay all the taxes, penalties, construction fees, etc. that is levied on them. As I said, Jesus commands it, they do it.yeah, i agree with alot of what you guys said. and some of what you said is definately a good way to think about it.
Ive thought about it alot and here's my take:
The FEDERAL government should not allow public schools to ever favor ANY religion in any way. That way, people who are from other countries/cultures/religions cannot get angry and clash with what the school teaches. BUT this is very hard to do when some religions do not believe in what some of us consider to be common knowledge. So some people have issues with that. BUT those people are given the choice, and probably should, put their kids in a private religious school if they want their kids to learn something religious in a public school. I would really HATE to see our schools somehow accommodate various religions in science classes for example. The teachers can just say "some people do not believe in evolotion, but we are going to teach it , because there is a lot of science that supports it. Keep in mind that we do not know what happened 1million years ago, but scientific evidence supports an evolution of all creatures in some way." Kids today need to learn how to question what is taught to them. They can believe it or not. Schools should teach them the most common knowledge of science, history, etc. Then they can tell them that it is ok to not believe it. But it will be on the test, so they should know it. and there is NO reason for a church to be involved in ANY way.
edit:
i could go off on a rant about how i am getting to the point that i am anti-religion really, but i wont go there. It's pointless to argue with people that believe that a virgin can magically give birth and a god talks to them......... you cannot reason with people like that. I laugh when i read posts like the one above me (archangel's long post).
[QUOTE="-ArchAngeL-777-"][QUOTE="hamstergeddon"][QUOTE="Talldude80"]i believe the idea of separation of church and state is great. but in reality, some parts of the country are VERY religious. There have been debates about how Schools should or shouldnt ban a "moment of prayer." I say, hey let each town's community determine if they want it or not. If a kid wants to just sit there and do nothing fo 10 seconds, big deal, its not like they are forcing him to pray. and saying "one nation under god, ..." in the pledge of allegiance is NOT forcing religion on people. The point is that you are pledging your allegiance to the USA. and really the word "god" is not religion specific. If they said "one nation according to Jesus" or something, then yeah that would be religious. and really when i was in grade school, i could be lazy and just move my lips and nobody would get mad at me. Basing Laws on religion is the stupidest thing a country as big as ours can do. We have SO many different religions, you cannot pick one to decide what laws are "godly" or not. Obviously, if i was brainwashed into some religion, then maybe i wouldnt feel this way, but I just think people need to chill out. but dont force a ban on things because "jesus says so." or any other religion. Thats what makes the USA so great.hamstergeddon
While I agree that trying to strike "On nation, under god" from the pledge is a case of over-sensitivity, alloting a time to pray in school is directly alienating those who don't pray. So IMO this should be illegal because what's a first-grader going to do when all of his ****ates are praying and his parents haven't raised him religiously? Go home and ask his mom, "Mommy, why don't I believe in God?" So such a superliminal (if that's even a word) promotion of religion could almost be construed actively trying to convert kids while they're young. Well, no matter what this country as a "melting pot" is becoming, it was formed by Protestants looking for freedom of religion from the oppression in Europe. Our Constitution, money, pledge of allegiance, etc. mention God, not as a side effect, but as a genuine respect and belief of our founding fathers. God, BTW, in the pledge is the Christian God, not some general catch all for any religion. Praying in school, ten commandments in the court house, etc. have never been an issue until the last 10 years or so, when the government has started to adapt a "please all" attitude and lose what it was established as in the first place. Christianity is part of our culture...period. It has and should always be. The one downfall of a "melting pot" is you lose all cultural identity and where you came from. Other countries are very protective of their culture. I for one believe we are giving ours away every time we try to force God out of our every day lives. As for Church and state separation, a belief in God is not something that can be separated like a side hobby or something. Your belief in Jesus and God shape how you behave on an everyday level. If you separate Them from your decisions, then you are no longer a Chrisitian or leading a Christian nation.
And I say this meaningfully: Thank god there's some finally some clash in this thread.
One thing that you overlook is that America was first colonized by Protestant colonists, but even before it was established as an independent colony America was settled by various religious groups. In addition, just because a nation was founded on Christianity doesn't mean it has to stay that way. This anti-progressive mindset is the bane of advanced civilizations such as ours.
As for our "culture" it is always changing. Milwaukee, Wisconsin, is a perfect example. Founded by Germans, this is a center for all the beer-swilling, brotwurst eating festivities one can dream of. Wisconsin has it's own independent "culture" and without all those german immigrants it wouldn't be the hub of culture like it is today. Or New York, where you can clearly see the influences in their culture by the heavy amount Jewish and irish immigrants. Or maybe San Francisco, where its Vietnamese section of the city is larger than most towns.
So you make the elitist claim that the american melting pot is diluting our culture? On the contrary, it IS our culture. And as times change, so must our policy, and what was once commonplace in our government is no longer acceptable. If the government fails to adapt to the changing of times, then how effective do you think our government would be :?
This is an age of equality, diversity and tolerance. And if we ask OUR elected officials to put aside their religious ideals for the duration of the day, I don't think its too much to ask. After all, they are the servants of the people. And seriously, drop the elitist crap. You sound like you're reciting a passage out of "Mein Kampf" I could bore you with a lot of quotes dating back to Thomas Jefferson and back to the 1700s, but lets end with the House of Representative conclusion in 2003 that the phrase "One nation under God" in the pledge reflects the religious faith that was central to the Founding Fathers and thus to the founding of our Nation. It is a debate that has raged through our history, and the argument against has always be of "progression of the time". "If our founding fathers could have had the foresight...",etc. Never is the con arguement actually pointing at founding father's intent. Sure the country has changed, but I dont think you can call a constantly changing culture...culture. It just doesnt make any sense. We see that in every aspect of society today. One of the biggest effects is immigration laws. Now the Muslim faith is rapidly expanding in the US, a faith that is very contradictory to the faith of the founding fathers. Tolerance and forgetfulness of where you come from and how you start are central points in the downfall of prior civilizations such as the Roman empire.
It's been a long day :( But I would like to point out that many of our founding documents have terms like "All men are 'created' equal" "Under god" etc.
hamstergeddon
"Under God" came much later -- it was added to the pledge of allegiance (which was commissioned in the 19th century, btw, so it's by no means a founding document!) in the 1950's as a subtle means of indoctrinating children against atheist Communism.
I like this topic, bro, but you could make a much better argument. I mean, seriously...this is very immature.
I agree with most aspects of separation of Church and state. I agree that people can't push their beliefs on people who don't share their beliefs, I believe that people should respect other people's beliefs and I believe that the methods of politics for the most part is irreligious. However, I don't believe public open prayers should be required for public schools, I believe prayers should be in private for those who pray not banned entirely. I don't believe that religion should be entirely wipe out in our politcs, because lets face most of the laws were inspired or a reflection of religious beliefs. I believe in the fact that despite our politics is secular that the people who believe in that system are not, and that religious still deeply affects our government and state of living.greenprinceThe US is hardly a shining beacon of secularization. Look at Europe, France specifically. They have zero trace of "God" anywhere in politics.
What separation of chruch and state really means is that the government does not interfere with one's religion and that there is no government-run church... thats the main reason the Pilgrims left England...battlefront23"Respecting an establishment of religion" is not the same thing as establishing a government-run church.
[QUOTE="greenprince"]I agree with most aspects of separation of Church and state. I agree that people can't push their beliefs on people who don't share their beliefs, I believe that people should respect other people's beliefs and I believe that the methods of politics for the most part is irreligious. However, I don't believe public open prayers should be required for public schools, I believe prayers should be in private for those who pray not banned entirely. I don't believe that religion should be entirely wipe out in our politcs, because lets face most of the laws were inspired or a reflection of religious beliefs. I believe in the fact that despite our politics is secular that the people who believe in that system are not, and that religious still deeply affects our government and state of living.MattUD1The US is hardly a shining beacon of secularization. Look at Europe, France specifically. They have zero trace of "God" anywhere in politics.
Did'nt say that it was but its pretty close given that many people support this notion, and by the way I'm Canadian, I just find your politics more interesting than Canadian politics.
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment