PDA

View Full Version : church vs state



Lord_Nicon
11-02-2006, 04:12 PM
its all over the place. seperation of church and state... yet what is all over our money?

"in god we trust"

what about the first thing you do when you get on the stand in court... you put your hand on the bible and they say "Do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you god?"

what about the pledge al alligence?(please forgive spelling)

"...one nation, under god, indivisible..."

its all over in the constitution about keeping religion and patriotism seperate, but it is very obviously not. im not trying to start a war here(although thats probably what will happen) I am just looking for other opinions on this matter.

ScAreCroW
11-02-2006, 04:32 PM
Controversy in separating from tradition is the main problem. But you can refuse to put your hand on the bible, you can change the pledge of alegence, and all that. You can't be forced to do so. Both times I've been in court. Once I was a witness however, I didn't swear on the bible. They asked me to. But I refused. I didn't just say a moronic no. I stated why. In the end the judge smiled at me and said that I didn't have to. Just that I had to promise not to lie and made sure I understood the consequences of doing so. Since he realized me putting my hand on a book meant nothing to me. Might as well give me Harry Potter.
For church and state to seperate huge, drastic changes would have to be made. Some have been though. For instance just recently in my province. We were allowed to shop on sundays. Like I mean 2 weeks ago. Stores always used to be closed on sundays so people could go to church. But not anymore. That's modernization for you I guess.

NickF
11-02-2006, 04:36 PM
Its not a matter of separating Church form state, its a matter of people not liking our countries Christian heritage. I tihnk its a crock load of ****, if one doesn't want to say the word God, then don't. Just stop bitching about it, one word isn't going to kill you.

Mystic Videl
11-02-2006, 04:38 PM
The court, currency, and almost everything that speaks of god. Was made long before Seperation of Church and state was. If you read in to this consititution there is this little thing that states "If a law is applied after something has already been done, no law can act upon it." So there is nothing that is going to change, we are a primarily christian country... so yeah.

NickF
11-02-2006, 04:43 PM
That "little thing" is total BS. What about the abolishment of slaves, or the abolishment of AMENDMENT XVII (that got rid of liquor)?

ScAreCroW
11-02-2006, 04:44 PM
For now The states is a christian country yes. But that'll change. Atheism will take control as more people need fact and proof to believe something. Blind faith isn't enough. At least not for me. As I see it the only reason church isn't completely seperate from state. Is because of adaption. Everyone is uneasy with change. No matter what you say. But I'll go Socrates on you chillun' and say that church will become obsolete or viewed as a cult within the next 200 years.

Also prohibition was just a phase. You are looking at this as if it were barbaric. It wasn't. It's just how they lived and how they were influenced by society and religion. Note my sunday shopping example. I didn't see it as barbaric. It's just how it was. I'm sure when I tell it to my grandchildren, they'll think it was barbaric and plain stupid.

*Sorry if some of this doesn't make sense. I'm busy working on some programs I need done for tomorrow. I get confused sometimes

Xel'Naga
11-02-2006, 04:53 PM
There's going to be a separation, I don't see people stopping it. So yes, they will have to remove that line off our money, take it out of the constitution etc. If they want to separate then let them. Then we can all watch the country go down the drain because like it or not, Christian's founded the country, and Christian morality has been keeping it together(barely).

Mystic Videl
11-02-2006, 04:53 PM
Now, if something is added in to the constitution that has resonable limit. Civil liberty was won by WAR, and alcohol was passed over for states to allow as a decision because after outlawing of it there was so much illegal brewing going on that growing weed looks like nothing. So if you'd like to gather your rebellion squads and march up to the capital building, be my guest. Then removed from the constitution. Our country was built as a land of god, you can't expect that to be removed. Seperation of Church and State refers mainly to education, federal jobs, and govermental objectives (laws, courts, etc.).

BLeH
11-02-2006, 06:03 PM
Maybe mainly Christian founded the US, but make no mistake about it America was founded on freedom and more specifically freedom of religion. Seperation of church goes both ways you don't want to go to a public school and be asked to pray to Allah, anymore than an atheist wants to be asked to pray to the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Joseph in school.

Though with adults i think it's much different as long as there is a choice to say no as with the court example theres no problem with that.

Lord_Nicon
11-03-2006, 02:04 AM
hmmmm intresting points..... although i dont really like nickf[ss] reply... no ones bitching about anything... im just voicing my thoughts and asking what you think....


/me thinks the [ss] has something to do with nazi gemany

ScAreCroW
11-03-2006, 08:57 AM
Can you all not agree that church will seperate. I mean look at the majority of bwh members. The only one I know that is religious is Crytical. And well, we all hated on him. It's not a significant issue. Atleast not in Canada and The States

Crytical
11-03-2006, 10:11 AM
"You" represents the radical athiests that complain and want all of these changes just becauase they point to religion.

I do get off course a bit here, but I mostly talk about "Seperation of Church and State" to stay on topic, sorry.

Athiests: Seeing crosses in public, prayer in public, and even on money and in the pledge, goes against their rights against religion?

Religious ones: We get our rights to religion inflicted upon by you guys bitching about it, just ****ing ignore it and grow up? Money? Are you that greedy or obsessed with it that you really care?

BleH is actually pretty correct here, we all have freedom of choice, so respect each other, we don't arrest you for bitching against religion, so return the respect.

As for "Church and state" this is taken overboard. God can be made an allusion in school anytime, but supporting him or bashing him is out of the question, according to our US rights. Xel is also correct though, our founding fathers supported Christianity, and ironically we are doing very well being a moral-based country, also an "Eagle" as the bible fortells being great. I think we are getting weaker, as we are, becauase of the fighting among people ESPECIALLY becauase of religion!

Another case, removing crosses from graves, many of those people or their families wanted a cross there, they didn't refuse and put a simple stone did they? Therefore respect the dead and leave their stones, even if crosses.

Banning alcohol was stupid, haha, but in a way smart, because sadly so many people are too immature and irresponsible to handle it. And you have the abusive drunken parents that deserve to be shot, etc.

There is so much oppinion and interpretation here, that not much will budge, and I have now simply stated my oppinion, haha. This also leads into a billion detailed arguements, as I listed some, there are many more. I just wanted to make a broader point.

By the way, "Under God" actually was with a capital "G" they are reffering to the Judea/Christian God.

GOD BLESS AMERICA.

ScAreCroW
11-03-2006, 12:21 PM
And he's back.

I do agree with the gravestone/cross thing. However, there should be proof of whether they wanted/didn't want a cross there.

Gold_Yoshi
11-03-2006, 12:52 PM
I believe it will happen where nation upon nation will rise against false religion. The bible actually says so, too! When it says the "beast will throw off the harlot," the harlot is supposed to be "Babylon the Great" (false religion) and the beast is "The nations of the world."

IversonAli3
11-04-2006, 05:12 AM
I believe it will happen where nation upon nation will rise against false religion. The bible actually says so, too! When it says the "beast will throw off the harlot," the harlot is supposed to be "Babylon the Great" (false religion) and the beast is "The nations of the world."
Please tell me youre joking..

llafnwod
11-04-2006, 10:44 AM
I believe it will happen where nation upon nation will rise against false religion. The bible actually says so, too! When it says the "beast will throw off the harlot," the harlot is supposed to be "Babylon the Great" (false religion) and the beast is "The nations of the world."Throw yourself into a pit and die.

EDIT: Ack. Didn't even see Iveson's post.

Gold_Yoshi
11-04-2006, 10:52 AM
Lol, I was just putting that there to see people's reactions. lveson's was the funniest.

Raistlin
11-17-2006, 07:23 PM
The Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the US Constitution (the clause that is used to support the doctrine of complete separation of church and state), in reality, simply forbids the government from enacting any law regarding the establishment of a religion, and thus forbids designating an official church for the United States.

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..."

That is what the constitution actually says. Not a blanket separation of government and religion. What it actually prevents is Congress establishing any official state religion or prohibiting people from exercising their chosen religion. This does not seem to prohibit the phrase "In God We Trust" from remaining on our currency, or the tradition of swearing on the Bible in a courtroom, or the inclusion of the word "God" in our pledge of allegiance. None of these things establishes an official state religion. The phrase "an establishment of religion" as used in the Establishment Clause refers to an official, legal establishment of a state church such as you see in Argentina, Bolivia, Costa Rica, El Salvador, Haiti, Liechtenstein, Malta, Monaco, some cantons of Switzerland, and Vatican City (all of which are officially Catholic); Cyprus, Greece, and Finland (all Eastern Orthodox); Denmark, Iceland, Norway, and Finland (all Lutheran); England (Anglican - Church of England); Afghanistan, Algeria, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Brunei, Iran, Iraq, Jordan, Kuwait, Libya, Maldives, Mauritania, Morocco, Oman, Pakistan, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Tunisia, United Arab Emirates, and Yemen (all Islamic); and Bhutan, Cambodia, Kalmykia, Sri Lanka, Thailand, and Tibet (all Buddhist).

Countries which decline to establish any religion are: Australia, Azerbaijan, Canada, Chile, People's Republic of China, Colombia, France, India, Japan, Nepal, New Zealand, Phillippines, Romania, Singapore, South Africa, South Korea, Turkey, and the United States of America.

The Establishment Clause in the First Amendment simply prohibits the government from establishing a religion or prohibiting the free exercise of various religions. The United States has not established any religion, nor does it prohibit the free exercise of various religions. What is the problem, again?

The phrase "separation of church and state" never appears in the Constitution, but rather is derived from a letter written by Thomas Jefferson to a group identifying themselves as the Danbury Baptists. In that letter, quoting the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, he writes: "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 and State." People often cite this as evidence that the intent of the Establishment Clause was a complete separation of any aspect of the church from any aspect of the state, but in reality Thomas Jefferson's words do not speak to that argument. When read objectively, they simply argue that the act of prohibiting the government from establishing an official religion, and from preventing the free practice of various religions, functions sufficiently as a wall separating the church and state.

While I personally believe in the practical value of the doctrine of separation of church and state (a political doctrine which states that the institutions of government should be kept separate from the institutions of religion), this doctrine is actually not "all over the constitution". In reality, the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment simply prohibits the establishment of a religion... and indeed, the United States has no established religion.

BLeH
11-18-2006, 03:07 PM
The Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the US Constitution (the clause that is used to support the doctrine of complete separation of church and state), in reality, simply forbids the government from enacting any law regarding the establishment of a religion, and thus forbids designating an official church for the United States.

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..."

That is what the constitution actually says. Not a blanket separation of government and religion. What it actually prevents is Congress establishing any official state religion or prohibiting people from exercising their chosen religion. This does not seem to prohibit the phrase "In God We Trust" from remaining on our currency, or the tradition of swearing on the Bible in a courtroom, or the inclusion of the word "God" in our pledge of allegiance. None of these things establishes an official state religion. The phrase "an establishment of religion" as used in the Establishment Clause refers to an official, legal establishment of a state church such as you see in Argentina, Bolivia, Costa Rica, El Salvador, Haiti, Liechtenstein, Malta, Monaco, some cantons of Switzerland, and Vatican City (all of which are officially Catholic); Cyprus, Greece, and Finland (all Eastern Orthodox); Denmark, Iceland, Norway, and Finland (all Lutheran); England (Anglican - Church of England); Afghanistan, Algeria, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Brunei, Iran, Iraq, Jordan, Kuwait, Libya, Maldives, Mauritania, Morocco, Oman, Pakistan, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Tunisia, United Arab Emirates, and Yemen (all Islamic); and Bhutan, Cambodia, Kalmykia, Sri Lanka, Thailand, and Tibet (all Buddhist).

Countries which decline to establish any religion are: Australia, Azerbaijan, Canada, Chile, People's Republic of China, Colombia, France, India, Japan, Nepal, New Zealand, Phillippines, Romania, Singapore, South Africa, South Korea, Turkey, and the United States of America.

The Establishment Clause in the First Amendment simply prohibits the government from establishing a religion or prohibiting the free exercise of various religions. The United States has not established any religion, nor does it prohibit the free exercise of various religions. What is the problem, again?

The phrase "separation of church and state" never appears in the Constitution, but rather is derived from a letter written by Thomas Jefferson to a group identifying themselves as the Danbury Baptists. In that letter, quoting the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, he writes: "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 and State." People often cite this as evidence that the intent of the Establishment Clause was a complete separation of any aspect of the church from any aspect of the state, but in reality Thomas Jefferson's words do not speak to that argument. When read objectively, they simply argue that the act of prohibiting the government from establishing an official religion, and from preventing the free practice of various religions, functions sufficiently as a wall separating the church and state.

While I personally believe in the practical value of the doctrine of separation of church and state (a political doctrine which states that the institutions of government should be kept separate from the institutions of religion), this doctrine is actually not "all over the constitution". In reality, the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment simply prohibits the establishment of a religion... and indeed, the United States has no established religion.

Yeah but it's a two-fold argument, the constitution also allows the supreme court to interpret what it says for future generations, and if they interpret that the constitution doesn't allow public prayer in school like they have, you'll have to agree with that even if it isn't in the constitution, because if you disagree with their decision then you disagree with what the constitution says the other way around see what im sayin?

Having kids pray to a certain God in a government forum, where those kids are required to be, IMO is establishing a religion.

Raistlin
11-18-2006, 03:11 PM
Yeah but it's a two-fold argument, the constitution also allows the supreme court to interpret what it says for future generations, and if they interpret that the constitution doesn't allow public prayer in school like they have, you'll have to agree with that even if it isn't in the constitution, because if you disagree with their decision then you disagree with what the constitution says the other way around see what im sayin?

I certainly do.


Having kids pray to a certain God in a government forum, where those kids are required to be, IMO is establishing a religion.

No, that is not the same as establishing a state religion. I listed which countries have established religion and which countries do not. We have no established religion in the United States.