Amazon.com Widgets

Should there be a Separation of Church and State?

Asked by: wishmania
  • Definitely! To ensure true equality.

    The idea that there can be a dominant religious belief in a country without promoting alienation of other religions and religious minorities is insane. The problem is that if religion is part of all aspects of a state, every member of the state is affected by it, which if you are not part of the dominant religion, can be quite unsettling. The minority develop a sense that they are unwanted or against the state they live in. And there's no way to find a happy medium as unless you completely divide state and religion, someone will always be alienated by their state.
    The argument from religious people is that it removes their right to religious freedom. Your rights of religion should ensure you can go to your place of worship and preach, or read your sacred text or speak freely about your belief. It does not give you the right to claim an elitist view and bigot your religion as the "main" or "correct" belief.

  • Separation of Church and State?

    Yes, there should be. Religion should not be any sort of factor in how the government is run. If something involving religion is brought up it usually starts many arguments, and conspiracy theories. For example, when Obama was elected, and even today people accused him of being Muslim, people believed that he would support the terrorists, just because they thought he was a Muslim. Some people that might have voted for him, didn't because they heard rumors that he was of a certain religion. Religion shouldn't be involved in politics, it can influence people, or people might make assumptions of a person because of their religion. Likewise a member of the government shouldn't make decisions based on religion.

  • Full separation only

    There is no real argument here the only way for us to all be equal is to not have any religion in government. Religion is primarily a misogynistic dictatorship that encourages women to keep their mouths closed, beat or kill your children if they disrespect you, and to take slaves. That doesn't sound loving or civil to me and therefore has no place in society

  • Full separation only

    There is no real argument here the only way for us to all be equal is to not have any religion in government. Religion is primarily a misogynistic dictatorship that encourages women to keep their mouths closed, beat or kill your children if they disrespect you, and to take slaves. That doesn't sound loving or civil to me and therefore has no place in society

  • Full separation only

    There is no real argument here the only way for us to all be equal is to not have any religion in government. Religion is primarily a misogynistic dictatorship that encourages women to keep their mouths closed, beat or kill your children if they disrespect you, and to take slaves. That doesn't sound loving or civil to me and therefore has no place in society

  • Full separation only

    There is no real argument here the only way for us to all be equal is to not have any religion in government. Religion is primarily a misogynistic dictatorship that encourages women to keep their mouths closed, beat or kill your children if they disrespect you, and to take slaves. That doesn't sound loving or civil to me and therefore has no place in society

  • Full separation only

    There is no real argument here the only way for us to all be equal is to not have any religion in government. Religion is primarily a misogynistic dictatorship that encourages women to keep their mouths closed, beat or kill your children if they disrespect you, and to take slaves. That doesn't sound loving or civil to me and therefore has no place in society

  • Full separation only

    There is no real argument here the only way for us to all be equal is to not have any religion in government. Religion is primarily a misogynistic dictatorship that encourages women to keep their mouths closed, beat or kill your children if they disrespect you, and to take slaves. That doesn't sound loving or civil to me and therefore has no place in society

  • Otherwise we would be a Theocracy

    If we did not separate church and state, we would be a theocracy like Saudi Arabia, Iran, etc. In these countries, women are oppressed and radicals control everything. In some parts of these countries, if you are not Muslim then you can, by law, be executed because the law is based in the Qur'an, and not a secular document like the U.S. Constitution.

  • Absolutely there should be a separation

    Almost every society that has tried to function without a separation of church and state has failed, or had many troubles. A combination of church and state generally implies a lack of religious and individual freedom, as everyone is subject to the same divine laws. Now I'm not trying to say that religion is bad or anything, only that everyone should be allowed to practice their own religion and have free agency.

  • The Constitution Says Nothing about "Separation of Church and State."

    The phrase "separation of church and state" came from a letter written by Thomas Jefferson, in 1802, to Baptists in Danbury, Connecticut. The Baptists heard a rumor that there was going to be a national Christian Denomination set up. He answered that it was not true and there would remain a "separation of church and state." The First Amendment says "Congress shall not pass pass a law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof." It says nothing about the Separation of Church and State.

    The words "Under God" are In the Pledge of Allegiance.

    James Madison, The Chief Architect of the Constitution once said, "We have staked the whole future of American civilization, not upon the power of government, far from it. We have staked the future of all of our political institutions upon the capacity of each and all of us to govern ourselves ... According to the Ten Commandments of God."

    You like apples?
    How 'bout dem apples?

  • Well, actually, the terms "Separation of Church and State" do not exist in the Constitution, Declaration of Independence, or the Bill of Rights.

    Actually, it was never even hinted at. It was a myth, as it was written in the letter from Thomas Jefferson (to who I cannot remember, but I think it was James Madison). Thomas Jefferson was assuring Madison (or whoever it was) that the church would not rule the nation... That is as far as the topic went, not saying that religion should be banned in schools or that people cannot stand on a corner and preach what they believe.

  • Separation of Church and State is over-used and mis-understood.

    As most of the other people on this side are saying, this clause is NOT even in the Constitution. On top of this, when you look at who wrote the Constitution you can see that a lot of the framers actually were religious or had seminary degrees or were affiliated with Christianity http://www.adherents.com/gov/Founding_Fathers_Religion.html. Therefore we should be able to make the assumption that these framers would want to put some of their beliefs within the document.

    The provision of the 1st Amendment in the Constitution also only applies the religion clause to the Congress of the United States of America, not the individual states. In fact, Massachusetts had its own state church up until the late 1820s and early 1830s, a long time after the Constitution. Some may say the 14th Amendment puts all the power with the Federal government but the 9th and 10th Amendments give the states and the people freedoms not defined in the Constitution. Since the clause of Separation of Church and State is not in the Constitution, it is therefore up to the people and the states to decide the outcome of this idea.

    Finally, religion of some kind will be prevalent in society and government no matter how much one tries to separate them. People have inherent beliefs that they want to impose on government be they atheist, muslim, buddhist, or Christian. Separating religion from government is directly causing the government to get involved in religion! For example, If I want to voice an opinion on religion in the public square and I get censored by the government then the government is getting involved in my religious actions.

  • The Constitution had original intent

    The Constitution's original intent was to make it difficult, if not impossible, for one group to become too powerful in the country. Therefore, they put the establishment clause in the first amendment, barring any religions from taking over the state. However, in becoming almost phobic of anything that even comes close to resembling a religious figure or act sponsored by the government, we are quick to cry wolf and attempt to remove or revoke it. This has opened the door for science to take over as a dominant group in America, with no Evangelicals, Christians, Muslims, Jews, etc. having the ability to overturn this effect under law. Teaching solely evolutionary sciences in schools, promoting only scientific research, and eradicating any religion in government has led to a science based generation with the fewest amount of religious people by percentage in the history of the country. Promoting science is demoting religion, the exact aspect which this country was founded on. No where in the Constitution does it mention separation of church and state, only in a single letter written by Thomas Jefferson. So good job separation of church and state, you have created a generation of similarly minded people, exactly what the constitution was made to prevent.

  • Constitution says yes, many Americans may now believe no

    The US Constitution provides for a separation of Church and state. What that means is commonly misunderstood, including by judges. All it means is what it actually says, that the USA cannot establish a state church. Many colonies had established churches, and this remains common elsewhere - Denmark, Holland, Norway, England etc. Most Muslim countries also have the equivalent of a state religion.

    That the US central government cannot create an official church does not mean the religion is excluded from official life. That conclusion is entirely false, but regrettably common.

    In order to strengthen the state against the greatest threat that the world now faces - Islam - the US ought to create a state church. The Episcopalian Church should become the Established Church. The doctrine and prayers of the Church should be widely taught throughout schools, government institutions, and the military. Muslim's want a religious war, and we have no choice but to fight on the battleground of their choosing. The alternative is to ban Islam, which will never happen.

  • The truth will set you free!

    On what does the state determine right and wrong? A sense of separation from the original intent of the Bill of Rights, etc. is being plotted to make nothing right and nothing wrong. So if my religion encourages killing someone if they don't follow my religion, the laws of the land (the state) would limit my ability to carry that out. What is wrong with that? We are being set up for there being no absolutes. Right is wrong and wrong is right....Wake up and smell the coffee! You are being fed a line that sounds like TRUTH and TOLERANCE but it's a lie of manipulation to take over the laws of the land!
    We are founded on Biblical principles. Don't throw those principles out the door! Fear God! Anything else will take you captive in your own country through your own laws!


Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.