Seperation - Church/State

I want to start off by saying that I believe that there is a God, so don't take this as a militant post against that notion. This is also totally in my opinion. I just want to put my thoughts on this subject out there to gain a better understanding of what others think on the topic and of my critique. In my opinion, it is so ridiculous to have religion anywhere near the government. This is for multiple reasons... Lets start off with confirmation. There is absolutely no way on Earth you can confirm a person is truly of a certain faith. Just because a politician says he is, for example, a Christian, doesn't mean he lives that lifestyle or even follows those beliefs at all. There is no way of knowing if that person is telling the truth or just pulling the strings of a certain base for personal gain. In fact, recently a republican congressmen by the name of Scott DesJarlais had a thick past of abortions due to pressing his mistress to get one. There is no way of telling if a person is genuine because it is a belief or state of mind that they are proclaiming to have. That's not even the most important aspect. It all comes down to one fact... Not everyone is the same religion! A government should not impose a specific religion on the government, instead it should leave all out and keep it out of public. It should be in private life due to it being a private belief of an individual. This notion is stated clearly in our constitution! Also, when it comes to teaching evolution vs creationism in schools, creationism should have no part in schools due to the simple fact that science is tested, creationism is based on faith. There is nothing wrong with it being based on faith, but it shouldn't be taught as fact if it is based on this. If faith is to be taught as fact, then that should never be put into a school system. If someone wishes to do that, then it should be done in private. You can't teach one certain form of creationism along with science. All forms of creationism from every religion would have to be covered. One religion's views couldn't be favored over the others. That would be nearly impossible. It's as simple as that. That is my quick overview of my thoughts on the topic. What are your thoughts on this topic? Don't take offense to this. I know it kind of is typed in a militant way, but I just want to put it out there exactly how I think it. What do you consider me to be correct about and wrong about? I'm prone to error due to judging things off of my own experiences so it would be nice to hear different views on this!

chris7375 said:

I am Christian and I believe devote at my faith. I do not believe the Public School system should have a religious class in their schools other then as an overall history lesson on the different religions. Though as far as the state having a religious affiliation that I believe is up to the state an their citizens to decide.

If one looks at some of the original states and even to this day they have religious affiliations even today. Alls one has to do is look at their State Constitutions.

Click to expand...

I see what you mean. I agree. It's interesting though when you look at America, we have separation of church and state in our constitution, yet we have a deep argument over this in the country. But when you look at England, which is tied to an official church, they have the most secular society. It somewhat has the opposite effect it seems.

chris7375 said:

Well in all honest the only Government that was not going to back a Religion was the Federal Government as stated in the Constitution. Though the Fed left it up to the Stae on whether or not they wanted to be affiliated with a religion. The term "Separation of Church and State" is a phrase taken from a letter from Thomas Jefferson to Dansbury Baptists. It is in all reality is not a law that governs the states. Only the Fed states that it would not recognize a religion. The reason for this was because of Britain and The Church of England.

Click to expand...

I never knew that. That is interesting, but what makes me mad about that is the fact that if a state was decide on an official religion that it is affiliated with or promotes, the odds are near impossible that every citizen of that state would agree on that religion. Which brings the fairness aspect into the equation. Many people would be against what is chosen. It would be a majority rules type of situation. So that is confusing. But that is still cool to learn because I never knew that about separation of church and state.

chris7375 said:

Though you also have to look at it this way also if a State does promote a Religion the majority of that States people most likely are members of that religion.

Affiliating with a religion is not a bad thing I believe if you search South Carolina, and North Carolina both are affiliated with a religion to this day. Google their Constitutions.

Click to expand...

Though that is true about the state having a majority of that religion, there would still be people being left out. Why not just get rid of it publicly in entirety and keep it private so that every citizen can enjoy their own personal beliefs in a fair manner? That is what I mean. But really? Those states are still affiliated with a religion? I never knew that either. I do want to Google that because that is something you never hear about mainstream. That is interesting.

redwood said:

Except...it's obviously NOT the case. The First Amendment applies to every state,county,town. It is no more optional than other segments of the Constitution.

300 yr ago my ancestors arrived in Pennsylvania as persecuted religious refugees. Of the 13 colonies, just a few tolerated "other religions"

Personally, I don't much believe in believing. I can KNOW what I can KNOW...I choose to not subscribe to someone's package deal of magic ,superstition or manipulation. I consider it my duty to figure it out...and I figured out that the Universe has no beginning or end. That pretty much changes the whole need for some cosmic monarchy. I LIKE how religions can instill positive social values...but the reality is that it's as likely people chose the one that's about some arrogant delusion of superiority. I was RAISED very Christian, and I'm quite familiar with the Bible, the words of Christ, his lessons and I'm AMAZED at how many TALK about being Ultra-Christian...yet are in fact below average Pharisees.

We must permit ALL kinds of religions but can endorse NONE. That's the essence of our Constitution. If I want to send Little Redwood to a religion based school...I can. However...the neighbors who may be Jews,Muslims,Agnostics..whatever..ought not have to pay for that.

The Catholics are big on Religion...but also run a LOT of schools. They have come to terms with Evolution as the scientific fact,leaving Genesis as a Parable, a fable of sorts that makes some points. When that book was written, stuff like Gravity,Electricity,Magnetism, us revolving around the sun, Atoms, Bacteria...were totally unknown and stayed so for a long while.
Genesis...obviously is not your operating manual for Spaceship Earth.

If our intent is to be FUNCTIONAL...then reality is what it is and we need to adapt to it. In the long proggression and evolution of life,mankind,knowledge,civilization....Religion was often an obstacle. Perhaps it meanwhile restrained our tendencies toward greed,hate,slaughter...but sometimes it failed badly at that.

Click to expand...

That is my exact view. Religion is based on faith, therefor it doesn't belong in schools. It should be practiced in private. Also this is true due to fairness. On the other hand, science is tested, and continues to test and shall be taught.

Cicero said:

My feeling is that the government of the United States is by far best served by removing religion entirely from the public sphere. I favor a much stronger interpretation of the establishment clause and the free exercise clause than current law does, and I hope that the law progresses to consider things such as the references to God in the pledge of allegiance and on currency to be constitutional violations.

Click to expand...

That is EXACTLY how I feel! I doubt it will ever happen for a long time or even at all, but hopefully it does!

redwood said:

Coins say "in God We Trust". and that THEISM is a degree of "establishment" since a considerable numer are agnostic or atheist or in a religion that is Non-Theist. We really...as a civilization, have other more vital issuers so....whatever.

Some obvious stuff...just because 90% of the town is Born Again Christian...you don't have a school prayer or Baby Jesus in front of City hall. Individually...WHATEVER. For a while I chose Joe Montana as MY deity...and Superbowl Sunday as a religious holiday. Beer and Pizza REQUIRED. That is just as legit as ANY "faith"...and I reckon having MY deity on videotape was a big plus.

Click to expand...

Actually, there is proof that Joe Montana is real, so yours is even more legit!

chris7375 said:

If the Majority of the State is Atheist are people who are religious not being left out. It can be said for any philosophy really. You will never be able to include all the Masses in everything you want to do.

Click to expand...

That is irrelevant because atheism isn't a religion and has no practices. It is of disbelief. There are militant atheists that attack religion, but only because it is in the public and they also want a secular society. What I am saying is that all religions stay private and keep spiritual beliefs away from government and all discussions of the government.

chris7375 said:

I agree with you in a way my only point is you can't include everyone in everything someone always gets left out.

Click to expand...

I completely understand what you mean. But I'm not saying replace religion with atheism in the government. I am saying don't let religion even be a discussion. For example, if a person runs for congress and says he is an atheist, the chances of him winning that election is almost impossible. Only few have done it. That isn't right. It's unfair and makes a lot of politicians lie about their faith. Atheism and religion shouldn't even be a factor. That way nobody is getting left out in a sense, because that is left to private discussion since it isn't even a factor. Hopefully I'm explaining it right. That's just my opinion. I agree with what you've said. Just adding on a bit. We pretty much agree exactly though.