Separation of church and state
Printed From: History Community ~ All Empires
Category: Scholarly Pursuits
Forum Name: Social Sciences
Forum Discription: Discuss Sociology, Law, Economics, Psychology and other soft sciences.
URL: http://www.allempires.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=27338
Printed Date: 25-Apr-2024 at 13:35
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 9.56a - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Separation of church and state
Posted By: sonya
Subject: Separation of church and state
Date Posted: 03-Jun-2009 at 04:07
| What do you think about politic and religion,and separation of church and state? |
Replies:
Posted By: Parnell
Date Posted: 03-Jun-2009 at 11:03
|
You'll have to be more specific.
------------- |
Posted By: tjadams
Date Posted: 05-Dec-2011 at 19:37
Saw this really old thread and thought I'd talk to the ghosts. The US stands by the separation of church and state because at the time when all the forming documents of the nation was being written, the American Rev. was sill fresh in many minds. The US wanted a fresh start from English rules of forcible support of the local church. Americans wanted to worship as they chose if they chose not to. It would be their call and not the city, state or national powers dictating what religion would be supported as 'official.'
|
Posted By: lirelou
Date Posted: 05-Dec-2011 at 22:42
|
I suspect it had far more to do with the pattern of colonization. Allowing a official state church a la the church of England, Scotland, or Ireland would have been impossible in a United States whose colonizers included Congregationalists (Puritans), Presbyterians, Lutherans, Anglicans, Quakers, and Catholics, not to mention the occasional Jew. So it wasn't so much the American Revolution as its aftermath. Unity required either a single official religion, or none at all, other than recognizing the common elements that bound all. ------------- Phong trần mài một lưỡi gươm, Những loài giá áo túi cơm sá gì |
Posted By: tjadams
Date Posted: 05-Dec-2011 at 22:45
|
Before the ARev., many many towns had to support the local church with their taxes, whether they attended or not. It wasn't so much a point of unity, it was about freedom to chose.
|
Posted By: Don Quixote
Date Posted: 18-Mar-2012 at 17:09
|
They have to be separated, because if they are not, a governmental-issued pressure could, as it was, be used to press people into one or another faith; while faith have to be a personal choice. I still think there is too much religion involved in US politics and I don't feel comfortable with it. In every election the religious affiliations of every candidate come to the fore, and people start voting/rejecting for one or another because of what church they go to - what this has to do with his abilities as politician? Nothing.
------------- |
Posted By: Cywr
Date Posted: 24-Mar-2012 at 09:26
|
Its a good idea, when can we have it?
-------------  Arrrgh!!"
|
Posted By: Centrix Vigilis
Date Posted: 24-Mar-2012 at 09:43
In America we already do. Thousands of examples exsist and continue to occur damn near daily. Whether you believe it or not is another matter.
 ------------- "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence" S. T. Friedman Pilger's law: 'If it's been officially denied, then it's probably true' |
Posted By: TheAlaniDragonRising
Date Posted: 24-Mar-2012 at 10:19
|
I think that we see the odd news report where there seems to be a fine line between American politicians carrying on this separation and breaking it. Can anyone tell me if this separation is law in America?
------------- What a handsome figure of a dragon. No wonder I fall madly in love with the Alani Dragon now, the avatar, it's a gorgeous dragon picture. |
Posted By: Don Quixote
Date Posted: 24-Mar-2012 at 11:42
|
In US the religious affiliations of political figures have significant influence on their popularity - many people won't vote for Romney because he is LDS, or will vote for Santorum because what he says his religious values are, and vice versa. However, this is not lack of separation between state and church per se, more like public opinion-making. The separation of church and state in US is enshrined in the Constitution, like the 1st Amendment: "...Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a http://www.usconstitution.net/glossary.html#REDRESS - redress of grievances....". Religion is a very basic human expression, and it cannot not play some role in the people's opinions, even in those people who really fight to keep their minds unbiased; but the separation of church and state is something that is defined my a law - and a law cannot govern human opinions.State cannot force one religion or everyone, and religion cannot force it's laws on state - this is guaranteed by the US constitution. As for voting, etc - I consider it everyone's personal responsibility to keep in mind that he/she is supposed to vote for a politician, based on what the political qualities of the person in question are; and hence to keep the bias away what making a political decision. Laws cannot govern people's minds, people have to do that by themselves - a failure to separate religion and state in one's mind is not a responsibility of the state. In Bulgaria there is official religion, Orthodox Christianity, under the Bulgarian Orthodox Church that is sponsored and have the salaries of it's priests payed by the government - but even this is not lack or separation of state and church /because no one is forced to be baptised/, it's more like mutual support - and this existed even in communist times. A real example of lack or separation of church and state is, say, Iran. ------------- |
Posted By: Centrix Vigilis
Date Posted: 24-Mar-2012 at 14:55
Amendment ICongress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances. This is defined as the Establishment Clause and the Free Exercise Clause. Article 6 - Debts, Supremacy, Oaths All Debts contracted and Engagements entered into, before the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be as valid against the United States under this Constitution, as under the Confederation. This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding. The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States. Most recent important case to exemplify: Hosanna-Tabor Evangelical Lutheran Church and School v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. see: http://www.becketfund.org/supreme-court-sides-with-church-in-landmark-first-amendment-ruling/ - http://www.becketfund.org/supreme-court-sides-with-church-in-landmark-first-amendment-ruling/ ------------- "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence" S. T. Friedman Pilger's law: 'If it's been officially denied, then it's probably true' |
Posted By: Baal Melqart
Date Posted: 25-Mar-2012 at 09:13
|
[TUBE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GQ0KqcSn5SI&feature=g-all-u&context=G2be6921FAAAAAAAADAA[/TUBE]
------------- Timidi mater non flet |
Posted By: LeopoldPhilippe
Date Posted: 30-Jun-2015 at 20:52
|
On December 11, 2013 the Freedom From Religion Foundation tried to take legal action against the city of Chipley, Florida to remove the Nativity scene in front of the Chipley City Hall.
Randal Seyler, a reporter for the Washington County News, contacted the FFRF to challenge the legality of the Christmas display. The FFRF said this Nativity scene was unconstitutional because it was on government property and owned by the City. |
Posted By: Centrix Vigilis
Date Posted: 30-Jun-2015 at 21:45
|
nothing new.
''10 Commandments statue must be removed from state Capitol, Oklahoma Supreme Court rules'' http://www.koco.com/news/10-commandments-statue-must-be-removed-from-state-capitol-oklahoma-supreme-court-rules/33849476 ------------- "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence" S. T. Friedman Pilger's law: 'If it's been officially denied, then it's probably true' |
Posted By: Centrix Vigilis
Date Posted: 01-Jul-2015 at 00:22
|
Another.
''After Censoring Muhammad, NY Times Publishes Offensive Image of Pope Benedict'' http://www.mediaite.com/online/after-censoring-muhammad-ny-times-publishes-offensive-image-of-pope-benedict/ Iow.. as long as RCC's are not running threatening to cut heads off it's ok to ridicule them....or when they run anti-Semitic, bigoted images....and Jews don't complain in large enough manner or numbers...it's fine. Same same the GLBT crowd celebrating their victory in the recent marriage decision from the USSC....yet still unwilling in large measures..... to allow the expressions of counter opinions to their lifestyles... by theological conservatives or religious moral traditionalists. ...nothing more than ongoing liberal, leftist, secularist, horse shitt. bathed and perfumed in the cologne known as 'eau de hypocrisy'...and in reality....bigoted themselves. ------------- "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence" S. T. Friedman Pilger's law: 'If it's been officially denied, then it's probably true' |