Separation of Church and State (It's a long one)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 04:49:30 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  U.S. General Discussion (Moderators: The Dowager Mod, Chancellor Tanterterg)
  Separation of Church and State (It's a long one)
« previous next »
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Separation of Church and State (It's a long one)  (Read 1341 times)
beowulf
Rookie
**
Posts: 33


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: May 07, 2005, 08:39:45 PM »

In March of 2005, the legislation of Mississippi passed a law allowing monuments of the Ten Commandments to be placed in public buildings.  The law also allowed for quoting of Jesus' Sermon on the Mount.  Reading that story got me thinking.  I believe it’s about time that the people, not the courts, through the elected legislation, start controlling the U.S. government.  I’m hoping that this legislation, though only on the level of one state so far, is a sign of what is to come for our country.  I’ve about had enough of this “Separation of Church and State” being in my face, and being used for discrimination against Christians.  But how many people know that the phrase, “separation of church and state”, is not in the Constitution?  That’s correct, it is not a constitutional right or power.  I'm not saying it's a bad concept, keeping the government out of the church's daily business and away from establishing a national religion.  That is actually constitutional.  What the first Amendment really says is, "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 redress of grievances."  Notice that it says establishment of religion, not tolerance of religion.  Now, I may be on my own here, but putting a monument of the Ten Commandments, a very sound and highly influential ancient law code, in a courthouse, or merely mentioning the name of God is a far, far distance from establishing a national U.S. religion! Can anyone agree with that?  I feel that when Christianity is discriminated against in this way, keeping it out whether it's reasonable or not, it is a prohibition of the free exercise of religion.  We live in a widely diverse country, where all kinds of people can speak up.  We permit people such as Ward Churchill teach in this country's universities, the kind people who disrespect their fellow citizens and country.  We allow for talent competitions such as American Idol to be featured on TV.  No one complains about people expressing themselves through music, and neither do I.  The American justice system affords due process to criminals, and provides food and shelter for even prisoners.  The American Civil Liberties Union, the cause of much distress over freedom of religion, even receives tax dollars.  There's plenty of free speech there.  However, God forbid that someone should do something in school or at work in the name of the Lord.  (Forgive the pun).  That is not right.  Anyone has every right to talk about God.  On one hand, Separation of Church and State is not always a bad thing.  It is in fact wrong to make someone believe something they don't want to.  That's why America should not establish a national religion.  But no one should have the right to share their beliefs taken away.  That is truly a violation of the First Amendment.

-beowulf

Logged
A18
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 23,794
Political Matrix
E: 9.23, S: -6.35

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: May 07, 2005, 08:43:30 PM »

The courts should enforce it, but they should establish clear standards instead of making it up as they go along, and the state courts, rather than the federal courts, should determine at least the gray areas.
Logged
○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└
jfern
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 53,611


Political Matrix
E: -7.38, S: -8.36

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: May 07, 2005, 08:45:41 PM »
« Edited: May 07, 2005, 08:48:14 PM by jfern »

What discrimination against Christians?  San Francisco elected a Catholic who talks about her faith to Congress. Do you have a g point? I'm really sick of hearing about this so-called "discrimination against Christians".  Bush Senior said that atheists shouldn't be considered citizens. That's discrimination, not this hypothetical stuff that you haven't mentioned.
Logged
Emsworth
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,054


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: May 07, 2005, 08:55:05 PM »

I’ve about had enough of this “Separation of Church and State” being in my face, and being used for discrimination against Christians.
The idea is patently absurd. Having a Ten Commandments monument, if anything, discriminates against non-Christians; not having one does not discriminate against anybody.
Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.
Primarily, of course, the justice system affords due process to defendants, who have not yet been convicted and are therefore presumed innocent.

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.
Yes, everyone does have the right to talk about or believe in God. However, this does not mean that the government needs to express a preference for religion. The government should neither express support, nor opposition for religion; it should be neutral. Sadly, the religious right equates neutrality with atheism and anti-religionism - an absolutely absurd stance.
Logged
beowulf
Rookie
**
Posts: 33


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: May 07, 2005, 09:08:04 PM »

What discrimination against Christians?  San Francisco elected a Catholic who talks about her faith to Congress. Do you have a g point? I'm really sick of hearing about this so-called "discrimination against Christians".  Bush Senior said that atheists shouldn't be considered citizens. That's discrimination, not this hypothetical stuff that you haven't mentioned.

Yeah, acutally, I do have a point!  Why is it that schools can talk about evolution all they won't, but even mention "intelligent design", heck no!  That would be religious.  Why do I hear of all these lawsuits where any mention of a god is just thrown away?  Why is it such a problem in this country to have a monument to a fundamental law code?  Why is it that plaques quoting the Bible had to be taken away from the park at the Grand Canyon?  The story is at http://www.reclaimamerica.org/PAGES/NEWS/newspage.asp?story=1294.  That version has a religious twist, I will warn you, but it does give a fuller story.  We are completely fine with government support of anything not religious, or even anti-religious.  That's my point.  Do you get it?
Logged
beowulf
Rookie
**
Posts: 33


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: May 07, 2005, 09:14:12 PM »

And no, I don't equate atheists with anti-Christians.  I have many atheist friends.  I think this country should be open to varied belief systems, including atheism.
Logged
○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└
jfern
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 53,611


Political Matrix
E: -7.38, S: -8.36

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: May 07, 2005, 09:15:39 PM »

What discrimination against Christians?  San Francisco elected a Catholic who talks about her faith to Congress. Do you have a g point? I'm really sick of hearing about this so-called "discrimination against Christians".  Bush Senior said that atheists shouldn't be considered citizens. That's discrimination, not this hypothetical stuff that you haven't mentioned.

Yeah, acutally, I do have a point!  Why is it that schools can talk about evolution all they won't, but even mention "intelligent design", heck no!  That would be religious.  Why do I hear of all these lawsuits where any mention of a god is just thrown away?  Why is it such a problem in this country to have a monument to a fundamental law code?  Why is it that plaques quoting the Bible had to be taken away from the park at the Grand Canyon?  The story is at http://www.reclaimamerica.org/PAGES/NEWS/newspage.asp?story=1294.  That version has a religious twist, I will warn you, but it does give a fuller story.  We are completely fine with government support of anything not religious, or even anti-religious.  That's my point.  Do you get it?

Evolution is a proven scientific theory. Intelligent design isn't even a scientific theory, according to the American Association for the Advancement of Science.
http://www.aaas.org/news/releases/2002/1106id2.shtml
There's nothing saying that one can't talk about non-scientific theories outside of a science class. The original pledge, as written by a clergyman, did not include "under god". Those plaques are still there. Do the Scientologists get to put up plaques too?  Every religion and cult that ever existed should get 3 plaques each at the edge of the grand Canyon.
Logged
beowulf
Rookie
**
Posts: 33


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: May 07, 2005, 10:35:42 PM »

What discrimination against Christians?  San Francisco elected a Catholic who talks about her faith to Congress. Do you have a g point? I'm really sick of hearing about this so-called "discrimination against Christians".  Bush Senior said that atheists shouldn't be considered citizens. That's discrimination, not this hypothetical stuff that you haven't mentioned.

Yeah, acutally, I do have a point!  Why is it that schools can talk about evolution all they won't, but even mention "intelligent design", heck no!  That would be religious.  Why do I hear of all these lawsuits where any mention of a god is just thrown away?  Why is it such a problem in this country to have a monument to a fundamental law code?  Why is it that plaques quoting the Bible had to be taken away from the park at the Grand Canyon?  The story is at http://www.reclaimamerica.org/PAGES/NEWS/newspage.asp?story=1294.  That version has a religious twist, I will warn you, but it does give a fuller story.  We are completely fine with government support of anything not religious, or even anti-religious.  That's my point.  Do you get it?

Evolution is a proven scientific theory. Intelligent design isn't even a scientific theory, according to the American Association for the Advancement of Science.
http://www.aaas.org/news/releases/2002/1106id2.shtml
There's nothing saying that one can't talk about non-scientific theories outside of a science class. The original pledge, as written by a clergyman, did not include "under god". Those plaques are still there. Do the Scientologists get to put up plaques too?  Every religion and cult that ever existed should get 3 plaques each at the edge of the grand Canyon.

I agree with you that we should honor all the people of our country.  But putting up plaques quoting Scripture isn't meant to exclude other people.  And I know "under god" wasn't in the original pledge.  But there are holes in the theory of evolution.  I've seen some.  But who's to say there isn't an intelligent designer too?  Evolution is a concept that, as far as human knowledge goes, pertains to life on earth.  The debate of whether or not there is or is not a creator should still be taught in schools, with openness to more than evolution.  Wouldn't you be open to discussing other possible theories to the origin of the universe in classrooms?
Logged
The Dowager Mod
texasgurl
Moderator
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,972
United States


Political Matrix
E: -9.48, S: -8.57

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: May 07, 2005, 10:48:53 PM »

http://www.newsobserver.com/news/story/2381962p-8759950c.html#1

Heres a good example of religious stupidity
"A Western North Carolina church expelled nine members this week because they refused to support their pastor's Republican views, members say."
Logged
A18
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 23,794
Political Matrix
E: 9.23, S: -6.35

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: May 07, 2005, 10:53:22 PM »

Should definitely be legal
Logged
Gabu
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 28,388
Canada


Political Matrix
E: -4.32, S: -6.52

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: May 07, 2005, 11:28:19 PM »

Now, I may be on my own here, but putting a monument of the Ten Commandments, a very sound and highly influential ancient law code, in a courthouse, or merely mentioning the name of God is a far, far distance from establishing a national U.S. religion!

The Ten Commandments are not "highly influential".  The only things from the Ten Commandments that influence US laws are the things that are absolute no-brainers, like "don't murder" and "don't steal".  The first four commandments, all of which are about God and/or religion, are not in any way a part of American law.  What about the first one, for example: "Thou shalt have no gods before me"?  Last I checked, it was perfectly okay to have a god before the Christian god in America, so, nope, that one's gone.  Keeping the Sabbath holy?  Nope, it's legal to work on Sundays (or Saturdays, whichever you consider to be the Sabbath).  Et cetera.

If every single part of the Commandments dealing with religion has no bearing on American law, why do we need to include those Commandments?  The reason is, of course, quite clear: it would no longer be the Christian Ten Commandments if we removed the ones that have no bearing on American law.  Therefore, it seems to me that the Ten Commandments, as a whole, form a religious document out of the Bible, plain and simple, that is not directly related to anything in American law.  Thus, they have no place that I can see in a courthouse - unless we want to include the Five Pillars of Islam and the major tenets of every other religion in existence.  It seems to me that it'd be much easier to just keep all of them out.

I feel that when Christianity is discriminated against in this way, keeping it out whether it's reasonable or not, it is a prohibition of the free exercise of religion. We live in a widely diverse country, where all kinds of people can speak up. We permit people such as Ward Churchill teach in this country's universities, the kind people who disrespect their fellow citizens and country. We allow for talent competitions such as American Idol to be featured on TV. No one complains about people expressing themselves through music, and neither do I. The American justice system affords due process to criminals, and provides food and shelter for even prisoners. The American Civil Liberties Union, the cause of much distress over freedom of religion, even receives tax dollars. There's plenty of free speech there. However, God forbid that someone should do something in school or at work in the name of the Lord. (Forgive the pun).

Um, my school had a few people I knew that were openly religious.  I was friends with two of them.  Nobody discriminated against any of them.  I'm not sure what discrimination you're talking about here.

Anyone has every right to talk about God.

Absolutely.

On one hand, Separation of Church and State is not always a bad thing. It is in fact wrong to make someone believe something they don't want to. That's why America should not establish a national religion. But no one should have the right to share their beliefs taken away. That is truly a violation of the First Amendment.

Prohibiting the display of the Ten Commandments in a courthouse does not prohibit anyone from sharing their beliefs.  The only thing it's prohibiting is the government from sponsoring those beliefs by displaying what is, at the root of it, a religious document in a government-owned building.

Yeah, acutally, I do have a point!  Why is it that schools can talk about evolution all they won't, but even mention "intelligent design", heck no!  That would be religious.

Um, that's because it is religious.  Intelligent design is not a scientific theory, plain and simple.  Regardless of what you think of evolution - that is an entirely different matter - intelligent design makes no predictions, is not falsifiable, does not open the door towards any further discovery, and is not supported by any reproducible tests.  Furthermore, what would be the point of including it in a science class, anyway?  What do you say?  Something like, "The Bible says that God created the universe in seven days.  Okay, class dismissed"?

Why is it such a problem in this country to have a monument to a fundamental law code?

See above.

Why is it that plaques quoting the Bible had to be taken away from the park at the Grand Canyon?  The story is at http://www.reclaimamerica.org/PAGES/NEWS/newspage.asp?story=1294.  That version has a religious twist, I will warn you, but it does give a fuller story.

I'm going to have to request a second source for this.  Anything that quotes Scripture in an article about something religious, while not automatically biased, does not do its best in my eyes of assuring me that what they're presenting is in a completely neutral point of view.  Non-religious organizations can certainly blow a religious matter way out of proportion, but religious organizations can just as equally blow something out of propotion.
Logged
beowulf
Rookie
**
Posts: 33


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: May 08, 2005, 10:57:49 PM »

I feel that when Christianity is discriminated against in this way, keeping it out whether it's reasonable or not, it is a prohibition of the free exercise of religion. We live in a widely diverse country, where all kinds of people can speak up. We permit people such as Ward Churchill teach in this country's universities, the kind people who disrespect their fellow citizens and country. We allow for talent competitions such as American Idol to be featured on TV. No one complains about people expressing themselves through music, and neither do I. The American justice system affords due process to criminals, and provides food and shelter for even prisoners. The American Civil Liberties Union, the cause of much distress over freedom of religion, even receives tax dollars. There's plenty of free speech there. However, God forbid that someone should do something in school or at work in the name of the Lord. (Forgive the pun).

Um, my school had a few people I knew that were openly religious.  I was friends with two of them.  Nobody discriminated against any of them.  I'm not sure what discrimination you're talking about here.
Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

That's just one instance.  Maybe I'm totally wrong, and religious discrimination never occurs in schools, but by what I've heard, it happens frequently.

On one hand, Separation of Church and State is not always a bad thing. It is in fact wrong to make someone believe something they don't want to. That's why America should not establish a national religion. But no one should have the right to share their beliefs taken away. That is truly a violation of the First Amendment.

Prohibiting the display of the Ten Commandments in a courthouse does not prohibit anyone from sharing their beliefs.  The only thing it's prohibiting is the government from sponsoring those beliefs by displaying what is, at the root of it, a religious document in a government-owned building.
Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

This may be a little off topic, but why have courthouses sworn witnesses in with their hand on a "religious document"?

Yeah, acutally, I do have a point!  Why is it that schools can talk about evolution all they won't, but even mention "intelligent design", heck no!  That would be religious.

Um, that's because it is religious.  Intelligent design is not a scientific theory, plain and simple.  Regardless of what you think of evolution - that is an entirely different matter - intelligent design makes no predictions, is not falsifiable, does not open the door towards any further discovery, and is not supported by any reproducible tests.  Furthermore, what would be the point of including it in a science class, anyway?  What do you say?  Something like, "The Bible says that God created the universe in seven days.  Okay, class dismissed"?
Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

It doesn't have to be the Christian God dicussed as an intelligent creator.  I think schools could make some kind of allowance for the concept of intelligent design, since it is possible.  I don't see a problem with telling students about it as a theory.  Please enlighten me.

Why is it that plaques quoting the Bible had to be taken away from the park at the Grand Canyon?  The story is at http://www.reclaimamerica.org/PAGES/NEWS/newspage.asp?story=1294.  That version has a religious twist, I will warn you, but it does give a fuller story.

I'm going to have to request a second source for this.  Anything that quotes Scripture in an article about something religious, while not automatically biased, does not do its best in my eyes of assuring me that what they're presenting is in a completely neutral point of view.  Non-religious organizations can certainly blow a religious matter way out of proportion, but religious organizations can just as equally blow something out of propotion.
Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

My apologies, I was unable to find a more balanced source at the time.  I hope you find that this one shows the story evenly: http://www.stevequayle.com/News.alert/03_Global/030725.scripture.returned.html
Logged
beowulf
Rookie
**
Posts: 33


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: May 08, 2005, 11:06:13 PM »

http://www.newsobserver.com/news/story/2381962p-8759950c.html#1

Heres a good example of religious stupidity
"A Western North Carolina church expelled nine members this week because they refused to support their pastor's Republican views, members say."
It's a shame that a church is so closed-minded about politics.
Logged
Ebowed
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,597


Political Matrix
E: 4.13, S: 2.09

WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #13 on: May 09, 2005, 01:51:49 AM »

http://www.newsobserver.com/news/story/2381962p-8759950c.html#1

Heres a good example of religious stupidity
"A Western North Carolina church expelled nine members this week because they refused to support their pastor's Republican views, members say."
Wow!  I guess we should outlaw religion.
Logged
minionofmidas
Lewis Trondheim
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 58,207
India


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #14 on: May 09, 2005, 07:51:02 AM »

I’ve about had enough of this “Separation of Church and State” being in my face, and being used for discrimination against Christians.
The idea is patently absurd. Having a Ten Commandments monument, if anything, discriminates against non-Christians; not having one does not discriminate against anybody.
Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.
Primarily, of course, the justice system affords due process to defendants, who have not yet been convicted and are therefore presumed innocent.

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.
Yes, everyone does have the right to talk about or believe in God. However, this does not mean that the government needs to express a preference for religion. The government should neither express support, nor opposition for religion; it should be neutral. Sadly, the religious right equates neutrality with atheism and anti-religionism - an absolutely absurd stance.
Not necessarily. That stance has historical roots, though it's never been appropriate in the U.S. where separation of church and state has always (since the overthrow of the original Maryland and Massachusetts, and maybe Connecticut, I'm not sure, constitutions) been a principle of government.
Enforced state neutrality was in many countries born out of opposition to control of branches of the state by the church, and easily shaded off - still does, at times, especially among Islamic anti-Islamists - into hostility to religion. Just read any history of France, 1870-1945.
Logged
opebo
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 47,010


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #15 on: May 09, 2005, 07:54:24 AM »

http://www.newsobserver.com/news/story/2381962p-8759950c.html#1

Heres a good example of religious stupidity
"A Western North Carolina church expelled nine members this week because they refused to support their pastor's Republican views, members say."
Wow!  I guess we should outlaw religion.

Logged
Filuwaúrdjan
Realpolitik
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 67,609
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #16 on: May 09, 2005, 08:03:52 AM »

BIGOT
Logged
angus
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 17,423
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #17 on: May 09, 2005, 09:56:58 AM »

I keep trying to think of something intelligent to say about this.  I had read about this some time ago in the newspaper.  And was a little surprised, but this would not be the most bizarre bit of legislation to come out of Jackson.  I do not understand its motivation except in the context of sensationalism.  After all, there is the Texas case, which is being argued by a bum, the Roy Moore fiasco, which led to his political ouster, and a number of pending cases involving separation of church and state.  It seems like a violation of federal law to me as well, but what do I know, I'm not a lawyer.  It'll be interesting to watch this get challenged.  Certainly Mississippi has more pressing problems, and the debate time would have been better spent discussing serious budgetary issues.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.058 seconds with 12 queries.