| Are you sure church and state should be seperated?

Are you sure church and state should be seperated?

ace asked the question:

consider this:
Pilgrims came to America to establish gov’ts that were based on Judeo Christian values.
Secularists claim that they meant to create a godless system in which church and state were seperate. This is a myth.
the term “seperation of church and dtate” came from a letter by President T. Jefferson to a group that had expressed concerned that the gov’t would favor on religious denomination over another.
Liberals have used this term to drive religion out of public schools and gov’t, yet Jefferson and the founding fathers had no intention of removing religion from American culture. In Fact they Knew Christianity had to be the bedrock upon which our nation was founded on. It would not survive w/o a firm moral basis.
Even Washigton’s said in his farewell adress:
“of all destitutions and habits which lead to political prosperity, Religion and morality are indespnsible supports…Tis substantially true, that virture or morality is neccessary for a spring of gov’t.”
virtue and morality are are necessary for free, rebpublican gov’t: religion is necessary for virtue and morality: religionis, therefore, necessary for republican gov’t
James Madison
“We have staked the whole future of American civilization , not under the power of gov’t ,far from it. We have staked the futer of all of ourpolitical institutions upon the capacity of Mankind for self-gov’t.upon the capacity of each and all of us toto govern ourselves , to control ourselves, to sustain ourselves to The Ten Commandments of God.
Buy your domain name registration at lower cost

Related posts:

  1. What protestant denominations today do not trace back to the roman catholic church? Kitteh-n-Da Red Hoodz asked the question: If you call “the...

Filed Under Politics |

Tagged With , ,


20 Responses to “Are you sure church and state should be seperated?”

  1. johnny_zondo on January 22nd, 2009 10:37 am

    absolutely im sure!

    try reading Article 11 of the 1796 Treaty with Tripoli.

    Art. 11. As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion; as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquillity, of Mussulmen; and, as the said States never entered into any war, or act of hostility against any Mahometan nation, it is declared by the parties, that no pretext arising from religious opinions, shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries.

  2. tmladenka on January 25th, 2009 4:22 pm

    Yes it should…unless you want to live in a place like Saudi Arabia or Iran where church (mosque?) and state are the same. Maybe you’d be happy there, but what about most people?

  3. when irish eyes are smiling on January 28th, 2009 6:20 am

    “Tis substantially true, that virture or morality is neccessary for a spring of gov’t.”

    So someone without religion has no morals or virtues? I’d rather have an atheist in my government than a religious one. They tend to start less wars.

  4. g on January 30th, 2009 5:23 am

    well… if it’s not separated… what religion does the government choose? You can’t be pro-all religions… it doesn’t work that way…

    You said Christianity…but that doesn’t work.. Catholic or Protestant?

    and the pilgrims come here to run away from people telling them how to worship… are you saying that they wanted to just set up a system where they told others how to worship?

    you can’t have true freedom of religion… if the government openly supports one religion… that one religion then smothers out the others… it doesn’t work…

  5. AprilRocksIt on February 1st, 2009 5:46 am

    We also burned women on a stake during the witch trials? What’s your point with the historical part? We have freedom of religion, and public schools shouldn’t teach one religion without the other. As a non-christian, I would have felt extremely awkward growing up with Jesus looking at me.

    Christian’s should be raised that way, if their parents want it, in Church and private institutions.

    Morality doesn’t rely on religion, and that’s what I think our country is based on. I don’t mean morality as in pro-life stuff, but morality as in being the better man, trying to be the pillar of the world. Right now, we are failing, strangely enough with a person who has extremely religious attributes. If our country ran completely secularly, we wouldn’t have half the debates we have right now. Gay marriage, pro-choice, they would all be part of our life. Now, pro-lifers and religious radicals wouldn’t like that, but the MAJORITY of our country would. And as a democracy, I think that would be enjoyable.

  6. BeachBum on February 1st, 2009 5:50 am

    Seriously, you aren’t thinking… do you want us to be a mirror of some Arabian countries that execute ppl for leaving Islam. And don’t tell me it won’t come to that.

    One religion would be the most powerful and decide as the ‘moral majority’ the rules. If you didn’t believe in the same faith, you would become a social deviant or outcast…

    Hasn’t society already been there, done that, gotten that tshirt already?

  7. david.goldsworth@sbcglobal.net on February 3rd, 2009 1:55 am

    The Pilgrims hung people for witchcraft, and Washington and Jefferson were slave owners. Would you want their brand of virtue and morality as part of our government?

  8. St. Anthony of Y!Answers on February 4th, 2009 12:41 am

    well, we can model our government after iran. would that make you happy?

  9. bluffmike on February 6th, 2009 6:55 pm

    The early settlers came to avoid religious persecution. England had an official religion and was impinging on their beliefs.

  10. psicatt on February 8th, 2009 5:32 pm

    Separation of church from state is important in any so-called free democratic state. You value many freedoms given under your constitution, freedom of speech, freedom to bear arms, freedom of movement, and, specific to this case, freedom of religion. You have a constitution that allows your populace to choose their own religion without any interference from the government.

    If you merge state and church, what then does that say about your freedom of religion? You do not live in a theocracy where the church dictates what freedoms you are allowed. Your constitution was drawn up from the idea to allow the citizens of that country to be free from opression as it was under British rule. If you merge chuch and state that would then undermine the very freedoms that you hold so dear…

  11. Roxanne on February 11th, 2009 2:19 am

    Osama bin Laden doesn’t think so.

  12. JoeThatUKnow on February 12th, 2009 3:52 pm

    I think religion has to remain as seperate as possible from government in this country. Naturally we need morality in government but I am not one of those people that believes you have to belong to a certain religous denomination in order to have morality. It is my experience that people who are constantly referring to their religous beliefs are usually the ones that have little or no real morality. I do think people tend to go too far with religion and politics by trying to get rid of “In God We Trust” and other examples. But the last thing I or any other real American wants is this great free nation to end up a theocracy like Saudi Arabia or Israel. Unfortunately to some people that’s okay, and that’s a problem.

  13. laughter_every_day on February 13th, 2009 12:37 pm

    our government is not hostile to religion and the constitution doesn’t demand such hostility. Nor do liberals. However, the basis tenant of most of the first amendment decisions is that religion is a private matter and the government has no business in it. You should appreciate that, in case we end up one day with a majority of muslims in congress who try to force their religion on you. Furthermore, the constitution doesn’t prohibit prayer in schools. As long as there are exams, there will be prayer. What is prohibited is the school endorsing public prayer in a public school, any sort of official policy that suggests to the children that one religion is better than another. So, when a teacher proposes to lead the children in prayer to the christian god, the teacher is telling the children that she, a government agent, is espousing the official doctrine that christianity is better than atheism or islam or hinduism or shintoism or wica or any of the native american religions. All of those are welcome in this country and we should not be telling children that one is better than the other or that one is more approved by government than the others. I do not seek a godless society. All I want is for government to keep its nose out of my religious choices.

  14. Joselito T. M. Fraginal on February 17th, 2009 1:24 pm

    Church and State should be separate from each other. The Church should not intervene in the affairs of the state vice versa. The Church must not influence its followers to vote for a specific person. On the other hand, the State must not pass a law favoring a specific religious group.

  15. CoveEnt on February 18th, 2009 10:39 am

    Of course they should be separated. After all, who’s religion would be put in charge? Of course you would say that Christianity should be, but what flavor? Baptist? Catholic? Episcopalian? Presbyterian? Pentecostal?

    Pretty soon the debate would look like the middle east with different names on the groups trying to kill each other. That does not sound like a whole lot of fun.

    If a law is enacted that is based on reason that are not religious in origin, then people of all religions can acknowledge the sound reason for that law.

    The constitution says that the government is not to show favoritism to any religion, not that religion should not exist. People have taken that acknowledging, in an official manner, any religion is showing preference to that religion, so it should not be done.

    And then there is always the question of morality. Should morality be legislated, or should it be taught in the homes? The family, and whatever resources, such as churches, schools, and after-school programs, the family wishes to employ. When the government starts legislating morality, I will start looking for another home.

  16. Elizabeth on February 21st, 2009 1:19 pm

    Religion isn’t necessary for virtue and morality, but it could be argued that the RIGHT religion determines the RIGHT morality.

    Because people left Europe to escape religious persecution, it would seem Un-American to show favoritism for one religion over others through government-sanctioned programs. For example, if Catholicism were the guiding principles for government, it would be excluding all other sects of Christianity. If a Christian lets the government control his/her actions, then he/she isn’t really working it out right. I can still pray in school even if there isn’t a designated time for me to do so.

    I will say that people (**cough** liberals **cough**) often interpret Freedom of Religion to mean Freedom FROM religion. Christianity still comes into play with each elected official’s personal views. Those Christian beliefs can still dictate decisions made in government by our country’s representatives.

  17. One & only bob on February 22nd, 2009 5:23 pm

    Wasn’t the entire point of the pilgrims coming to America to avoid the oppressive government which imposed its religion upon them? We seem to forget that for thousands of years humanity was run by religious institutions. Every King and Pharaoh was said to be some way related to God, and no one could question his authority because of that status — faith by definition refuses questioning. It turned out that religiously controlled governments or governments that controlled religions weren’t the best systems. Thomas Hobbes was the first to discuss the separation of church and state in 1651 in his book Leviathan from which many of the found fathers drew their ideas. Democracy and representative systems that had a separation of church and state were a great relief from the religious governments because democracy relies on questioning, debate and reason. Not being monolithically controlled by a religion, these forms of government allowed for a freer exchange of ideas and a more robust development of science and economy which progressed the US and democratic European nations.

  18. southca49er on February 23rd, 2009 8:38 am

    I would provide my own answer but this guy above
    (The One& Only Bob) answered the question so completly and thorough that nothing else needs to be said. Pick his answer as the best because this question could not have been answered better than he has answered it.

  19. RANDALL S on February 24th, 2009 2:25 am

    I can’t stop laughing on the comment Atheists start fewer wars. Um…..Stalin, Hitler ring any bells

    Answer to the post below:

    Lol, no friend not at all. I respect your choice, it’s your choice and I have no judement of that, but I was pointing out to the previous writer that atheism or christianity has people who would bring harm to others and that one or the other in not a free pass of that.

  20. eddster08 on February 26th, 2009 9:51 pm

    “Pilgrims came to America to establish gov’ts that were based on Judeo Christian values.” Just not true—they came to escape religious prosecution from the Anglican Church. America is completely based upon freedom—freedom of speech, freedom of press, and of course freedom of religion. If there was no seperation of church and state, there could not be freedom of religion. Also, one thing which conservatives assume that drives me crazy is that you have to be religious to have a “firm moral basis.” That is just a horribly ignorant view my friend. I am an atheist—does that make me a psychopathic killer with no conscience, simply because i do not share the same religious views as you do???