In the First Amendment in the United States Constitution it states:
“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.” Over time citizens, politicians, and lawmakers interpreted this to mean that the Church and the State are two unique identities. There should be a separation of Church and State. The United States will never be able to accomplish separation of Church and State. These are two areas of our lives that are so inextricably linked, yet we are constantly trying to pull them apart. The very reason our nation was founded is religiously motivated!
When the Pilgrims sailed to America and set up the first colonies back in 1620 it was to escape religious persecution. They dreamed of a nation where they could have their own beliefs and be free from their tyrannical king. Even the choice to establish religious freedom has a religious basis. Including a clause to separate Church and State in the Bill of Rights immediately links Church and State as well.
Religion is usually programmed in us by our parents before we truly understand it. Whether you’re Christian, Jewish, Muslim, Buddhist, Agnostic, Atheist, or otherwise, your religious outlook on life has an influence in everything you do. The choice to believe or not believe in God often dictates your stance on many of the big issues like abortion, the death penalty, gun control, and even education. Most of these issues are heavily discussed and debated by our politicians. But I challenge you to give me one good reason why abortion should be decided by a group of suits up on Capitol Hill. Abortion is a personal life choice that only a woman could really understand. Your religious views probably weigh heavy on your reasons for being for or against abortion. So if our policy, so clearly stated in the Bill of Rights, is to keep Church and State separate, then how can we vote on abortion? This is a clear violation of the Constitution and it goes against the wishes of our Founding Fathers.
And we don’t truly want to send Church and State to their respective corners. Look at our Democratic Presidential Candidate. Love him or loathe him, Barack Obama was a member of the Trinity United Church of Christ, a church that advocated the Black Value System, for 20 years. Relatively out of the limelight, he was able to be an active part of this church, to follow what he believed. While knee-deep in the primaries, Obama’s reverend, Reverend Jeremiah Wright made some comments that caused an uproar in the political community. The backlash from his involvement was so severe that Obama was forced to leave the church behind. Shouldn’t he have been free to practice what ever faith he wanted? Why did he have to abandon his church (and in some ways his beliefs) after 20 years?
Because we are unable to separate his political identity from his religious one. Our religious backgrounds make up such a substantial part of our whole personalities that it is really impossible to separate the two. The same is true for Church and State, which are simply larger versions, extensions, of our religious and personal characters. Our religions (or lack thereof) help to teach us right from wrong, the difference between good and bad. So why should we be forced to vote on issues that are largely personal and highly religiously charged?
I really don’t think its possible to keep Church and State apart. So the question arises, “Should we give up trying to make them separate?”
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
While I oppose the secularization of the nation, I think the struggle between Church and State is healthy for a democracy. The point isn't to ever resolve this struggle, it's so that we never have a theocratic government established, or a government totally devoid of ethical conduct and morality. It ensures that a "middle path" is taken.
Ironically, America has been greatly shaped by both a lack of the Church's influence, and the infusion of religious ideas into our government. What I mean is, one of the reasons why America is the land of freedom and equality is that from the very beginning, we rejected the influences of the Church and the nobility that had oppressed European society for centuries. On the other hand, there are undeniable elements of Puritanism and religious philosophy deeply embedded in our national consciousness, which have guided America's course since its birth.
Morality is not dependent on religion. I see no reason for religion to be present in order to have ethical conduct.
Find out everything you need to know about poop here:
http://progressiveu.org/000701-everything-you-need-know-about-poop
That is such a frustrating claim, isn't it? There are many non-religious people who have a firm grounding in morals and ethics, and it is NOT because of Christianity. Being a good person is good for society. One does not need the carrot on a stick of heaven to behave oneself!
http://www.progressiveu.org/blog/ediblewoman
Okay, okay, I see your point, I just have a very hard time believing it. If religion never existed, ever, in the course of human history, I doubt we'd have any moral direction or honor. There's no denying that our universal code of ethical conduct was born out of some sort of religion. Where else can it come from? Certainly not the individual, since we're all rife with flaws, insecurities, and prejudices. Morality as provided by religion gave human beings an honorable way of life to aspire to.
...that "our universal code of ethical conduct was born out of some sort of religion." To begin with, I would suggest that there is no evidence at all that would suggest even that there even is such a thing as a "universal code of ethical conduct." Even those precepts which are often referred to as "sociological constants" are not truly universal in human cultures (though they are extremely common). Secondly, one of the leading theories regarding the origin of "morality" is Ultilitarianism, which posits that. "the moral worth of an action is solely determined by its contribution to overall utility, that is, its contribution to happiness or pleasure as summed among all persons."
We can see the foundations of primitive morality in the actions of many lower animals (especially species who congregate in herds). The sharing of labor, cooperation for self-defense, the punishment of individuals within the herd who break "the rules" of productive herd behavior...are really not so far off (for example) from our own morals as evolved humans.
I would suggest that a little reading is in order, and the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy's entry on "The Definition of Morality" would be a good place to start.
TTFN,
Blackout
-------------------------
Yes, I've changed my username from "percivale" to "Blackout." Go here if you want to know why.
Exactly. It makes perfect sense to not kill and steal from others. Society would not exist without a moral code because we would all be too busy killing each other and stealing resources. Cooperation is a result of morals.
Click here to read about new ways to save money and the environment that you have never heard!
Of all things to be first, I think it is neat that this one is it. I am not sure how it says seperation of church and state... I just looked it over again and I do not see it were it says that. I also think its neat that it also says we are free to contact government officials to adress greivences. I love this contry and its founding.
The people in it I fear though are sometimes crazy control freaks...thus the need for this fabulous document.
According to a talk radio caller who felt it important to spread the truth, Obama was only apart of that church for 16 years not 20.
The abortion thing could only be truely understood by a woman pregnant and for the first time seeing why it could be a good thing. Ultimatley, God gave us a choice to choose... who is any of us to take that away.
I do not know enough to say much else, but excellant blog, great food for thought
~T
All truths are easy to understand once discovered; The point is to discover them ~Galileo
The phrase "separation of church and state" is not found word for word in the Constitution or Bill of Rights. However, that phrase was commonly used by the men who were involved in writing the First Amendment to explain their intent. To quote the Supreme Court of the United States, in the decision of Reynolds v. United States (1878)...
"At the first session of the first Congress the amendment now under consideration was proposed with others by Mr. Madison. It met the views of the advocates of religious freedom, and was adopted. Mr. Jefferson afterwards, in reply to an address to him by a committee of the Danbury Baptist Association, took occasion to say: "Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between man and his god; that he owes account to noneother for his faith or his worship; that the legislative powers of the government reach actions only, and not opinions, -- I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should 'make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,' thus building a wall of separation between church and State." Coming as this does from an acknowledged leader of the advocates of the measure, it may be accepted almost as an authoritative declaration of the scope and effect of the amendment thus secured. Congress was deprived of all legislative power over mere opinion, but was left free to reach actions which were in violation of social duties or subversive of good order."
There are a lot of legal catch phrases that are not found word-for-word in our Constitution, but are clearly encompassed in the document's intent.
TTFN,
Blackout
-------------------------
Yes, I've changed my username from "percivale" to "Blackout." Go here if you want to know why.
Ah....This makes things so much clearer... I am all for the government butting out. I really like this phrasing in context, I think I will keep it. Saying just 'seperation of church and state' sounds so calus and rediculous....Thanks Blackout.
~T
All truths are easy to understand once discovered; The point is to discover them ~Galileo
So are you advocating or are you against the actual seperation... wait... I agree with comment one and that it is healthy for the government to try to seperate it. As we have seen to openly say that one religion is the chief set is frankly immoral. Throughout history we have seen the mistake done over and over again. Look at the Salem witch trials when the mock Senate sentenced people to death because a few girls said they were witches. Those people had to abide thier religious prospects and kill all the people who could not prove that they were not withces.
Also many Europeans came to this country not because of religious persocution (christianity was actually a huge part of Europe and many places in Europe were free of persocution at the time) but they came for a new beginning America has always been the place for the "American Dream" where anyone can come and get Rich enough to do anything.
I believe that Religion should not be in school and the Government
people need to understand that others have opinions that are and should be equally respected (even if not logically equal) as thiers
Saint O Nothin' Says
PEACE
D'oh! Sorry, I thought I hit reply. The following comment is in response to your comment.
"Music expresses that which cannot be said and on which it is impossible to be silent." - Victor Hugo
Yup, I'm a music nerd.
I'm saying that separation of Church and State is fantastic thing. I'm absolutely 100% advocating it. But I'm also saying that it is a damn hard thing to accomplish. Church and State can never be completely separate no matter what we do. I'm saying that the government should stay out of our business and leave personal choices up to the people, which would be a positive step towards achieving the greatest possible separation between Church and State.
"Music expresses that which cannot be said and on which it is impossible to be silent." - Victor Hugo
Yup, I'm a music nerd.
You said "I'm saying that the government should stay out of our business and leave personal choices up to the people," I say. AMEN!!!
What an excellant perspective!
~T
All truths are easy to understand once discovered; The point is to discover them ~Galileo
I agree- too bad the government doesn't just oversee states and provide for defense. That would be the life!
Find out everything you need to know about poop here:
http://progressiveu.org/000701-everything-you-need-know-about-poop