Seperation

buzz2 · 04-24-2008, 01:38 PM

I wasn't sure where to put this question. So hopefully it fits here.
Why is it so important to some of the atheist crowd that God be taken out of every facet of our nation? I hear the term "seperation of church and state" alot. Someone show me EXACTLY where in the Constitution it says anything about seperation of church and state. It's not there. Does the word GOD physically hurt or something? Help me to understand.

duck · 04-24-2008, 02:00 PM

It depends on which god we are speaking of. The jewish god of the old testament? The Christian God which requires acceptance of christ? The islamic god? The list goes on and on and on. Bhuddist? Pagan?

The first amendment states that:

Quote:

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.

What this means is that the acceptance of the god that you want in government is not the interpretation that everybody can live with. Therefore, we cannot have the "Christian Nation" that many fundamentalist would have because not all Americans are Christian. This is not limited to the atheist/agnostic view as many would have us believe, but that we are a nation for all religions and all interpretations that cannot and should not accept one single interpretation.

If this should happen, then we become a theocracy instead of a democratic republic.

greywolf90 · 04-24-2008, 08:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by buzz2

I wasn't sure where to put this question. So hopefully it fits here.
Why is it so important to some of the atheist crowd that God be taken out of every facet of our nation? I hear the term "seperation of church and state" alot. Someone show me EXACTLY where in the Constitution it says anything about seperation of church and state. It's not there. Does the word GOD physically hurt or something? Help me to understand.

the same could be asked of you: why is it so important that god be added to everything? a good example is the texas state pledge. while i was growing up the texas pledge has always been:

"honor the texas flag,
i pledge allegence to thee,
texas one and indivisable."

but just last year, it has been changed to include "texas, one state under god, one and indivisible." now i don't mind saying "under god" every day in school, but it strikes me as rediculous that someone actually went through the trouble of changing it when it was just fine the way it was. is nothing good or complete anymore without "god" in it? and the addition doesn't do anything for the pledge except to assert a single religion. like duck said, to have "one state/nation under god," implies a country unified under one religion, when there are actually many religions.

mabey you could give me some specific examples where god has been removed that you think was a mistake... but as for seperation in general, i think it is important to keep everything balanced, where someone's beliefs are not forced onto someone who doesn't share that beleif. it is not trying to discriminate against christianity, i think it is meant to keep everyone religiously equal by taking religion out of the equation.

Astreja · 04-25-2008, 12:05 AM

In my opinion, separation of church and state performs several important functions in civil society:

First, and most important: It puts the religious and non-religious on an equal footing in relation to the secular government.
It dispels the illusion of power-by-divine-fiat that has plagued so many governments throughout history.
It protects non-believers from being forced to utter oaths to something they consider imaginary.

Oh, and it's the Establishment Clause that sets out the ground rules for church-state separation in the United States.

romansh · 04-25-2008, 12:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Astreja

In my opinion, separation of church and state performs several important functions in civil society:

First, and most important: It puts the religious and non-religious on an equal footing in relation to the secular government.
It dispels the illusion of power-by-divine-fiat that has plagued so many governments throughout history.
It protects non-believers from being forced to utter oaths to something they consider imaginary.

It protects one religion from another.

buzz2 · 04-25-2008, 07:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by romansh

Quote:

Originally Posted by Astreja

In my opinion, separation of church and state performs several important functions in civil society:

First, and most important: It puts the religious and non-religious on an equal footing in relation to the secular government.
It dispels the illusion of power-by-divine-fiat that has plagued so many governments throughout history.
It protects non-believers from being forced to utter oaths to something they consider imaginary.

It protects one religion from another.

Well, since you and the poster before you live in Canada (a socialist country anyway) what would you know about US Constitution anyway? I'm not taking a shot at yall. Just wondering. Do your government schrools teach US policy and history?
There's this guy, Michael Newdow (you spell it). He's down here wasting taxpayers $ filing lawsuits to get our $ changed, so that the words "In GOD We Trust" is taken off. Trying to remove GOD from ANY public view, and so on and so forth. To me... this is frivolous and petty. HE is the one that should just get over it already. I mean really!!! This country was founded on Judeo-Christian beliefs. THAT, no one can deny. The law makers should not have to bow down to a tiny minority and change something that's been here since the beginning over 200 years ago. I don't see where it says you must change something just because this guy is offended. Maybe the Christians are offended by the actions of him and his kind. Does that matter? Or do we take a back seat to atheism. If the sight of a crucifix or the word GOD offends anyone, then just don't look at it!!!! The Constitution, nor the Bill of Rights have no provision for your right to "not be offended". GET OVER IT!!!

duck · 04-25-2008, 07:38 AM

Buzz, you are carrying a revisionist view of the Founding Father's intentions for the Republic.

Those minorities are not "tiny". I agree that the few who would remove the Ten Commandments from public property or remove the references to a higher authority tend to go too far, but so do those that would have me teach the bible in my classroom. Its all about balance, and keeping the theocratic views of the larger groups out of people's private lives.

buzz2 · 04-25-2008, 08:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by duck

Buzz, you are carrying a revisionist view of the Founding Father's intentions for the Republic.

Those minorities are not "tiny". I agree that the few who would remove the Ten Commandments from public property or remove the references to a higher authority tend to go too far, but so do those that would have me teach the bible in my classroom. Its all about balance, and keeping the theocratic views of the larger groups out of people's private lives.

Hey Duck,
I agree with you about the fanatics on BOTH sides of the belief aisle. They are ruining it for everyone. And yes, comparitively speeking, it IS tiny. Take into consideration the population. Broken down, non-believers are a very small minority. At least the ADMITTED non-believers anyway.
As for the revisionist remark. If you read the Constitution, there are numerous references to GOD. Same with the Bill of Rights. Example: how about there are certain inailiable rights endowed by our Creator. I probably didn't get it exactly right, or spell so good, but I got the jist of it right. Get a copy of those two documents from the web and read up. See ya.

duck · 04-25-2008, 08:19 AM

Please don't lecture me on the Constitution. Thanks.

We have to remember, even where minority opinions exist, we have to have a government where all are equal under the law. A believer cannot be held to be more equal even though that is the majority view.

**WilliamBlue** · 04-25-2008, 09:55 AM

I think the most important part of keeping it separate is that the country is not allowed to become a religious state, if it were allowed then eventually we could end up having one religion dictate the laws that govern our lives, as an example see Iran. You may say that this is an extreme and I would agree, but if the country took that path then over time who knows what could happen... I am definitely for the separation and I am very glad that the courts have interpreted it so.

Besides that, I put the christian fundamentalist on the same level as the muslim fundamentalist, they are both nuts. Mostly the christian fundamentalist are the ones pushing for the integration, the mere thought of it makes me shiver.