Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

why do you believe in sepration of church and state

there is no such thing it is not in the consitution , the supreme court ruled time and time again that we are a christain nation , the constution gives us religous freedom but it does not say that you can not rule from your beliefs after al it is christian values that gives you freedoms that is why countries that are not founded by christains are not free


Asked by almts915 at 4:19 PM on Nov. 11, 2008 in Religion & Beliefs

Level 1 (0 Credits)
This question is closed.
Answers (44)
  • tha , the court the court once again the court is not the law makers which the whole deal is the court is uncontitutional by even making the ruling so i reject your answer

    Answer by Anonymous at 4:40 PM on Nov. 11, 2008

  • Because we are a country that supposedly accepts all religions, colors, languages, beliefs etc.

    Just because you may believe one thing is right doesnt mean the rest of the country will agree. I think it needs to be seperated. When your president or in senate or any part of government i think you should KNOW that peoples opinions and beliefs are going to be different which is why i think a lot of things that pass need to be decided by the people.

    Answer by KelsoBabeyy at 4:23 PM on Nov. 11, 2008

  • I have a post on this but to put it simply it ensures that we are free to practice our religion of choice without government interference likewise it keeps one set religion from ruling and forcing their beliefs on others. It's a duel purpose clause.

    Answer by KristiS11384 at 4:27 PM on Nov. 11, 2008

  • 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.

    The phrase "seperation of church and state" was penned by Benjamin Franklin in a letter in 1878 as a way to describe the first amendment. The founding fathers were VERY clear that this is NOT a Christian nation, and I would love to see links to these supreme court rulings.

    By ruling this country with the bible, hundreds of religions and hundreds of thousands of people are being repressed. Again, I would love to see links to these supreme court rulings. Please.

    Answer by SamanthaAgain at 4:30 PM on Nov. 11, 2008

  • you see the forfathers want said we are a christain nation and we have the right to worship as we see fit catholic , baptis , pentacost, quaker and such but even the supreme court ruled back in 1810 that religions like muslim are imposters and thoe you have the right to practice what you want we are based on Jesus and that is why we have the freedoms we do and iran is not a free nation

    Answer by almts915 at 4:37 PM on Nov. 11, 2008

  • McCollum v. Board of Education Dist. 71, 333 U.S. 203 (1948)

    Court finds religious instruction in public schools a violation of the establishment clause and therefore unconstitutional.

    Torcaso v. Watkins, 367 U.S. 488 (1961)

    Court holds that the state of Maryland can not require applicants for public office to swear that they believed in the existence of God. The court unanimously rules that a religious test violates the Establishment Clause.

    Engel v. Vitale, 82 S. Ct. 1261 (1962)

    Any kind of prayer, composed by public school districts, even nondenominational prayer, is unconstitutional government sponsorship of religion.

    Answer by thalassa at 4:37 PM on Nov. 11, 2008

  • Abington School District v. Schempp, 374 U.S. 203 (1963)

    Court finds Bible reading over school intercom unconstitutional and Murray v. Curlett, 374 U.S. 203 (1963) - Court finds forcing a child to participate in Bible reading and prayer unconstitutional.

    Epperson v. Arkansas, 89 S. Ct. 266 (1968)

    State statue banning teaching of evolution is unconstitutional. A state cannot alter any element in a course of study in order to promote a religious point of view. A state's attempt to hide behind a nonreligious motivation will not be given credence unless that state can show a secular reason as the foundation for its actions.


    Answer by thalassa at 4:37 PM on Nov. 11, 2008

  • Wallace v. Jaffree, 105 S. Ct. 2479 (1985)

    State's moment of silence at public school statute is unconstitutional where legislative record reveals that motivation for statute was the encouragement of prayer. Court majority silent on whether "pure" moment of silence scheme, with no bias in favor of prayer or any other mental process, would be constitutional.


    Answer by thalassa at 4:37 PM on Nov. 11, 2008

  • Edwards v. Aquillard, 107 S. Ct. 2573 (1987)

    Unconstitutional for state to require teaching of "creation science" in all instances in which evolution is taught. Statute had a clear religious motivation.

    Lee v. Weisman, 112 S. Ct. 2649 (1992)

    Unconstitutional for a school district to provide any clergy to perform nondenominational prayer at elementary or secondary school graduation. It involves government sponsorship of worship. Court majority was particularly concerned about psychological coercion to which children, as opposed to adults, would be subjected, by having prayers that may violate their beliefs recited at their graduation ceremonies.

    Answer by thalassa at 4:37 PM on Nov. 11, 2008

  • So...

    Since when has the Supreme Court been ruling that this is a "Christian" Nation?

    ...considering they have already ruled in favor of "separation of church and state" as being the basis of the Establishment Clause...

    Answer by thalassa at 4:39 PM on Nov. 11, 2008