Separation of Church and State: Myths and Facts

The Founders Tried to Protect Us From Religious Extremists

America's founders deliberately kept god out of our Constitution because they didn't want a theocracy. But many Americans now try to force all of us to practice their faith, and prevent some from practicing different faiths. Nothing is more un-American.

James Madison and Gouverneur Morris wrote our Constitution from scratch in 1787, using pen and paper. There had never before been such a document. They could have put anything they wanted into it. They chose not to use the words "god", "Christ", "Christian", or "Jesus" anywhere in it. They chose not to require an official religion. In fact, they forbid the government to require a religious test of any person who holds public office.

In 1789, they proposed the Bill of Rights.  The first amendment forbids government to establish a religion. Now, if they had wanted a Christian nation, surely they would have required it, and required religious tests for public servants. If they had wanted a theocracy, surely they would have said so.

Since so many of our schools don't bother to teach the Constitution, here is the text of the First Amendment:
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.

Strident, tyrannical "christians" like to proclaim that the phrase "separation of church and state" does not appear in the Constitution. They're right; it doesn't. They claim that as "proof" that the separation doesn't exist. They're wrong. The phrases "three equal branches of government", "innocent until proven guilty", and "majority rule" aren't there either, but the concepts do exist in our government. 

Read More ...
http://voices.yahoo.com/separation-church-state-myths-facts-12227230.html?cat=17

 

[Sisteract]

 

Quoting mikiemom:

bump because this can't be expressed often enough.

 

 

[Della529]

 If you like my reply, can or will you explain?

Quoting Della529:

 Read the Danbury letters.

 

[12hellokitty]

What does separation of church and state have to do with individuals voting according to their religious beliefs?  

Quoting mikiemom:

No it was to ensure people like  you couldn't make laws to suit their religious fanaticism

Quoting TranquilMind:

 Strident, tyrannical non-Christians like to proclaim that separation of church and state means protect the state from the Church. 

Knowledgeable people know that the intention was the precise opposite - to protect the church from the state. 

 

[romalove]

Quoting 12hellokitty:

What does separation of church and state have to do with individuals voting according to their religious beliefs?  

Quoting mikiemom:

No it was to ensure people like  you couldn't make laws to suit their religious fanaticism

Quoting TranquilMind:

 Strident, tyrannical non-Christians like to proclaim that separation of church and state means protect the state from the Church. 

Knowledgeable people know that the intention was the precise opposite - to protect the church from the state. 

 

She didn't say anything about voting, she said "make laws", you know, like in legislatures and Congress.  All the stuff no one votes on but themselves.

[romalove]

It doesn't matter if the separation is to protect the Church from government interference or not.  The result of a separation is to keep things separate.  As long as the government is secular and the people are as religious (or not) as they choose to be, all is good.

[12hellokitty]

Quoting romalove:

It doesn't matter if the separation is to protect the Church from government interference or not.  The result of a separation is to keep things separate.  As long as the government is secular and the people are as religious (or not) as they choose to be, all is good.

Many secular beliefs are no different in how they are formed, supported and followed then religious beliefs.  I agree the government should not promote religion, but it should also not promote religious secularism.  

[romalove]

Quoting 12hellokitty:

Quoting romalove:

It doesn't matter if the separation is to protect the Church from government interference or not.  The result of a separation is to keep things separate.  As long as the government is secular and the people are as religious (or not) as they choose to be, all is good.

Many secular beliefs are no different in how they are formed, supported and followed then religious beliefs.  I agree the government should not promote religion, but it should also not promote religious secularism.  

Religious secularism?

No religion.

None.

Not in government.

I am not talking "beliefs".  I am talking secular as in being separate from religion.  

People are religious.  You cannot separate out a person's religion from the person themself.  This means that individuals, and individuals who are legislators, are going to vote their consciences.

The government, though, has no religion, endorses no religion, and should not even have the appearance of doing so.  This country, while still overwhelmingly Christian, has many religions and some people without any religion at all.  The government represents all of us, and therefore should not seem to be favoring any one group.  

I am not going to entertain a discussion on religious secularism right now, for a variety of reasons, chief among them I think it dilutes what I am saying with distractions that needn't be there.  You can call anything religious that you want to, but unless it involves worship of some God or gods, I am not going to consider it actually religious.

[12hellokitty]

Quoting romalove:

Quoting 12hellokitty:

Quoting romalove:

It doesn't matter if the separation is to protect the Church from government interference or not.  The result of a separation is to keep things separate.  As long as the government is secular and the people are as religious (or not) as they choose to be, all is good.

Many secular beliefs are no different in how they are formed, supported and followed then religious beliefs.  I agree the government should not promote religion, but it should also not promote religious secularism.  

Religious secularism?

No religion.

None.

Not in government.

I am not talking "beliefs".  I am talking secular as in being separate from religion.  

People are religious.  You cannot separate out a person's religion from the person themself.  This means that individuals, and individuals who are legislators, are going to vote their consciences.

The government, though, has no religion, endorses no religion, and should not even have the appearance of doing so.  This country, while still overwhelmingly Christian, has many religions and some people without any religion at all.  The government represents all of us, and therefore should not seem to be favoring any one group.  

I am not going to entertain a discussion on religious secularism right now, for a variety of reasons, chief among them I think it dilutes what I am saying with distractions that needn't be there.  You can call anything religious that you want to, but unless it involves worship of some God or gods, I am not going to consider it actually religious.

Are their ways you view the government as having the appearance of endorsing religion that might not be so obvious to those who are religious?  

[romalove]

Quoting 12hellokitty:

Quoting romalove:

Quoting 12hellokitty:

Quoting romalove:

It doesn't matter if the separation is to protect the Church from government interference or not.  The result of a separation is to keep things separate.  As long as the government is secular and the people are as religious (or not) as they choose to be, all is good.

Many secular beliefs are no different in how they are formed, supported and followed then religious beliefs.  I agree the government should not promote religion, but it should also not promote religious secularism.  

Religious secularism?

No religion.

None.

Not in government.

I am not talking "beliefs".  I am talking secular as in being separate from religion.  

People are religious.  You cannot separate out a person's religion from the person themself.  This means that individuals, and individuals who are legislators, are going to vote their consciences.

The government, though, has no religion, endorses no religion, and should not even have the appearance of doing so.  This country, while still overwhelmingly Christian, has many religions and some people without any religion at all.  The government represents all of us, and therefore should not seem to be favoring any one group.  

I am not going to entertain a discussion on religious secularism right now, for a variety of reasons, chief among them I think it dilutes what I am saying with distractions that needn't be there.  You can call anything religious that you want to, but unless it involves worship of some God or gods, I am not going to consider it actually religious.

Are their ways you view the government as having the appearance of endorsing religion that might not be so obvious to those who are religious?  

All religious people don't view things the same.

I certainly can't predict how other people view things, so this question is impossible to answer.

I do know that from your responses you can find religion in secularity, and I do not.

[prommy]

 

Quoting yourspecialkid:

 Oh cool.  Pat is a professional Progressive.

http://www.patomalley-consulting.com/Pages/default.aspx

 

 

 OH goody, I do have access to sweet peas and...