If no seperation of church & state....

Discussion in 'Religious Discussions' started by 45Auto, Nov 1, 2012.

  1. 45Auto

    45Auto Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2008
    Messages:
    1,232
    Which religion would become the official state religion of he USA if we no longer have the seperation of church & state? Of course it would be Christian, but which one? should we sellect our state religion by voting, or maybe it should be the religion of our president. I'm sure there must be some interesting ideas.
  2. jack404

    jack404 Former Guest

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2010
    Messages:
    17,607
    Location:
    Australia
    with the president you have now , islam would be the state religion , sharia the law of the land and this forum shut down its members hunted to extinction
  3. 45Auto

    45Auto Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2008
    Messages:
    1,232
    I've seen him drink beer and eat pork chops. If he's a follower of Islam, he aint into sharia law. ;)
  4. 45Auto

    45Auto Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2008
    Messages:
    1,232
    BTW, Jack, did Australia ever have a state religion?
  5. tcox4freedom

    tcox4freedom Well-Known Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2009
    Messages:
    1,302
    Location:
    South Carolina USA
    If I'm not mistaken, it is perfectly ok to engage in forbidden practices in order to gain power so you can eventually force people into submission; or defeat them.

    NOTE:
    There is only one TRUE form of Christianity! Though it may manifest itself in different "denominations".

    If the government ever took control over religion, we would most likely see the rise of the "tyranny". This would once again lead to people seeking TRUE freedom in Christ. (Which IS the reason the USA was formed in the first place.)

    -
    Last edited: Nov 1, 2012
  6. RunningOnMT

    RunningOnMT New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2008
    Messages:
    4,720
    Location:
    Akron, Ohio
    Southern Baptist...cause I say so.:lmao2:
  7. markfh

    markfh New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2008
    Messages:
    200
    Just curious. Could one of the learned ones here please direct me to the paragraph in the Constitution or Bill of Rights where it says there is a "separation of church and state".
  8. jedwil

    jedwil Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2009
    Messages:
    2,917
    Location:
    Texas Hill Country
    SCOTUS and lower court rulings, from what I can discern.
  9. GunnyGene

    GunnyGene New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2012
    Messages:
    1,959
    It is not explicitly stated in that manner, but is implied in the First Amendment. "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..." . Essentially that means the same thing.

    It was not always thus, and in fact we went thru several periods during the early colonial days of permitting/rescinding freedom of religion.
  10. markfh

    markfh New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2008
    Messages:
    200
    That's all well and good but where's the beef?

    Answer: There is NO separation of church and state in the constitution or bill of rights.

    What people usually refer to is the "establishment clause" and contorting that to the position that there is a separation of church and state is a perversion of the original intent.
  11. markfh

    markfh New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2008
    Messages:
    200
    No, it is NOT "essentially the same thing". They intended only that the state would not "establish" a state religion.

    Let me add that words have meaning and they must be understood in context.
    Last edited: Nov 1, 2012
  12. jack404

    jack404 Former Guest

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2010
    Messages:
    17,607
    Location:
    Australia
    we where a Christian nation when i first left for Cambodia, somewhere between then and Rwanda we became a multi cultural nation and the attack on Christianity and Christian morals began.. the following year we had our first gay mardi gras

    Taqqiya and kitman are islamic doctrines that allows lies deception enjoyment of forbidden things if your long term goal is to advance islam

    look up how the 9/11 hijackers lived and on the strict instructions they had to make themselves "clean" again before they got on the planes Zakowi was very very strong about that , read it yourself , they have it all documented

    look at the steps they took

    first they got the ok from a senior imam and a jurga ( a group of lesser imam's) who agreed it was ok as it was for the glory of islam and a attack against its enemies

    then they had a series of acts they had to do to stay clean while they where doing the harum ( forbidden or unclean) things and again before they went on the planes , to ensure they would be accepted by allah

    they used hookers drugs booze all for the glory of allah

    so by the doctrine of kitman and the use of taqqiya

    all is ok
    Last edited: Nov 1, 2012
  13. WHSmithIV

    WHSmithIV Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2012
    Messages:
    4,664
    Location:
    Moore, Idaho
    In a letter dated January 1, 1802 Thomas Jefferson wrote this to the Danbury Baptist Association in Connecticut:

    "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 & State"

    This was published in a Massachusetts newspaper at the time. Jefferson's metaphor has been cited by the Supreme Court a couple times.
  14. jedwil

    jedwil Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2009
    Messages:
    2,917
    Location:
    Texas Hill Country
    The "beef" is the power of the Supreme Court and the agencies that enforce "their" interpretations of the court rulings. You have no "beef" with me. I certainly believe in the concept of our religious roots and the freedoms to believe and express any of those beliefs.
  15. ampaterry

    ampaterry *TFF Admin Staff Chaplain* Staff Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2008
    Messages:
    7,646
    Location:
    West Tennessee
    IMHO, it is a language thing.

    It is clear to all of us that the second amendment gave ALL the right to bear arms, but those opposed hang on to the word 'milita' to infringe on that right.

    The prohibition against establishing a 'religion' was merely to assure that the state would not declare Baptists or Catholics or some other denomination to be THE church of the US. I do not believe they had any conception that this amendment would one day be used to protect groups outside of the original judao-Christian beliefs of the founders, nor to remove all Judao-Christian references from everything public.

    I surely do wish they would have used more explicit language in BOTH the First and Second amendments to preclude all the twisting that has been done to both over the years - -

    I for one would be overjoyed for the Fed to declare the USA was Judao-Christian or Abrahamic. It sure would solve a lot of the problems we face with this multi-cultural garbage we are embroiled in now -
  16. Double D

    Double D Administrator Staff Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2009
    Messages:
    10,202
    Location:
    North Florida
    Dont kid yourself. Watch what the other hand is doing.....
  17. RunningOnMT

    RunningOnMT New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2008
    Messages:
    4,720
    Location:
    Akron, Ohio
    I think it's usually in Eric Holder's pants...Oops...Can I say that?

    obama_flatmate.jpg
    Last edited: Nov 2, 2012
  18. markfh

    markfh New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2008
    Messages:
    200

    Precisely! Good reason to have someone in office that would appoint conservatives to the Supreme Court that won't find things in the Constitution and Bill of Rights that aren't.
  19. CampingJosh

    CampingJosh Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2007
    Messages:
    5,307
    Location:
    Indiana
    Showing particular favor on one religious group over another is establishment.

    I am quite happy not to use the government's PA systems to announce a prayer since it keeps the government out of my church.

    It's a two-way street. I for one am fine with that street being barricaded. [​IMG]
  20. Sergeant Major

    Sergeant Major New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2012
    Messages:
    6
    We have to be carful with seperation of church and state. It must remain seperate, but it has to come from both sides. I'm a believer, but I strongly feel that the church must stay out of politics..... You can't gry foul and say seperation of church and state, then as a church get right in the middle of it everytime somethings comes up. The preacher should not spend all sunday service telling his flock who to vote for. That maybe should stay seperate time and be spent in worship to our lord...
Similar Threads
Forum Title Date
Religious Discussions Does nepotism occur in your church? Aug 14, 2013
Religious Discussions Lots of resources on Church and State May 20, 2013
Religious Discussions Wolves in church Apr 27, 2013
Religious Discussions What's the Deacon's Role in Your Church? Apr 25, 2013
Religious Discussions A funny thing happened on the way to church this morning... Jan 21, 2013