If no seperation of church & state....

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

  1. ampaterry

    ampaterry *TFF Admin Staff Chaplain* Staff Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2008
    Messages:
    7,646
    Location:
    West Tennessee
    I believe if we MUST err, it should be on the side of separation.
    If the twits in DC can't tell the difference between Baptist vs Episcopal and Christian vs Islam, it IS better if they avoid the topic completely.

    You're right, CJ about it being a two-way street.
    We wanted to assure that other countries had fair elections, and did that through the power of the UN.
    Now we have UN observers nosing into OUR elections!
  2. markfh

    markfh New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2008
    Messages:
    200
    You're wrong. "Establishment" as referred to by the founders was a direct response to the Church of England which was an "established" religion dictated by the state.

    The founders did NOT want religion to be excluded from government.

    Not allowing political speech in churches violates the 1st amendment.
  3. WHSmithIV

    WHSmithIV Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2012
    Messages:
    4,660
    Location:
    Moore, Idaho
    I don't see any reason for churches to avoid the topic of politics. They are under the rule of the same government as the people and their members, including the preachers vote also.

    I also see every reason for the government to stay out of religion. Banning the pledge of allegiance in schools though is going too far. If some atheist parent objects to the pledge of allegiance stating 'one nation under God' fine - they can tell their kid not to say it but the kid should stand with the rest of the class out of respect for the country anyway.
  4. ampaterry

    ampaterry *TFF Admin Staff Chaplain* Staff Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2008
    Messages:
    7,646
    Location:
    West Tennessee
    The break-point is that a church with 501(c)3 status cannot officially endorse a candidate, nor can they speak against a specific candidate, or they are violating the tax-exempt agreement with the government. They cannot put something like this on their church sign, print it in their bulletin, nor can the pastor say such from the pulpit.

    To say they must avoid politics altogether is ludicrous; politics and religion are so entertwined that the two cannot be separated.
    Abortion.
    Gays.
    Wars.
    Food stamps.
    Welfare.
    corporal punishment of children.
    Self defense.
    Possession of weapons.
    And a hundred more.
    Political issues all, and each one is deeply involved in Religion as well.
  5. edprocoat

    edprocoat New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2012
    Messages:
    3
    Location:
    Ohio
    Actually Gunny it not even close to the same thing. What it truly means is that religion and the practise of it and those who practise are free from government intervention, that was true until Obama came along and decided that all christians should pay for " health services " that they find morally objectionable thereby ignoring the constitution once again.

    ed
  6. jack404

    jack404 Former Guest

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2010
    Messages:
    17,607
    Location:
    Australia
    Welcome Ed !
  7. BlackEagle

    BlackEagle Well-Known Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2011
    Messages:
    3,975
    Location:
    UK
    Ed, welcome to the forum. Lots of good discussion here, among good friends who care for each other, who know guns and are happy to help people out. This place is addicting. Enjoy.
  8. CampingJosh

    CampingJosh Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2007
    Messages:
    5,307
    Location:
    Indiana
    Which is worse, to declare the Church of England to be the state religion but do nothing about it (as the UK today), or to not have an "established" state religion but to show favoritism to one religious group over others?

    What is an "established" state religion but a religious group that is favored over others? Whether declared or not, favoring any religious group over others is establishing a religion.

    Your first point there is debatable, though I agree with you on it.

    The second is absolutely correct. What freedom of speech is there if not free political speech by absolutely everyone?
    Last edited: Nov 5, 2012
  9. whirley

    whirley New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2008
    Messages:
    542
    If you read early American history, you'll find that the "established church" was supported by the government. Also no other religious group was allowed to own land or buildings. That was bypassed by electing members of the congregation as the property owners. When they became too old, they resigned and younger members were elected in their place. Church groups were not allowed to incorporate until Congress passed enabling laws about 1810. Our Constitution doesn't allow the "state" to give financial support to any religious group, but it also forbids government from interfering with any group in the practice of their religion. That's where it gets sticky, because some people insist that allowing religious grooups to use publicly owned facilities, even for such things as a ball game is a violation of the religious clause. That goes way back where none of the religious groups liked each other very much. For example, in many churches you will occasionally hear the ministers rant about the early Roman Church in the 14th century chaining bibles to the pillars so people couldn't take them. Actually true. A bible at that time represented the life work of perhaps 20 monks, were rare and valuable and few people could read anyway. The first book printed by Gutenberg was a bible.
  10. CampingJosh

    CampingJosh Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2007
    Messages:
    5,307
    Location:
    Indiana
    Many state governments did have official religions for decades.

    Of course, the 14th Amendment changed the whole nature of the Constitution, making it a limit on state governments that were previously limited only by their own constitutions and their people. The stuff previously disallowed to Congress now applies to all government in this country.
  11. 45Auto

    45Auto Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2008
    Messages:
    1,232
    In the 1700's, our founding fathers were well aware Europa's religious wars and persecutions. At that time, the Church of England was at best a propaganda tool for King George.

    A man of faith would long for a church to build his relationship with the lord rather than an instrument of state opression and controle.
  12. 45Auto

    45Auto Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2008
    Messages:
    1,232
    To expand upon the original question, if the Official State Religion was ......... Morman (for example)............ what would change in the USA, if anything?
  13. ampaterry

    ampaterry *TFF Admin Staff Chaplain* Staff Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2008
    Messages:
    7,646
    Location:
    West Tennessee
    1. Tax money would no longer be spent to fund abortions.
    2. Tax money would no longer fund "art" produced by the likes of Maplethorp or Sauron.
    4. Our relationship with Israel would be rock solid.
    5. We would quit kissing the behind of Muslims.
    6. We would stop all the multicultural hogwash.
    7. Education would gain an entirely new emphasis.
    8. All citizens would be encouraged to keep a two year stock of food on hand.

    Gosh, that would be horrible, wouldn't it?
  14. nosreme

    nosreme Guest

    If no seperation (sic) of church and state in the US:
    - scientific literacy would would become a thing of the past
    - medical and scientific research would stagnate and regress. American medicine would become third rate. Diseases presently under control with immunizations would see exponential, society-threatening resurgences.
    - society would become increasingly dumbed down as critical thinking is forced out of education
    - non-religious parents would be driven to home-school their children in order to keep them away from religious-centric indoctrination in public schools
    - there would be religious tests for public office and public and private employment and fierce inter-religious battles, some violent in the tradition of religions throughout the ages, for predominance
    - laws would be enacted to fulfill religious agendas...same inter-religion battles as described above
    - "free speech" would not extend to criticism of religions, religious practices, or the religious. Censorship would be rampant.
    - non-religious people would be shunned, persecuted, and prosecuted
    - the internet, which has undoubtedly caused the rapid awakening and long-overdue expansion and visibility of the non-religious, would come under state control
    - the government would fund religions
    - society would be irreparably fractured
    - the US would become more of the laughingstock and butt of jokes of the civilized world more than is now the case
    - etc, etc...benefits to US society of having a theistic state: None whatever

    "Separation of church and state" is simply a plain-language description of the Constitution's Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. What "establishment" means, under our constitutional and legal system, is what the courts--particularly the Supreme Court--say it means. What they say it means is essentially "separation."
    Last edited by a moderator: Nov 10, 2012
  15. BlackEagle

    BlackEagle Well-Known Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2011
    Messages:
    3,975
    Location:
    UK
    I've been watching this and thinking about it since I saw the OP.

    I can't give all the answer I would like to give, but here's a start. Whole libraries have been written on the relationship between church and state and people have debated that subject for centuries.

    Samuel Rutherford wrote Lex Rex (the Law and the King) for the King of England back in the 1600's to explain what the relationship should be between the church and state. The king later had the book publicly burned.

    "The book defends the rule of law and the lawfulness of defensive wars (including pre-emptive wars) and advocates limited government and constitutionalism in politics and the "Two Kingdoms" theory of Church-State relations (which advocated distinct realms of church and state but opposed religious toleration)." (Wikipedia, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lex,_Rex )

    When Joshua was standing looking over the promised land on the eve of the conquest (Joshua 5) he saw a man with a drawn sword in his hand. As a commander, he asked this warrior "whose side are you on, ours or theirs?" The warrior answered in effect, that he asked the wrong question. The warrior was the commander of the Lord's army. "Are you on my side?"

    What denomination this country would be is perhaps the wrong question. There were no denominations in the New Testament church, although Paul chastises the Corinthians because some claimed to be "of Paul", others of Apollos, and others of Christ only. What there was however, was a group of people dedicated to spreading the good news of the Gospel, to carrying out the Great Commission.

    Jesus Christ is described in the Bible as being prophet, priest, and king. But He himself said to Pilate, "My kingdom is not of this world." His kingdom is one designed to bring about what we pray for when we ask for "Thy Kingdom come, Thy Will be done on earth as it is in Heaven."

    Christ's Kingdom has been described as a Mediatorial dominion, designed by God to be the channel or conduit by which He works in the world, through nature, the individual, family, church, and the state. God made Christ head over all things for the church...Ephesians 1:22.

    Long story short, in an ideal world there would not be any particular religion or denomination. There would be a nation trying its best to find and put into practice God's standards for morality, honesty, justice, business accumen, care for each other, right use of scientific discoveries and knowledge, and any other issues that come up. The Bible talks a lot about each of these things. For starters, read through Proverbs. God invented man; He wrote an user's manual, called the Bible.

    God is not interested in suppressing society or a country. He wants people to live a full, prosperous, fruitful, and enjoyable life.

    There are a many historical examples of what happens when the state tries to become the church, and when the church tries to become the state. Communism has become the religion for many in this world; Nazism substituted government for God. So did the Roman emperors.

    We can see the turmoil and repression in many middle east countries today where a form of religion is trying to rule the state. But that is religious people trying to run a country, not a country trying to find what God wants for it.

    Apologies for the long post, but, well, 45Auto, you asked a big question. I'm only suggesting some ideas and can't begin to do justice to your question. Thanks for asking. My brain is beginning to hurt from thinking about this.
  16. ampaterry

    ampaterry *TFF Admin Staff Chaplain* Staff Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2008
    Messages:
    7,646
    Location:
    West Tennessee
    I question why someone who is so opposed to religion would come into the religious discussions here? If your intent is simply to stir up trouble, you will find success but will not enjoy the consequences.

    Every single point you made above is proven to be false by one simple fact.
    The united states, when it was formed and throughout most of it's history, did NOT hold the present view of "separation of church and state."
    There are Judao-Christian themes and writings on most federal buildings built more than just a few years ago.
    The public school system used to use Judao-Christian writings in their lessons.
    We chose "In God We Trust" as our national motto.

    And every single point you made was proven false as we grew to be the greatest nation on earth, and led the world in education and scientific research.

    Today, we have fallen from this leadership - and today we DO have the separation you speak of.

    Israel has a firm amalgamation of church and state, and has had from their formation. And Israel seems to be doing quite well in research worthy of Nobel prizes.

    The problem is, people who wish to repress the United States back into an atheistic state continue to point to Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan and other such countries, claiming THEY are an example of what a religious state becomes, and this is simply not true. What these nations prove is what happens when a nation accepts a religion that teaches opposition to education, glorification of war and conflict, and the subjugation of women.

    If we want to see the USA florish once more, we will not have a "church state", but we need a state that is ACCEPTING of the Judao-Christian teachings, and firmly OPPOSES the growth of Islam within it's borders.
  17. nosreme

    nosreme Guest

    ?? Question was asked and I assume sought forthright opinions rather than just those consistent with prevailing sentiments. Those are my beliefs, straightforwardly stated, in response to the OP's question. "Stiring up trouble" here would be in the eye of (and perhaps generated by) the beholder. As to the threat dire consequences for responding frankly to the original question...why stir up trouble?
    Last edited by a moderator: Nov 10, 2012
  18. ampaterry

    ampaterry *TFF Admin Staff Chaplain* Staff Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2008
    Messages:
    7,646
    Location:
    West Tennessee
    Your answers to the OP indicate you are opposed to religion of any sort, and leave absolutely no doubt about that due to the horrid consequences you gave of a religious state.
    This raises the question of why you are in the religious discussions at all, and that is the question I posed.

    Let me give you a simile;
    Let us suppose that a member posted in the handgun section asking for opinions of the S&W Model 29.
    So, a James Brady type registers here, goes to that thread, and TRASHES this weapon based on their opinion that NO ONE should own a handgun at all.
    Would their opinion be of ANY help WRT the OP?

    Does that make it clearer to you?
    IOW, those that have atheistic beliefs, OPPOSED to religion of any sort, need to stay out of the religious area here.
  19. Twicepop

    Twicepop Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2012
    Messages:
    795
    Location:
    NW Ohio
    Show me if you would please where it says that we have a separation of church and state.
  20. nosreme

    nosreme Guest

    The answer to that standard challenge appears at the bottom of my response above to the OP, and in other responses further up.
    Last edited by a moderator: Nov 11, 2012
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