Separation of Church and State

Separation of Church and State (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

daddyneedsluv -> Separation of Church and State (3/21/2012 1:00:00 PM)
With all of the current bickering in regard to a religious organizations' rights and how government cannot intrude on their moral structure and behavior, I am curious if anyone has taken the time to look at the opposite side of the coin. What are the parameters that define a "Non-Profit Religious Organization" and what are the rules and guidelines for such an entity? What are the penalties for such an organization getting involved in the political system and policies? And further more, what is the true meaning of "Separation of Church and State"? Keep your church out of my State and my State will stay out of your church. It goes both ways. Oh wait, that depends on whether you're Right or Left doesn't it? What about those of us that are dead smack in the middle? You know, the overwhelming vast majority of Americans that are just trying to live the American Dream.

Kirata -> RE: Separation of Church and State (3/21/2012 1:27:39 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: daddyneedsluv Keep your church out of my State and my State will stay out of your church. It goes both ways. No it doesn't go both ways, and you should be glad that it doesn't. The protection of religion is limited. The only debate is where the line is. K.

CaptJosh -> RE: Separation of Church and State (3/21/2012 3:08:34 PM)
The separation of church and state isn't even something enacted in law. It's a phrase used by Thomas Jefferson in a letter to a church association. The only thing in the law of the land, and not even the original law of the land, but the first of the original 10 amendments to the Constitution of the United States of America, is, and I 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." The law of the land, as far as the Constitution goes, is that Congress doesn't get to establish a state church or other religion, and they don't get to make laws that ban religious observance. That said, I don't think that if someone came up with or revived a religion out there that involved human sacrifice would get even a congresscritter to back it up on grounds of freedom of religion, much less John Q. Public. I await with bated breath the smartassery about my extreme example of a religious practice that most people wouldn't back up. Because I'm sure SOMEONE will have to go all tongue in cheek about it. [:D]

Kirata -> RE: Separation of Church and State (3/21/2012 3:37:00 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: CaptJosh I don't think that if someone came up with or revived a religion out there that involved human sacrifice would get even a congresscritter to back it up on grounds of freedom of religion, much less John Q. Public. Hell, I'm fully prepared to blow away anybody that gets the idea into their head of sacrificing a certain black cat of my acquaintance. K.

CaptJosh -> RE: Separation of Church and State (3/21/2012 4:01:26 PM)
But of course. After all, a dog is just a dog, but a cat is a purrrrrrson.

Kirata -> RE: Separation of Church and State (3/21/2012 4:04:10 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: CaptJosh But of course. After all, a dog is just a dog, but a cat is a purrrrrrson. Heh. I just noticed your avatar. [:)] K.

SpiritedRadiance -> RE: Separation of Church and State (3/21/2012 4:57:32 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: CaptJosh The separation of church and state isn't even something enacted in law. It's a phrase used by Thomas Jefferson in a letter to a church association. The only thing in the law of the land, and not even the original law of the land, but the first of the original 10 amendments to the Constitution of the United States of America, is, and I 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." The law of the land, as far as the Constitution goes, is that Congress doesn't get to establish a state church or other religion, and they don't get to make laws that ban religious observance. That said, I don't think that if someone came up with or revived a religion out there that involved human sacrifice would get even a congresscritter to back it up on grounds of freedom of religion, much less John Q. Public. I await with bated breath the smartassery about my extreme example of a religious practice that most people wouldn't back up. Because I'm sure SOMEONE will have to go all tongue in cheek about it. [:D] Its completely illegal to sacrifice small children, annoying teenagers, and misogynists... there for my religion has been violated. I want my money back... The point is there a difference between a church, and a business.. plain and simple, people want to be both and get upset when they cant be.

Owner59 -> RE: Separation of Church and State (3/21/2012 5:29:53 PM)
Maybe it`s time we take away the religious tax exemption and make them pay their share of the burden. That`s also.......not in the Constitution.

Iamsemisweet -> RE: Separation of Church and State (3/21/2012 6:02:22 PM)
No kidding. The church was certainly willing to avail themselves of the federal courts to declare bankruptcy to evade the judgments against them from sex abuse victims. Doesn't seem quite fair, since they don't pay for those courts. quote: ORIGINAL: Owner59 Maybe it`s time we take away the religious tax exemption and make them pay their share of the burden. That`s also.......not in the Constitution.

daddyneedsluv -> RE: Separation of Church and State (3/21/2012 7:09:02 PM)
I find it funny that no one is looking into the rules and regulations that go along with being deemed a "Non-Profit/Not for Profit Religious Organization". The laws are pretty clear cut in regard to what can be done and what con not be done by such an organization. I am pretty sure a few people would get a kick out of how many, dare I say most, religious organization should have lost their status long ago. These organizations should be treated as normal corporations, considering they can't keep within the lines of the laws they use to get this specific status. In regard to the bankruptcy statement............. The government should have disavowed the church or simply blocked the legal movement of the church. Yet again, victims got the raw end of the deal and the church was allowed to further their actions without oversight. If the government is going to continue to grow and control everything, why can't they do so with the churches?

GotSteel -> RE: Separation of Church and State (3/21/2012 9:16:31 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: CaptJosh The separation of church and state isn't even something enacted in law. It's in plenty of case law at this point.

Page: [1]

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875