Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: Church and State


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Church and State Page: <<   < prev  2 3 [4] 5 6   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Church and State - 12/8/2012 11:47:14 AM   
DomKen


Posts: 19457
Joined: 7/4/2004
From: Chicago, IL
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961

Okay, I hate to tell you people this, there is NO place in the Constitution or Bill of Rights, where it is stated there is a separation of Church and State. It is only stated that there would be no establishment of a state religion, and that citizens have the right to worship as they choose.

The fact that the position of Chaplain exists in every branch of the armed forces as well as in the Senate and House of Representatives, clearly indicate that there is a melding of church and state.

Now, as it was once said by a wise man, "Put that in your peacepipe and smoke it."

Actually there are two parts o the Constitution that make clear that church and state are to be seperate. The ban on religious tests and the first amendment. Jefferson wrote the text and he definitely thought there was a "wall of seperation" enchrined in the document.

As to the nonsensical chaplain argument, the only way chaplains are allowed is that they have to accept chaplains of any and all faiths. That means no endorsement or one over the other.

(in reply to jlf1961)
Profile   Post #: 61
RE: Church and State - 12/8/2012 11:51:17 AM   
Baroana


Posts: 1480
Joined: 11/13/2011
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961

Okay, I hate to tell you people this, there is NO place in the Constitution or Bill of Rights, where it is stated there is a separation of Church and State. It is only stated that there would be no establishment of a state religion, and that citizens have the right to worship as they choose.

The fact that the position of Chaplain exists in every branch of the armed forces as well as in the Senate and House of Representatives, clearly indicate that there is a melding of church and state.

Now, as it was once said by a wise man, "Put that in your peacepipe and smoke it."



Actually, the entire First Amendment states, "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."

This means that the government has to allow everyone to freely practice religion or atheism. It also means that the government cannot endorse one thing over another. Just because the military has chaplains so that soldiers can practice their religions while on active duty does not mean that church and state are melded. If there was such a thing as a chaplain for atheists, they would have one of those too.

(in reply to jlf1961)
Profile   Post #: 62
RE: Church and State - 12/8/2012 11:55:45 AM   
jlf1961


Posts: 14840
Joined: 6/10/2008
From: Somewhere Texas
Status: offline 		I never said there was an endorsement of one religion over another, I just said that as it stands there is a point where church and state are not separate.

While the intent was there, the wording that would guarantee the concept is not.

As it stands it is only a loophole, but loopholes have been exploited before.

The point I am attempting to make is that people have said that "the separation of church and state" is in the constitution. It isnt.

Yes you do not have to take a test on religion to hold office, but there are some opinions that does not separate church and state.

You pointed out that all religions have to be accommodated, that is just in compliance with the clause that there be no state religion or church.

By the way, Thomas Jefferson attended church services that were held IN the Capital Building, again that is not an example of separation.

_____________________________

Boy, it sure would be nice if we had some grenades, don't you think?

You cannot control who comes into your life, but you can control which airlock you throw them out of.

Paranoid Paramilitary Gun Loving Conspiracy Theorist AND EQUAL OPPORTUNI

(in reply to DomKen)
Profile   Post #: 63
RE: Church and State - 12/8/2012 12:00:27 PM   
Baroana


Posts: 1480
Joined: 11/13/2011
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961

I never said there was an endorsement of one religion over another, I just said that as it stands there is a point where church and state are not separate.



If you don't understand where the separation part comes in, then I think you need to lay off that pipe smoking.


quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961

While the intent was there, the wording that would guarantee the concept is not.



Mama say mama saw mama what??????????????


quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961

By the way, Thomas Jefferson attended church services that were held IN the Capital Building, again that is not an example of separation.



Yes, you know why? Because the First Amendment has been violated ever since it was written. Those violations have simply become less and less egregious over the years.

(in reply to jlf1961)
Profile   Post #: 64
RE: Church and State - 12/8/2012 12:17:35 PM   
tazzygirl


Posts: 37833
Joined: 10/12/2007
Status: offline
quote:

I wonder if the reason the concert was at the church was in part because the school's facilities could not accommodate the crowd. At one school where I taught music, we had to have our concerts at an area church because we had no auditorium. The church just allowed us to use the space for free.


We used to hold regional competitions in choir at churches.... was easier to bus kids in there than to try and get to one specific school.

_____________________________

Telling me to take Midol wont help your butthurt.
RIP, my demon-child 5-16-11
Duchess of Dissent 1
Dont judge me because I sin differently than you.
If you want it sugar coated, dont ask me what i think! It would violate TOS.

(in reply to cordeliasub)
Profile   Post #: 65
RE: Church and State - 12/8/2012 12:22:46 PM   
jlf1961


Posts: 14840
Joined: 6/10/2008
From: Somewhere Texas
Status: offline 		As I said in another thread, I am being the devil's advocate here.

Laws have been contested and overturned just on the wording. It is a common legal maneuver. It is why specific laws concerning cyber crime had to be written.

In looking for the words "Separation of Church and State" in the constitution I came across a lot of right wing commentary over the importance of the simple fact that it is not in the Constitution, thus creating a loophole that can be exploited.

Consider this, in this time of designer drugs, a drug cannot be considered illegal until it has been criminalized. There have been drug dealers and suppliers get off on just this technicality.

The legal argument that some groups on the right are presenting is simple, "if it is not clearly stated, then it does not exist. Implying that it exists is not part of the law." And that is the argument that has gotten some people off some pretty heinous crimes through out history.

_____________________________

Boy, it sure would be nice if we had some grenades, don't you think?

You cannot control who comes into your life, but you can control which airlock you throw them out of.

Paranoid Paramilitary Gun Loving Conspiracy Theorist AND EQUAL OPPORTUNI

(in reply to Baroana)
Profile   Post #: 66
RE: Church and State - 12/8/2012 1:02:55 PM   
vincentML


Posts: 9980
Joined: 10/31/2009
Status: offline
quote:

The legal argument that some groups on the right are presenting is simple, "if it is not clearly stated, then it does not exist. Implying that it exists is not part of the law." And that is the argument that has gotten some people off some pretty heinous crimes through out history.

The Supreme Court has a history of case law on Seperation.

(in reply to jlf1961)
Profile   Post #: 67
RE: Church and State - 12/8/2012 2:45:44 PM   
jlf1961


Posts: 14840
Joined: 6/10/2008
From: Somewhere Texas
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

quote:

The legal argument that some groups on the right are presenting is simple, "if it is not clearly stated, then it does not exist. Implying that it exists is not part of the law." And that is the argument that has gotten some people off some pretty heinous crimes through out history.

The Supreme Court has a history of case law on Seperation.



Alright, then explain to me why the FCA (Fellowship of Christian Athletes) can meet on school property?

_____________________________

Boy, it sure would be nice if we had some grenades, don't you think?

You cannot control who comes into your life, but you can control which airlock you throw them out of.

Paranoid Paramilitary Gun Loving Conspiracy Theorist AND EQUAL OPPORTUNI

(in reply to vincentML)
Profile   Post #: 68
RE: Church and State - 12/8/2012 2:47:59 PM   
vincentML


Posts: 9980
Joined: 10/31/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Yachtie


quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen
I don't give a damn about poor people receiving medical care? My annual donation the Doctors without Borders would seem to be at odds with your outrageous lie.


Good for you. Would it displease you if some of those doctors were saving lives of religious people? (thus allowing them to continue spewing their vile religious beliefs you so hate?) Be honest now. For if DWB does good works regardless, how can you discriminate as you do here without being hypocritical? Does Mercy Ships require a religious test prior to care? Your church/state thing, at least in this instance, is a smokescreen.

Thishereboi is right, it's more about "a chance to score one against religion" than your self professed do-goodieness.


I posted earlier in the thread that the fund raising was a good idea but the concert music choice and the involvement of the church stepped over the line. The concert could probably proceed as a cultural event if the music were inclusive of other religions and secular holiday tunes. But that is up for the Court to decide.

I support Ken and anyone else who expresses concern about Seperation. To say an atheist, agnostic, or secularist is motivated by hate in speaking out on a church/state issue to my mind is similar to calling anti-semitic against anyone who speaks out against what Israel is doing to the Palestinians.

The "hate" card is as despicable and an affront to free speech as is the anti-semite card.

Just my

(in reply to Yachtie)
Profile   Post #: 69
RE: Church and State - 12/8/2012 3:58:11 PM   
cordeliasub


Posts: 528
Joined: 11/4/2012
Status: offline 		Here is my take on separation of church and state:

If it doesn't go both ways it is NOT separation. Church should stay out of "the state".....great.
The state should also stay out of church.

If you don't have both, you don't have separation, you have discrimination.

It's like free speech. if you are only free to speak what is "accepted," it isn't free speech.

(in reply to vincentML)
Profile   Post #: 70
RE: Church and State - 12/8/2012 5:25:11 PM   
Kirata


Posts: 15477
Joined: 2/11/2006
From: USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

I do care that they don't force religion upon their patients.

I share your sentiments, but you have not made a case that Mercy Ships is doing that.

K.





< Message edited by Kirata -- 12/8/2012 5:40:37 PM >

(in reply to DomKen)
Profile   Post #: 71
RE: Church and State - 12/8/2012 5:40:18 PM   
Kirata


Posts: 15477
Joined: 2/11/2006
From: USA
Status: offline
~ FR ~

Sometimes it seems to me that the level of "separation of church and state" that some people want would require that we stop paying salaries to Congressmen who are avowedly religious, or else prohibit anyone except Atheists from serving.

K.

(in reply to Kirata)
Profile   Post #: 72
RE: Church and State - 12/8/2012 5:45:55 PM   
thishereboi


Posts: 14463
Joined: 6/19/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: thishereboi

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: thishereboi

Bullshit. You don't give a damn about the poor they were going to help. All you care about it a chance to score one against religion. I'll keep this in mind the next time you rant about how the right doesn't care about people. As for letting the charitly find a nonsectarian one. Not a lot of those around. You remind me of the girl who said she only gives money to the groups that don't have anything to do with religion, then when I asked which ones they were couldn't name one.

I don't give a damn about poor people receiving medical care? My annual donation the Doctors without Borders would seem to be at odds with your outrageous lie.

your annual donations have nothing to do with it. It is your words on here that speak volumes.

Nonsectarian charities are plentiful, I only donate to such. Beyond Docs without borders there is also Kiva which facilitates microlaons that let poor people lift themselves out of poverty, Shelter Box provides disaster relief quickly and efficiently, Rotary International is funding polio eradication efforts, The ICRC and affiliates continue to do their good works, Child's Play provides toys and games to children's hospitals and there are many hundreds more.

Where you donate money is no one elses business. If you don't like where the money is going to go, then don't buy a ticket. Obviously there are a lot of people who are fine with this or they would not have raised so much money.

Are you done making shit up about people you know nothing?
I am responding to your posts, if you don't want to come off as uncaring, maybe you should rethink the crap you write.


You just claimed that words are more important than actions. Could you be any more hypocritical?

You also claimed there were no secular charities. Confronted with a list of great charities with no religious connection you responded with a non sequitur.

How precisely does my insistence on government staying out of religion make me uncaring? In reality it marks me as a patriot who believes in the ideals this nation was founded upon.


I said your words said a lot about you. I didn't say they were more important that actions.

I also didn't say there were no secular charaties.

when you are done making shit up, let me know.

_____________________________

"Sweetie, you're wasting your gum" .. Albert


This here is the boi formerly known as orfunboi


(in reply to DomKen)
Profile   Post #: 73
RE: Church and State - 12/8/2012 5:51:32 PM   
searching4mysir


Posts: 2757
Joined: 6/16/2011
Status: offline 		I think this might be a little telling about the Founding Fathers and the "separation of Church and State":

The Aitken Bible of 1782 was reviewed, approved and authorized by the US Congress.


On Sundays, church services were regularly held in the Capitol Building - a practice that continued until after the Civil War.




If both of those things are true (and while Wiki isn't the be-all-end-all of sources, Wiki does have those claims footnoted and sourced), what was the government doing being involved in printing Bibles and having church services in a government building if there was supposed to be this separation?

< Message edited by searching4mysir -- 12/8/2012 5:52:04 PM >

_____________________________

No longer searching -- found my one and only right here on CM


(in reply to Kirata)
Profile   Post #: 74
RE: Church and State - 12/8/2012 6:03:31 PM   
Kirata


Posts: 15477
Joined: 2/11/2006
From: USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961

As I said in another thread, I am being the devil's advocate here.

It's worth doing. It seems to me that the clear intention of the First Amendment was to disallow Congress from enacting any law that directly or indirectly favored one religion over another or religion over non-religion. How we got from there to some of today's case law is beyond me.

K.



< Message edited by Kirata -- 12/8/2012 6:12:03 PM >

(in reply to jlf1961)
Profile   Post #: 75
RE: Church and State - 12/8/2012 6:13:51 PM   
slvemike4u


Posts: 17896
Joined: 1/15/2008
From: United States
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata


~ FR ~

Sometimes it seems to me that the level of "separation of church and state" that some people want would require that we stop paying salaries to Congressmen who are avowedly religious, or else prohibit anyone except Atheists from serving.

K.

Interesting....but I would be curious to know where or what caused you to "feel" that way.I have never,nor have I ever heard anyone else ever stretch separation to such an extreme
Till just now

_____________________________

If we want things to stay as they are,things will have to change...Tancredi from "the Leopard"

Forget Guns-----Ban the pools

Funny stuff....https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eNwFf991d-4


(in reply to Kirata)
Profile   Post #: 76
RE: Church and State - 12/8/2012 6:23:49 PM   
jlf1961


Posts: 14840
Joined: 6/10/2008
From: Somewhere Texas
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata


quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961

As I said in another thread, I am being the devil's advocate here.

It's worth doing. It seems to me that the clear intention of the First Amendment was to disallow Congress from enacting any law that directly or indirectly favored one religion over another or religion over non-religion. How we got from there to some of today's case law is beyond me.

K.





Here is something interesting I found on a website that is decidedly moderate in its positions.

quote:

The Bill of Rights made no provision for “separation of church and state;” on the contrary, it defended the “free exercise” of religious beliefs. Secularists cannot point to the First Amendment to justify their anti-religious campaigns. The New Moderate supports the free expression of religion in a civil and non-coercive manner, but theocracy has no place in American life.


see the entire article here

_____________________________

Boy, it sure would be nice if we had some grenades, don't you think?

You cannot control who comes into your life, but you can control which airlock you throw them out of.

Paranoid Paramilitary Gun Loving Conspiracy Theorist AND EQUAL OPPORTUNI

(in reply to Kirata)
Profile   Post #: 77
RE: Church and State - 12/8/2012 6:31:54 PM   
tazzygirl


Posts: 37833
Joined: 10/12/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata


quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961

As I said in another thread, I am being the devil's advocate here.

It's worth doing. It seems to me that the clear intention of the First Amendment was to disallow Congress from enacting any law that directly or indirectly favored one religion over another or religion over non-religion. How we got from there to some of today's case law is beyond me.

K.




This is what confuses me as well. If the kids consent.. and the parents consent... and the issue isnt about one or two children being penalized if they dont...

This is just.. sad.

_____________________________

Telling me to take Midol wont help your butthurt.
RIP, my demon-child 5-16-11
Duchess of Dissent 1
Dont judge me because I sin differently than you.
If you want it sugar coated, dont ask me what i think! It would violate TOS.

(in reply to Kirata)
Profile   Post #: 78
RE: Church and State - 12/8/2012 6:34:35 PM   
vincentML


Posts: 9980
Joined: 10/31/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: cordeliasub

Here is my take on separation of church and state:

If it doesn't go both ways it is NOT separation. Church should stay out of "the state".....great.
The state should also stay out of church.

If you don't have both, you don't have separation, you have discrimination.

It's like free speech. if you are only free to speak what is "accepted," it isn't free speech.

Can't agree. The religious are free to express themselves and to address grievances to the government just like anyone else . . . . however, they jeopardise their tax exempt status if they engage in overt political activity, which seems rampant on both sides of the political divide.

(in reply to cordeliasub)
Profile   Post #: 79
RE: Church and State - 12/8/2012 6:38:12 PM   
tazzygirl


Posts: 37833
Joined: 10/12/2007
Status: offline 		They have been doing that for years. Dont see any of them losing their tax exempt status as a result.

_____________________________

Telling me to take Midol wont help your butthurt.
RIP, my demon-child 5-16-11
Duchess of Dissent 1
Dont judge me because I sin differently than you.
If you want it sugar coated, dont ask me what i think! It would violate TOS.

(in reply to vincentML)
Profile   Post #: 80
Page:   <<   < prev  2 3 [4] 5 6   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Church and State Page: <<   < prev  2 3 [4] 5 6   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.109