Who here actually thinks that separation of church & state is a bad thing?

[SmarterThanHick]

My people you idiot, are other Americans. Even fucking assholes like you. Yes, I would fight, and have fought for your right to be an asshole.

And it is your people that wish to build a temple there. Remind me what the problem is again.

And you call me a fucking racist?

No no. You misunderstand me. You're just an ordinary nothing-special racist.

Hey asshole, did you know the church that WAS ALREADY THERE, is being blocked from being re-built? Do you even fucking care? No, why? B/c those evil christians don't need a place to pray.

I see the Jackie-Chan-syndrome extends to buildings as well. Apparently you are incapable of understanding the differences in the two buildings since they have one thing in common with one another, being religion. So tell me: what is stopping someone from building a church AT ground zero, whereas a mosque can be built AWAY from ground zero but on the same island?

You don't even know me fuck nut, don't make fake ass accusations you can't fucking back up.

Your mistake is believing I need to "know you" to point out your faults. You have demonstrated multiple times in this thread alone that you are incapable of coming to conclusions between different racial groups using the same standards. You have even used language such as "my people" to differentiate from "those other people" that are the focus of your racism.

 

[manifold]

So it seems we have plenty of nitwits here that are willing to argue that separation of church and state is a fallacy, but they don't have the balls to come out and explain why they think such separation is a bad thing.


Interesting...

 

[del]

So it seems we have plenty of nitwits here that are willing to argue that separation of church and state is a fallacy, but they don't have the balls to come out and explain why they think such separation is a bad thing.


Interesting...

show me where it says in the constitution that it's a good thing, you commie homo.

 

[FA_Q2]

Sorry, I realize that you want to make all kinds of crap arguments that the first amendment actually does not really mean it when it gives you freedom of religion and that it really means that the people can do whatever religious crap they want through the government they want but we all know that is complete bullshit. The fist acknowledged the right to religious freedom and the ONLY way you can achieve that is by separating the church from the state. PERIOD. You cannot have a freely religious country when the government is actively pushing a single religion or openly sponsoring certain religious beliefs. The framers knew this and that is why this is not a Christian state but a state that was founded by many Christians to be a free state to all. Today, I can agree with many of the people here that is has gone too far and we are getting overly protective. A nativity scene at a public building is not a problem as long as we are acknowledging Christmas as a national holiday. People need to get over it if they have a problem like that. Same story if a government worker wishes to place religious symbols on their desk or person. Those are acts of INDIVIDUALS and not the government. However, things like displaying the ten commandments at school I believe are different as the SYSTEM is now promoting one set of values over another. If you want to keep your rights and freedom to worship how and when you want then you NEED to defend the separation of church and state. NOWHERE is there a theocracy that is free in any religion and there will never be one. That is the ultimate end to a government that embroils itself in a religion. Just because our country is BASED on a moral framework that reflects Christianity and most of its people's morals are based on that same ideology does not mean that anything more than that moral framework needs to be infused into the government.

 

[SmarterThanHick]

the only things greater than 100 years old that belong in public schools are history and principles.

 

[Liberty]

The Church should not control the government. The government should not control the church. Prayer is fine in government. Every congress opens with a prayer, and I think that's ok.

Congress shall make no establishment of religion. It hasn't, however it can invite pastors to lead a prayer before session of congress...I don't see how this is controversial.

100% separation is a bad thing because the good part of understanding and having faith in a divine creator fosters strong moral and ethical values, and positive effects for individuals.

Atheists can argue that they can have values through other means, and that is perfectly fine. However, some in government would prefer to believe in a divine creator, and they should be permitted to worship in whatever way makes them more efficient at their job.

 

[Charles_Main]

Identify and explain yourselves please.

I think taking the Idea to such an extreme that a cross or the Star of David or a crescent moon. Can not be displayed on any state or Federal Land. Is an over the top, and out of control, interpretation of the original Intent.

As long as the government can not tell us who and what and how we can worship, and as long as they can not establish and official State Religion. I'm happy.

So once again what you are doing, Just like Libs do all the time. Is making the argument an all or nothing thing. Which it clearly is not.

 

[shintao]

Not sure why, but she looks inviting, like come on in........................

 

[shintao]

Identify and explain yourselves please.

I think taking the Idea to such an extreme that a cross or the Star of David or a crescent moon. Can not be displayed on any state or Federal Land. Is an over the top, and out of control, interpretation of the original Intent.

As long as the government can not tell us who and what and how we can worship, and as long as they can not establish and official State Religion. I'm happy.

So once again what you are doing, Just like Libs do all the time. Is making the argument an all or nothing thing. Which it clearly is not.

We shouldn't object to free speech in public, like children kneeling and praying in front of adult stores, the display of Buddha or nativity scene. We should respect others private lands if they object to religions. And government should be entirely out of the equation, not even a variable. Government should be stripped of all religion.

Further government should have no laws governing religious beliefs, regardless of what those beliefs are.

 

[Liberty]

Identify and explain yourselves please.

I think taking the Idea to such an extreme that a cross or the Star of David or a crescent moon. Can not be displayed on any state or Federal Land. Is an over the top, and out of control, interpretation of the original Intent.

As long as the government can not tell us who and what and how we can worship, and as long as they can not establish and official State Religion. I'm happy.

So once again what you are doing, Just like Libs do all the time. Is making the argument an all or nothing thing. Which it clearly is not.

We shouldn't object to free speech in public, like children kneeling and praying in front of adult stores, the display of Buddha or nativity scene. We should respect others private lands if they object to religions. And government should be entirely out of the equation, not even a variable. Government should be stripped of all religion.

No. Just no.

 

[shintao]

I see no problem with kids saying a prayer in school or at a school football game or graduation if that's what they wanted to do. I see no problem with the 10 Commandments being posted in our court houses. I see no problem with Christmas displays on public property. How far do you want to take all of this?

Then you wouldn't object to teens fucking in the football bleachers, graphic porn posted in the court house, or nude people in a public Christmas parade. OK, we can go farther if you chose.

 

[Charles_Main]

Buy your beer on a Saturday.... problem solved.

Stop trying to force your religious views upon others...problem solved.

When will you people learn that forcing an extreme secular interpretation of the constitution on people is the same as forcing your religious views on people.

My guess is never because you are all unabashed Hippocrates.

 

[MarcATL]

Interesting debate.

I'm a Christian and I can see the importance of church and state.

What's good for the goose is good for the gander type of thing.

What goes for one must go for all type of thing.

I guarantee that every single RW Christian would have a MAJOR problem if a Muslim religious act were to be prominently displayed or practiced in a public or "gubment" place. Like say placing the Koran in the courthouse or somewhere prominent in a government building or something.

I don't understand how they can't see this.

Blind something.

 

[manifold]

Identify and explain yourselves please.

I think taking the Idea to such an extreme that a cross or the Star of David or a crescent moon. Can not be displayed on any state or Federal Land. Is an over the top, and out of control, interpretation of the original Intent.

As long as the government can not tell us who and what and how we can worship, and as long as they can not establish and official State Religion. I'm happy.

So once again what you are doing, Just like Libs do all the time. Is making the argument an all or nothing thing. Which it clearly is not.

You probably shouldn't presume what I'm doing, but that's beside the point.

I don't disagree with anything you've said, but you were clever enough to avoid talking about funding.

How would you feel if the cross, or the star of david, or the crescent moon adorning federal land was paid for and maintained with taxpayer money?

 

[manifold]

Buy your beer on a Saturday.... problem solved.

Stop trying to force your religious views upon others...problem solved.

When will you people learn that forcing an extreme secular interpretation of the constitution on people is the same as forcing your religious views on people.

My guess is never because you are all unabashed Hippocrates.

Extreme secular?? ??

The Constitution is secular, therefore it cannot be intrpretted too secularly.

Are you always this transparently partisan?

 

[thereisnospoon]

Identify and explain yourselves please.

There's no such thing as seperation of church and state.
Oh there is a perception that seperation is the law and exists in the US Constitution and at the end of the day I suppose perception is just enough to get by.
Now, I want no chruch to decide an election. I reject the religious left and ultra right wing bible thumpers every bit as adamantly as I reject left wing moonbats.
However, let's be realistic. If there were true seperation of church and state, the following laws would not be Constitutional.....Blue Laws. Those laws that prohibit certain activities on the Christian Sabbath. For example. Most states prohibit or restrict sales of alcoholic bevs on Sunday. In SC for example, one cannot buy alcohol "to go".. Convenience stores and other beer and unfortified wine outlets are not allowed to sell these items "to go"....
In GA, there are county by county laws. In Clayton County, GA just south of Atlanta, bars MUST close by midnight on Saturday, However , one can trundle up to FultonCounty( Atlanta) and booze until 2 am..
In NJ, No "to go" alcohol sales are permitted on Sunday. In some towns one cannot mow their grass, or do any work on a vehicle outside their home, or do any work of any kind on their property on Sundays. IN some counties home improvement stores such as Lowes and Home Depot cannot. In other towns, Paramus NJ being one, dept. stores and malls are closed on Sunday.. Blue laws. Bergen County NJ has a Snday shopping ban for all but essential( food and necessities) items. Grocery stores can open but dept stores cannot. If there is a Super Walmart, the Grocery section is open while the remainder of the store is closed. I worked in K-Mart in Closter ,NJ for 4 years. The store was closed on Sunday..Blue Laws.
Wagering laws. In most "Bible Belt " most forms of gambling are illegal.
Casinos and parimutuel facilities are banned.
All of the above are in place due to religious considerations.
IN conclusion, if there were a true seperation of Church and State, these laws could be struck down on Constitutional grounds that they violate the "Establishment" clause in the First Amendment.
I am not an attorney. I did not go to law school. Law and the study of law is a lot of knowledge of laws, rules and protocol. Knowing about the law is a lot about common sense and doing a little homework.....Ask all those jail house lawyers who successfully try cases and know lawbooks( all on computer now) better than most real attorneys.
Ain't that a bitch.
I digress

 

[FA_Q2]

Identify and explain yourselves please.

There's no such thing as seperation of church and state.
Oh there is a perception that seperation is the law and exists in the US Constitution and at the end of the day I suppose perception is just enough to get by.
Now, I want no chruch to decide an election. I reject the religious left and ultra right wing bible thumpers every bit as adamantly as I reject left wing moonbats.
However, let's be realistic. If there were true seperation of church and state, the following laws would not be Constitutional.....Blue Laws. Those laws that prohibit certain activities on the Christian Sabbath. For example. Most states prohibit or restrict sales of alcoholic bevs on Sunday. In SC for example, one cannot buy alcohol "to go".. Convenience stores and other beer and unfortified wine outlets are not allowed to sell these items "to go"....
In GA, there are county by county laws. In Clayton County, GA just south of Atlanta, bars MUST close by midnight on Saturday, However , one can trundle up to FultonCounty( Atlanta) and booze until 2 am..
In NJ, No "to go" alcohol sales are permitted on Sunday. In some towns one cannot mow their grass, or do any work on a vehicle outside their home, or do any work of any kind on their property on Sundays. IN some counties home improvement stores such as Lowes and Home Depot cannot. In other towns, Paramus NJ being one, dept. stores and malls are closed on Sunday.. Blue laws. Bergen County NJ has a Snday shopping ban for all but essential( food and necessities) items. Grocery stores can open but dept stores cannot. If there is a Super Walmart, the Grocery section is open while the remainder of the store is closed. I worked in K-Mart in Closter ,NJ for 4 years. The store was closed on Sunday..Blue Laws.
Wagering laws. In most "Bible Belt " most forms of gambling are illegal.
Casinos and parimutuel facilities are banned.
All of the above are in place due to religious considerations.
IN conclusion, if there were a true seperation of Church and State, these laws could be struck down on Constitutional grounds that they violate the "Establishment" clause in the First Amendment.
I am not an attorney. I did not go to law school. Law and the study of law is a lot of knowledge of laws, rules and protocol. Knowing about the law is a lot about common sense and doing a little homework.....Ask all those jail house lawyers who successfully try cases and know lawbooks( all on computer now) better than most real attorneys.
Ain't that a bitch.
I digress

Hey, now you are getting it. Many blue laws SHOULD be struck down. There is a difference from the state and federal government though and none of those laws are federal laws. There is also the point that anti gambling and most drinking laws may be rooted in religious pretence at times but they are not necessarily religious laws. The Sabbath is defiantly directly tied to Christianity and I do find it rather unsettling that the government feels that it needs to enforce the Sabbath when it has no right to do so. It is wrong for the state to enforce a religious 'law' or practice on those that do not observe it. Is it right that a Muslim or Buddhist is forced to observe the Sabbath even though they do not believe in it. Would it be right if my religion required me to work every day and a blue law forced me not to work on Saturday? The thing is though, those laws are mostly written in the middle of the bible belt where people are more likely to ignore the rights that they do not agree with like the separation of church and state. It is no different than the inner city liberals that conveniently forget about the second amendment when writing their laws. It seems people believe that the constitution can be cut up to ignore parts that we do not agree with and that is a dangerous and scary thought process. That's right, those that defend the separation of church and state yet advocate tight gun control or gun abolition: you are bigoted in the same way those that hold up gun control and try to sweep separation of church and state under the rug are.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Identify and explain yourselves please.

There's no such thing as seperation of church and state.
Oh there is a perception that seperation is the law and exists in the US Constitution and at the end of the day I suppose perception is just enough to get by.
Now, I want no chruch to decide an election. I reject the religious left and ultra right wing bible thumpers every bit as adamantly as I reject left wing moonbats.
However, let's be realistic. If there were true seperation of church and state, the following laws would not be Constitutional.....Blue Laws. Those laws that prohibit certain activities on the Christian Sabbath. For example. Most states prohibit or restrict sales of alcoholic bevs on Sunday. In SC for example, one cannot buy alcohol "to go".. Convenience stores and other beer and unfortified wine outlets are not allowed to sell these items "to go"....
In GA, there are county by county laws. In Clayton County, GA just south of Atlanta, bars MUST close by midnight on Saturday, However , one can trundle up to FultonCounty( Atlanta) and booze until 2 am..
In NJ, No "to go" alcohol sales are permitted on Sunday. In some towns one cannot mow their grass, or do any work on a vehicle outside their home, or do any work of any kind on their property on Sundays. IN some counties home improvement stores such as Lowes and Home Depot cannot. In other towns, Paramus NJ being one, dept. stores and malls are closed on Sunday.. Blue laws. Bergen County NJ has a Snday shopping ban for all but essential( food and necessities) items. Grocery stores can open but dept stores cannot. If there is a Super Walmart, the Grocery section is open while the remainder of the store is closed. I worked in K-Mart in Closter ,NJ for 4 years. The store was closed on Sunday..Blue Laws.
Wagering laws. In most "Bible Belt " most forms of gambling are illegal.
Casinos and parimutuel facilities are banned.
All of the above are in place due to religious considerations.
IN conclusion, if there were a true seperation of Church and State, these laws could be struck down on Constitutional grounds that they violate the "Establishment" clause in the First Amendment.
I am not an attorney. I did not go to law school. Law and the study of law is a lot of knowledge of laws, rules and protocol. Knowing about the law is a lot about common sense and doing a little homework.....Ask all those jail house lawyers who successfully try cases and know lawbooks( all on computer now) better than most real attorneys.
Ain't that a bitch.
I digress

Hey, now you are getting it. Many blue laws SHOULD be struck down. There is a difference from the state and federal government though and none of those laws are federal laws. There is also the point that anti gambling and most drinking laws may be rooted in religious pretence at times but they are not necessarily religious laws. The Sabbath is defiantly directly tied to Christianity and I do find it rather unsettling that the government feels that it needs to enforce the Sabbath when it has no right to do so. It is wrong for the state to enforce a religious 'law' or practice on those that do not observe it. Is it right that a Muslim or Buddhist is forced to observe the Sabbath even though they do not believe in it. Would it be right if my religion required me to work every day and a blue law forced me not to work on Saturday? The thing is though, those laws are mostly written in the middle of the bible belt where people are more likely to ignore the rights that they do not agree with like the separation of church and state. It is no different than the inner city liberals that conveniently forget about the second amendment when writing their laws. It seems people believe that the constitution can be cut up to ignore parts that we do not agree with and that is a dangerous and scary thought process. That's right, those that defend the separation of church and state yet advocate tight gun control or gun abolition: you are bigoted in the same way those that hold up gun control and try to sweep separation of church and state under the rug are.

I'm "getting it"?..I took no particular position on this issue. I merely pointed out that religion is indeed intertwined with government.
Accept it or not ,the United States is primarily a Christian nation. And most likely it will be for the forseeable future.
Our laws and traditions are steeped religious doctrine.
Now there are those who object to our Distinct American Culture. Even some Caucasian of European descent cannot accept it. For some odd reason they want to live in a stir fry society where there are rules and traditions. They say it's stodgy and unfair to minorities.
That's bull. If one takes a hard look at any nation where there is not a dominant culture and a racial or ethnic majority, those nations are either totalitarian states or they exist in chaos.
Now just because our laws are based in religion does not mean we have church elders waltzing into the houses of government to wield power over the elected legislators. Not at all.
However, I think this so-called seperation of church and state isue has been turned into a nonsensical and irritating path to rid all visible signs of Christianity, ironically while other mnority religions not only recognized but our children are immersed in them in public school. This is done to appease liberal educrats and gives them the sense that they are "promoting understanding or other cultures"..Oh bullshit. If kids need to learn about other religions they can go to the house of worship of that particular religion or study about it on-line or at the library. If Chrsitianity is banned from public school. so should all other religions. Seperation MUST apply equally or it means nothong at all.
Making law....That is my narrow focus on this issue. And It is my belief that is what the Framers meant when they placed the establishment clause.

 

[Si modo]

LOL blue laws
I was in NC in the 80's trying to buy a beer on Sunday at a 711 and the redneck looked at me like I was a Martian.

We haven't gotten rid of them all yet.....but it's a lot better now than it was in the 60's and 70's. Heck, even now in Arkansas, you can't buy a beer on sunday without going to a 'private club'......

Blue laws are just not in the South. Michigan still has them, for example. And, although technically below the Mason-Dixon line, the bleeding heart liberal bastion and near-nazi state of Maryland still has them, too.

 

[manifold]

I think taking the Idea to such an extreme that a cross or the Star of David or a crescent moon. Can not be displayed on any state or Federal Land. Is an over the top, and out of control, interpretation of the original Intent.

How would you feel if the cross, or the star of david, or the crescent moon adorning federal land was paid for and maintained with taxpayer money?