Separation of Church and State

ihopehefails

VIP Member
Oct 3, 2009
3,384
228
83
I've heard on the radio that this bill is the morally responsible thing to do and for that reason it should be done. This actually violates what the founders intended to be separation of church and state. I believe that they thought that society could regulate itself through its own religion or religions that happen to be running through society. This is why they said that the ten commandments should be our guide and at the same time say that the state should stay out of the religious affairs of the people as in separation of church and state.

If you take a closer look at their philosophy of government it was that the state should not rule over the people. That role was for the people through their own conscience and moral restraint that they chose for themselves. The state was to protect certain aspects of the people's lives such as one's own life. The rest was to be done by the people as they chose for themselves and religion, morality, and self-restraint was to do the rest.

Religion existed completely within the private sphere but the private sphere was to create its own rules on how society should function. This alone should be good enough but not everyone is capable of living safely with others so the public sphere could interject by protecting the people from those things. It never could restrain the people since that violate the concept of self-governance.
 
^^^Don't sweat it man. See my 4th amendment thread. Thats the way out. How Obama Inc missed that one I don't know, but I can't wait for lawsuit $$$.
 
I heard the same thing from one of the Congress people. A person stating a personal opinion is not the same thing as the federal government mandating what religion is to be followed by penalty of law. There is no violation of the First Amendment here.
 
  • Thread starter
  • Banned
  • #4
I heard the same thing from one of the Congress people. A person stating a personal opinion is not the same thing as the federal government mandating what religion is to be followed by penalty of law. There is no violation of the First Amendment here.

I actually meant that for all aspects of our lives not just for this health care bill. What right does the state have to force anyone to adhere to some moral principle that goes beyond someone elses concept of morality.

Christian morality tells us that homosexuality is wrong but PC is somehow able to supercede that and tell christians that they can't believe that? Isn't that a violation of my freedom of religion?
 
  • Thread starter
  • Banned
  • #6
i really wish the O/P would stop pretending she knows anything about the constitution.

she really should stop. :cuckoo:

I wish you could actually put up an intelligent debate instead of insulting other people. Its fun when you put your points out and discuss things as rational human beings. You should try that sometime.
 
I heard the same thing from one of the Congress people. A person stating a personal opinion is not the same thing as the federal government mandating what religion is to be followed by penalty of law. There is no violation of the First Amendment here.

I actually meant that for all aspects of our lives not just for this health care bill. What right does the state have to force anyone to adhere to some moral principle that goes beyond someone elses concept of morality.

Christian morality tells us that homosexuality is wrong but PC is somehow able to supercede that and tell christians that they can't believe that? Isn't that a violation of my freedom of religion?

Until and unless the federal government tells you who, what, and why you are to worship in a mandated manner, the argument of political correctness in a societal sense is moot, in regards to the actual law of the land. To my knowledge, Congress has made no law mandating any such thing. A member of Congress, the President, and any other government official is allowed to state their opinion, moral or otherwise via the First Amendment.

I don't agree with many things the government employees have been doing. Be that as it may, I cannot support your supposition that the First Amendment has been violated.
 
I heard the same thing from one of the Congress people. A person stating a personal opinion is not the same thing as the federal government mandating what religion is to be followed by penalty of law. There is no violation of the First Amendment here.

I actually meant that for all aspects of our lives not just for this health care bill. What right does the state have to force anyone to adhere to some moral principle that goes beyond someone elses concept of morality.

Christian morality tells us that homosexuality is wrong but PC is somehow able to supercede that and tell christians that they can't believe that? Isn't that a violation of my freedom of religion?

Until and unless the federal government tells you who, what, and why you are to worship in a mandated manner, the argument of political correctness in a societal sense is moot, in regards to the actual law of the land. To my knowledge, Congress has made no law mandating any such thing. A member of Congress, the President, and any other government official is allowed to state their opinion, moral or otherwise via the First Amendment.

I don't agree with many things the government employees have been doing. Be that as it may, I cannot support your supposition that the First Amendment has been violated.

Political Correctness operates from the authority of the political process itself. Its why they call it political process and not religious correctness or world of warcraft correctness.
 
I actually meant that for all aspects of our lives not just for this health care bill. What right does the state have to force anyone to adhere to some moral principle that goes beyond someone elses concept of morality.

Christian morality tells us that homosexuality is wrong but PC is somehow able to supercede that and tell christians that they can't believe that? Isn't that a violation of my freedom of religion?

Until and unless the federal government tells you who, what, and why you are to worship in a mandated manner, the argument of political correctness in a societal sense is moot, in regards to the actual law of the land. To my knowledge, Congress has made no law mandating any such thing. A member of Congress, the President, and any other government official is allowed to state their opinion, moral or otherwise via the First Amendment.

I don't agree with many things the government employees have been doing. Be that as it may, I cannot support your supposition that the First Amendment has been violated.

Political Correctness operates from the authority of the political process itself. Its why they call it political process and not religious correctness or world of warcraft correctness.
Political correctness may be a lot of things, but it is not a violation of the First Amendment. It shouldn't be capitalized either. ;)
 
but is morality automatically tied to religion?

Not for me. It is tied to my standard of principals and system of ethics. :) I have my own expectations to live up to and I set the bar, high.

I have a profound belief in the universal law of cause and effect--the empowering conviction that we all ultimately direct our own lives. :)
 
i really wish the O/P would stop pretending she knows anything about the constitution.

she really should stop. :cuckoo:

I wish you could actually put up an intelligent debate instead of insulting other people. Its fun when you put your points out and discuss things as rational human beings. You should try that sometime.

I don't debate with people who don't have a modicum of knowledge about the subject matter.
 
i really wish the O/P would stop pretending she knows anything about the constitution.

she really should stop. :cuckoo:

I wish you could actually put up an intelligent debate instead of insulting other people. Its fun when you put your points out and discuss things as rational human beings. You should try that sometime.

I don't debate with people who don't have a modicum of knowledge about the subject matter.

I think you are stupid. Every post you have put up seems to be written by a teenage girl who just finished high school civics class. I don't see any depth or thinking behind yours other than repeated cliches your probably taught somewhere.
 
Until and unless the federal government tells you who, what, and why you are to worship in a mandated manner, the argument of political correctness in a societal sense is moot, in regards to the actual law of the land. To my knowledge, Congress has made no law mandating any such thing. A member of Congress, the President, and any other government official is allowed to state their opinion, moral or otherwise via the First Amendment.

I don't agree with many things the government employees have been doing. Be that as it may, I cannot support your supposition that the First Amendment has been violated.

Political Correctness operates from the authority of the political process itself. Its why they call it political process and not religious correctness or world of warcraft correctness.
Political correctness may be a lot of things, but it is not a violation of the First Amendment. It shouldn't be capitalized either. ;)

I accept that politcal correctness is not a law passed by the congress but it derives its authority from the same place that any law does. People who feel controlled by PC feel compelled by its edicts for whatever reason but why? Its clearly political (hence political correctness) and anything political is everything to do with the state which is the authority over our physical lives.

Its almost like "total state" mentallity where every aspect of our lives is to be determined by the political authority.
 
Last edited:
but is morality automatically tied to religion?

Not for me. It is tied to my standard of principals and system of ethics. :) I have my own expectations to live up to and I set the bar, high.

I have a profound belief in the universal law of cause and effect--the empowering conviction that we all ultimately direct our own lives. :)

Most morality is based on some concept of spirituality whether you are christian, buddhist, or just believe in the universal law.
 
but is morality automatically tied to religion?

Good question.
The definition of "morality" often changes faster than the direction of the wind.
I may find it immoral based on the Bible that you eat pork. You may find eating shrimp immoral.
Accordingly, "moral" values have no place in the law.
See the US Constitution for that one. God is not mentioned in that document.
Smart dudes the founders were. Slavery, making liquor at home, smuggling whatever they wanted and tapping a slave wench or 30 was not deemed immoral in their day.
 
i really wish the O/P would stop pretending she knows anything about the constitution.

she really should stop. :cuckoo:

I wish you could actually put up an intelligent debate instead of insulting other people. Its fun when you put your points out and discuss things as rational human beings. You should try that sometime.

I don't debate with people who don't have a modicum of knowledge about the subject matter.

You couldn't even if you wanted to, Jill.

Debate demands that both players actually know something about the subject at hand. That's basically why I tend to avoid all these debates about what the constitution means, or what the flounding fathers intended it to mean.

You could have an argument though.

As these boards are proving to any willing to see, any clueless idiot can have an argument about any subject.
 

New Topics

Forum List

Back
Top