Would America be better off with a state religion?

Midnight FM

Gold Member
Joined
May 4, 2025
Messages
797
Reaction score
349
Points
143
If America had a state church funded with taxpayer money, like the Church of England, except it would be the Church of the United States, I can see several advantages to it:

1. It would be created by people who are experts in religious studies, such as theology. This would help ensure that it is legitimate.

2. It would allow us to ban cook religions like Westboro Baptist Church and the FLDS. No more protection of cookery under the guise of "freedom of religion".

Sure, some people (as in cooks and cultists) wouldn't like it, but that's their problem. If they don't like it, they'd either be free to convert, or keep their cookery in the closet where it belongs.
 
you could not even prove your other thread about god existing.....you want a state religion start one and see how far that gets you...
 

Would America be better off with a state religion?​

Just as long as it's Rastafarianism ... that would be irie and highly Salassie!

images.webp
 
If America had a state church funded with taxpayer money, like the Church of England, except it would be the Church of the United States, I can see several advantages to it:

1. It would be created by people who are experts in religious studies, such as theology. This would help ensure that it is legitimate.

2. It would allow us to ban cook religions like Westboro Baptist Church and the FLDS. No more protection of cookery under the guise of "freedom of religion".

Sure, some people (as in cooks and cultists) wouldn't like it, but that's their problem. If they don't like it, they'd either be free to convert, or keep their cookery in the closet where it belongs.
Just look up how the Church of England came into existence and you will never use it as an example anymore.
 
If America had a state church funded with taxpayer money, like the Church of England, except it would be the Church of the United States, I can see several advantages to it:

1. It would be created by people who are experts in religious studies, such as theology. This would help ensure that it is legitimate.

2. It would allow us to ban cook religions like Westboro Baptist Church and the FLDS. No more protection of cookery under the guise of "freedom of religion".

Sure, some people (as in cooks and cultists) wouldn't like it, but that's their problem. If they don't like it, they'd either be free to convert, or keep their cookery in the closet where it belongs.
No
 
If America had a state church funded with taxpayer money, like the Church of England, except it would be the Church of the United States, I can see several advantages to it:

1. It would be created by people who are experts in religious studies, such as theology. This would help ensure that it is legitimate.

2. It would allow us to ban cook religions like Westboro Baptist Church and the FLDS. No more protection of cookery under the guise of "freedom of religion".

Sure, some people (as in cooks and cultists) wouldn't like it, but that's their problem. If they don't like it, they'd either be free to convert, or keep their cookery in the closet where it belongs.
You don't like our Constitution at all do you. Freedom to worship God (or yourself) as you understand God is in keeping with His desire for FREE WILL for humanity. Does God respect "worship" from robots with no free will?
 
You don't like our Constitution at all do you. Freedom to worship God (or yourself) as you understand God is in keeping with His desire for FREE WILL for humanity. Does God respect "worship" from robots with no free will?
The legal definition of "religion" has been interpreted too loosely, and it allows freak shows like Westboro Baptist Church and FLDS, which practices child marriage and forced marriage to exist under the loose definition of "religion".

Any rational person would ban them, and society would lose nothing from doing so. Common sense alone dictates that.
 
Actually, the King got no permission by the Pope to divorce and thus he created his own Church of which he was the Pope and then he got divorced.

Yes, I was making reference Henry's oldest daughter Mary and her attempt to gently persuade her subjects back into the Papist fold.
 
The legal definition of "religion" has been interpreted too loosely, and it allows freak shows like Westboro Baptist Church and FLDS, which practices child marriage and forced marriage to exist under the loose definition of "religion".

Any rational person would ban them, and society would lose nothing from doing so. Common sense alone dictates that.
Child marriage and forced marriage are not permitted .

Religion is not defined too loosely it is defined correctly
 
The legal definition of "religion" has been interpreted too loosely, and it allows freak shows like Westboro Baptist Church and FLDS, which practices child marriage and forced marriage to exist under the loose definition of "religion".

Any rational person would ban them, and society would lose nothing from doing so. Common sense alone dictates that.
**** you and your control issues.
If a group commits an actual CRIME, you can deal with it.
Saying "God hates fags" is their right and there is NOTHING you can do about it.

I worry more about a GOVERNMENT that burned alive 86 women and children to provide cover for a president who needed a distraction for his adultery
 
**** you and your control issues.
If a group commits an actual CRIME, you can deal with it.
Saying "God hates fags" is their right and there is NOTHING you can do about it.

I worry more about a GOVERNMENT that burned alive 86 women and children to provide cover for a president who needed a distraction for his adultery
Oh wow, some cultists got burned to death.

Good riddance.
 
Oh wow, some cultists got burned to death.

Good riddance.
And here is the problem. You bought into the LIE spread by a media covering for Bill Clinton.

You and your ilk are FAR more dangerous to this country than a religious group living their own lives

You are the threat to this country

Screenshot_20250816-222805.webp
 
15th post
And here is the problem. You bought into the LIE spread by a media covering for Bill Clinton.

You and your ilk are FAR more dangerous to this country than a religious group living their own lives

You are the threat to this country

View attachment 1150368
I don't support the right of cultists to live their own lives. They should be brought up to the level of civilization.

In the words of Ivan Drago. "If they die, they die".
 
As an example, Germany is apparently attempting to ban Scientology, which is widely considered a cult and a money-making scheme.

"Freedom of religion" was arguably a mistake, or, at best, outdated, and we might be better off just getting rid of it.

There is no " we " which could end up better off.

Freedom of religion is not arguably a mistake
 
Whatever you think of "cultists", there is no excuse for burning them alive. They are still people.
 
Back
Top Bottom