<p>Maybe you would like to enlighten us about where it mentions separation of church and state? I can't seem to find it anywhere.</p>
<p>(Hold your laughter everyone until hilary speaks)</p>
<p>I'm not saying that religion should RUN politics. I just don't see why liberals constantly go talking about a separation of church and state and attempt to ban all religious traditions in any governmental institutions. So what is a court house displays the ten commandements. So what is a child wants to pray in school before eating lunch. I mean, it's a good thing to keep religion out of politics, but you don't need to go nuts! A little relgious influence in politics isn't so terrible.</p>
<p>Amendment I:</p>
<p>Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion</p>
<p>(everyone, feel free to laugh at uc_benz now)</p>
<p>Perhaps you should paste the entire text, not just edit it to suit your needs:</p>
<p>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. </p>
<p>This means that people (i.e. school kids) shouldn't be suspended for praying in school, wouldn't you agree?</p>
<p>Haha, wow. I don't seem to see the words "separation" "church" or "state" ! imagine that.</p>
<p>I always love how Democrats refer to that amendment. They just make up words as they please.</p>
<p>alukaszewicz -- when did i say kids should be suspended for praying in school?? i dont think that at all! sorry if you misunderstood. i simply dont think they should be FORCED to pray or be subjected to anything religious if they dont choose too.
(also i didnt edit it, i just copied/pasted the part i was talking about, since i wasnt aware that we were debating about children praying in school...) </p>
<p>uc_benz -- notice that you are alone in your argument."Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion" means separation of church and state. didnt you learn that in freshman history class?
stop embarrassing yourself.</p>
<p>the Constitution doesn't say that literally but the first amendment means that religion and state is separate. Come on even a strict constructionist like TJ agrees that the constitution says that.
alukaszewicz - kids shouldn't be suspended for praying but they certainly shouldn't be suspended for not praying.</p>
<p>"I'm not saying that religion should RUN politics. I just don't see why liberals constantly go talking about a separation of church and state and attempt to ban all religious traditions in any governmental institutions. So what is a court house displays the ten commandements. So what is a child wants to pray in school before eating lunch. I mean, it's a good thing to keep religion out of politics, but you don't need to go nuts! A little relgious influence in politics isn't so terrible."</p>
<p>Becusae they are governmental institutions, you said it yourself. This country was founded when quakers and puritans came from England to escape religious persecution. As hilary6 proved, the founding fathers wanted there to be no role of religion in politics, hence no religion in governmental institutions.</p>
<p>Furthermore, the ten commandments should definitely not be displayed outside of courthouses. That gives the impression that our legal system is based on the the commandments, which it definitely is not.
alukaszewicz, quick question: Would you be against having the quran (the Islamic holy scripture) outside of courthouses?</p>
<p>Oh really? I'm glad you know the intent of the Founding Fathers. The only reason the phrase "separation of church and state" ever came about because it came up in a speech.</p>
<p>well then uc_benz, what would YOU say that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion" means? that congress should make laws based on religion? </p>
<p>honestly if you have any common sense this amendment isnt hard to decipher and is FAR from a topic of debate. in our history class there was not even a question about it, it was common knowledge that the 1st amendment= freedom of speech and separation of church and state.</p>
<p>Also..
James Madison is known as the "Father of the Constitution." More than any other framer he is responsible for the content and form of the First Amendment. His understanding of federalism is the theoretical basis of our Constitution. He served as President of the United States between 1809-1817.
His summary of the 1st Amendment was (THIS IS VERBATIM):
"Congress should not establish a religion and enforce the legal observation of it by law, nor compel men to worship God in any manner contary to their conscience, or that one sect might obtain a pre-eminence, or two combined together, and establish a religion to which they would compel others to conform." (Annals of Congress, Sat Aug 15th, 1789 pages 730 - 731)</p>
<p>oh, and if you dont understand that, James Madison also said:
"The civil Government, though bereft of everything like an associated hierarchy, possesses the requisite stability, and performs its functions with complete success, whilst the number, the industry, and the morality of the priesthood, and the devotion of the people, have been manifestly increased by the total separation of the church from the State" (Letter to Robert Walsh, Mar. 2, 1819).</p>
<p>uc_benz seriously this is all US history. Even a korean knows this stuff. It's the basic in all governments today at least the ones that are considered developed. Even Bush will agree with the Bill of Rights even though his actions don't</p>
<p>Oh, so since it is taught in the classroom then it MUST be true, right? The Supreme Court said that Secular Humanism is a religion, which by the way teaches evolution, yet that is being taught in the classroom.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Even Bush will agree with the Bill of Rights even though his actions don't
[/quote]
Thank you Mr. President, it was so kind of you to post on CC and express your views. I know it must be hard for you to take time out of your busy schedule, but once again I thank you.</p>
<p>The fact of the matter is: The words separation of church and state don't appear in any official government documents authored by the founding fathers.</p>
<p>what are you talking about...evolution is a scientific theory.</p>
<p>i'm not going to argue about this anymore. everyone else is aware of the basic facts... this is like someone trying to argue that george bush is a democrat.</p>
<p>(and yes, things that are taught in classrooms as basic historic facts nationwide tend to be true)</p>
<p>Since Christianity is the religion on which America was founded, that's why I support the Ten Commandments being displayed in front of courthouses. Since America's founding has nothing to do with the Quran, I don't see why it would be displayed. Besides, the signifiance is not really religious, its historic. But, for example, I wouldn't have a problem with the Quran being displayed in countries whose founding religion is Islam. </p>
<p>With the kids praying in schools issue, it has happened on more than one occasion. Persecution by David Limbaugh is a really great book for this subject. You'd be surprised by the facts that it contains. I kindergarten boy was suspended for a week because he prayed before eating lunch. This happened again, and he was suspended for another week. These are the kinds of things I'm against, as the 1st ammendment states that people should be free to express their religion.</p>
<p>To Primitive:
[quote]
Are you serious? I PROVIDED 32 VALID EXAMPLES OF BUSH AS A FLIP-FLOPPER. If you cant provide a logical reason behind them, then it is mature to admit it.
[/quote]
Okay, I am the strongest Conservative and a disgruntled Republican and yeah I am mature enough to admit that Bush is a flip flopper. But he is a flip flopper no more or less than most other politicians. After all, he is a politician.
To Hilary:
[quote]
the majority of people have sex outside of marriage anyways, buddy. and you cant force people to be catholics... catholics do not own the priviledge of marriage. and last i checked catholics were against abortion as well as any form of birth control. ...cool, then dont do it yourself, but i couldnt care less what you think about MY right to choose.
[/quote]
Okay that quote about the ten commandments was in response to another post made about the ten commandments. You are taking me out of context. I do think extramarital sex is wrong and you are right that I don't do it, but I do have a right to thing that it is a sin to do it, which in itself keeps me from doing it.
[quote]
BCgoUSC is pretending to be jesus.
[/quote]
No I am not. I am merely bringing a Christian point of view to the discussion.
[quote]
hm no one is responding, guess that means we win
[/quote]
Sorry but some people have jobs like myself. You do not win and I am ready and willing to discuss anything.
[quote]
.....well theres this other little thing called the bill of rights... maybe you've heard of it?
[/quote]
Yeah I have and nowhere in it is seperation of church and state mentioned. The idea of church and state seperation is found in a letter written by Thomas Jefferson after the writing of the Constitution. All that the Bill of Rights says is that Congress shall make no law regarding the establishment or the practice of religion. It never says that States cannot establish religion as Maryland (Catholic) and Connecticut (Congregationalist) did until the late 1800's. People's tax money went to support these churches.
To TennisTennis
[quote]
Now, does anyone honestly believe that religion has a positive role in politics?
[/quote]
Yes someone does and that someone is me.</p>
<p>i didnt suspend the kindergartener nor do i agree with his suspension .... why are you still debating this issue?</p>
<p>i do not, however, believe that the 10 commandments should be displayed outside the courthouse.
its a courthouse, not a church.</p>
<p>Oh, so the Supreme Court is wrong now? Wow, wouldn't they like to hear that from a teenager! </p>
<p>Here is a specific quote from Everson vs. United States:</p>
<p>[T]he rightful purposes of civil government are for its officers to interfere when principles break out into overt acts against peace and good order. In th[is] . . . is found the true distinction between what properly belongs to the church and what to the State.</p>
<p>Which blatantly says that government should only interfere with religion if it is affecting other people. The Ten Commandments does not affect anyone.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Okay, I am the strongest Conservative and a disgruntled Republican and yeah I am mature enough to admit that Bush is a flip flopper. But he is a flip flopper no more or less than most other politicians. After all, he is a politician.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>thank you for admitting this. i now respect your opinion more than the others because you are at least reading our arguments and not just disregarding the things you dont want to face.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Okay that quote about the ten commandments was in response to another post made about the ten commandments. You are taking me out of context. I do think extramarital sex is wrong and you are right that I don't do it, but I do have a right to thing that it is a sin to do it, which in itself keeps me from doing it.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>thats absolutely fine if you think its a sin and dont want to do it, as long as you dont impose your views on others (i dont think you were trying to but just pointing that out)</p>
<p>
[quote]
Quote:
BCgoUSC is pretending to be jesus.
No I am not. I am merely bringing a Christian point of view to the discussion.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>well you were being very preachy. you said i lived an immoral life and that is absolutely not your place to say considering you dont know me at all.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Quote:
hm no one is responding, guess that means we win
Sorry but some people have jobs like myself. You do not win and I am ready and willing to discuss anything.
Quote:
[/quote]
</p>
<p>haha i just said this to get the debate going again because i knew it would **** people off. i love arguing:)</p>
<p>
[quote]
....well theres this other little thing called the bill of rights... maybe you've heard of it?
Yeah I have and nowhere in it is seperation of church and state mentioned. The idea of church and state seperation is found in a letter written by Thomas Jefferson after the writing of the Constitution. All that the Bill of Rights says is that Congress shall make no law regarding the establishment or the practice of religion. It never says that States cannot establish religion as Maryland (Catholic) and Connecticut (Congregationalist) did until the late 1800's. People's tax money went to support these churches.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>see my posts above.</p>
<p>
[quote]
[T]he rightful purposes of civil government are for its officers to interfere when principles break out into overt acts against peace and good order. In th[is] . . . is found the true distinction between what properly belongs to the church and what to the State.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>thank you for supporting my argument....</p>
<p>You're welcome.</p>
<p>Does this support your argument too?</p>
<p>That Court, therefore, and others (Commonwealth v. Nesbit and Lindenmuller v. The People ), identified actions into which-if perpetrated in the name of religion-the government did have legitimate reason to intrude. Those activities included human sacrifice, polygamy, bigamy, concubinage, incest, infanticide, parricide, advocation and promotion of immorality, etc.</p>