• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

"Church and State" debate question (1 Viewer)

Melchior

Melchior

New member
Joined
Jul 4, 2005
Messages
46
Reaction score
5
Location
Palm Beach, Florida
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
There is a quarrel in this country over the issue of Separation of Church and State.

Some people believe the idea is clearly written in the Constitution and means we must have a secular government in order to remain free. Some people believe Separation of Church and State is a myth.

To those who think the idea is a myth: Why are you trying so hard to disprove it? Even if this constitutional law did not exist is it really such a bad idea? Do you want a theocracy?
 
the problem is the extent that people take this argument. even as a christian, i dont believe government should have any authority on our beliefs, but today this has taken on an entirely different meaning.

a separation of church and state merely means that the state cannot take away our freedom to worship in whatever way we choose. but when the state takes away our freedom to religion (i.e. not being able to pray in public shools), it then becomes a separation of church and society, which is clearly unconstitutional. the whole thing is a catch-22, it just goes in circles. look at our courts, some people dont want the 10 commandments in court rooms because they say that it imposes religious ideologies on them, while the next person has every right to hang the 10 commandments in the court room.
 
galenrox said:
The freedom TO religion is definately important, but it's a slippery slope. Individual prayer in school should be allowed, but a specified time is inappropriate, due to the presence of atheists.
It seems to me is that the role of public schools in this issue is to keep out any preference of any religion, and it would seem that the easiest way to do this is to keep religion out of public schools, but what makes this difficult is that could infringe on students ability to practice their own personal religion, and thus overstep their bounds.
I think a good idea is just have five minutes a day where there is just nothing specified. Kids can go online, do homework, talk with their friends, pray, whatever, and that way it doesn't show preference to any religion, but doesn't infringe upon the rights to practice.
It's in these fringe areas that the complexities of the issue really come out.
Click to expand...

i agree with the basis of what you're saying and i think most conservative christians would. public schools should not promote religion, but students reserve the right to practice religion individually. there are still shady areas. what if a class had to write a paper and present it orally. it would be a students right to write a paper on his or her faith, but do you think it would be the other students right not to hear it presented to them?
 
Melchior said:
There is a quarrel in this country over the issue of Separation of Church and State.

Some people believe the idea is clearly written in the Constitution and means we must have a secular government in order to remain free. Some people believe Separation of Church and State is a myth.

To those who think the idea is a myth: Why are you trying so hard to disprove it? Even if this constitutional law did not exist is it really such a bad idea? Do you want a theocracy?
Click to expand...


There is a difference between a theocracy and government not being able to meddle in religious affairs... Also how is a display of the 10 commandments in a courthouse have anything to do with Congress passing a law establishing an official state religion? It doesn't have anything to do with it, and therefore is not unconstitutional... I'm glad O'Conner stepped down... Lets get a Justice that will interpret the Constitution, not try to legislate from the bench...
 
The other reason why keeping religion out of public schools is if you do that you are also removing yet another piece of history. And history in publics schools has been eating away to the point of being stupid. I love history, Iam a huge history buff, and I have the ability when researching a paticular topic to look at it from the out-side. But to completely remove religion from schools takes away from our kids learning, our country was founded based on freedom of religion and now that ideal has been scewed over years of being, in my opinion, to sensitive. We are the only country that doesnt stand up for what makes this country great. I do however feel that it needs to be taught not through relgious beliefs but the history of religion it again is the foundation for most countries.
 
^^im definitely with you on that. fortunately, i think most of the debate is about how the schools promote religion, not whether its historic significance is being taught. but ive noticed that a lot of schools are starting to shy away from topics like the Crusades. bad news.
 
Where do we get our rights? From the creator, certainly not from the governement. And not from the Constitution.

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."

So, how can we as a free declared nation, claim to have any rights without that creator that gave them to us?

Taking the creator (regardless of religion) out of schools would be denying our equal rights. Would it not?
 
The question is which creator?
Do you think it looks like "equal rights" towards muslims for example?
Besides, if religion and state were splited, you wouldn't have a president who thinks he is on missions for god.... The only other one that I know believe is on a mission for god is called Oussama...
Another thing: to teach a kid a religion ain't quite good because he will think it's for sure, and he will take it for a truth, but there's no proof of that. It's like teaching children false things. Moreover religion should be a matter of personal choice, and not something that you "learn" at school...

That's my advice, waiting for replys...
(sorry about my english)
 
Thebestien said:
The question is which creator?
Do you think it looks like "equal rights" towards muslims for example?
Besides, if religion and state were splited, you wouldn't have a president who thinks he is on missions for god.... The only other one that I know believe is on a mission for god is called Oussama...
Another thing: to teach a kid a religion ain't quite good because he will think it's for sure, and he will take it for a truth, but there's no proof of that. It's like teaching children false things. Moreover religion should be a matter of personal choice, and not something that you "learn" at school...

That's my advice, waiting for replys...
(sorry about my english)
Click to expand...
Actually, I don't think it matters if you ask which creator. The point of being endowed by a creator with unalienable rights rests on a person realizing he is not the creator. Rights are not manifested from within a man, but come from something superior. Which creator a person belives in is unimportant, since reason tells us that there can only be one creator, no matter his/her/its name. origin, or pleasure.

Now, you made a disparaging remark about our president when you compared him to bin Laden. I'm no Bush fan, but that was way over the top. Completely unfair and really just plain stupid...
 
For me human rights are only coming from human history, and from human mind. It only comes from laws written by humans. Else, how would you explain years of slavement.... People who were bringing slaves in Europa or in the US were chretians...
I'm sorry about Bush, I just think he believes too much in god and in America. It really scares me when he says he is on a mission for god... Crusades ended a long time ago.
And even admitting that human rights are coming from a creator, which ain't right for me like I said, you'll still be able to teach children human rights without the religious side. Just say them: "every human on earth are or should be equals, no matter what religion, nationality or skin color they are". Sounds possible to me.
 
Thebestien said:
For me human rights are only coming from human history, and from human mind. It only comes from laws written by humans. Else, how would you explain years of slavement.... People who were bringing slaves in Europa or in the US were chretians...
I'm sorry about Bush, I just think he believes too much in god and in America. It really scares me when he says he is on a mission for god... Crusades ended a long time ago.
And even admitting that human rights are coming from a creator, which ain't right for me like I said, you'll still be able to teach children human rights without the religious side. Just say them: "every human on earth are or should be equals, no matter what religion, nationality or skin color they are". Sounds possible to me.
Click to expand...
Here's something to consider: If rights come from man and man's laws, then wouldn't you agree that man can remove them? If rights come from the Diety, then man has no right to remove rights granted by the Diety...
 
galenrox said:
I believe a man deserves those rights because of God, but he is given these rights by man, and they are maintained by man. God leaves a lot of our management to ourselves, which is another reason to completely seperate church and state.
Click to expand...
Your's is a subtle difference than what Jefferson wrote, that "we are endowed by our Creastor with certain inalienable rights." That means they can't be rightfully removed by man. But you're right, that rights are maintained by man, and that that's the reason governments are instituted, to protect those rights...
 
Got a question: your president, right after the election, has to promise on the Bible, right? (ouch, sorry about my english, hope you'll still understand)
Do you think this is fair? How would you do if an amercian muslim (or atheist) whishes to run for presidency? That I can't understand for now...

Another thing, that you won't like at all. I think that the way you see politics in the US (God is with the government, God bless America) doesn't help you to be open with others countries, and to question yourself about what you're doing from time to time. (I warned you ;-)
This is only what I think, it's up to you to show me if i'm wrong...
 
Thebestien said:
Got a question: your president, right after the election, has to promise on the Bible, right? (ouch, sorry about my english, hope you'll still understand)
Do you think this is fair? How would you do if an amercian muslim (or atheist) whishes to run for presidency? That I can't understand for now...

Another thing, that you won't like at all. I think that the way you see politics in the US (God is with the government, God bless America) doesn't help you to be open with others countries, and to question yourself about what you're doing from time to time. (I warned you ;-)
This is only what I think, it's up to you to show me if i'm wrong...
Click to expand...
Actually, I don't think it's a requirement for a newly elected person to place his hand on the Bible. They only do it for two reasons: #1, they really believe they should, and #2, if they didn't people would talk.

I think during the last election we did have a moslem or two running for president. I know we had at least two athiests. But you're right, most people in this country believe in God.

To the point you think might offend me, well, I'm not offended at all. Thanks for considering my feelings though. You must not be from America, because if you were you'd understand something we used to call "good old American ingenuity". It means more than just being good at doing things. It really means having the guts to be independent, and take things upon yourself and let the consequences work themselves out. So let the people in other countries think what they want.

As far as belief in God being an important part of our culture - yes it is. But that's not going to change any time soon, no matter what you read in the newspapers...
 
FiremanRyan said:
the problem is the extent that people take this argument. even as a christian, i dont believe government should have any authority on our beliefs, but today this has taken on an entirely different meaning.

a separation of church and state merely means that the state cannot take away our freedom to worship in whatever way we choose. but when the state takes away our freedom to religion (i.e. not being able to pray in public shools), it then becomes a separation of church and society, which is clearly unconstitutional. the whole thing is a catch-22, it just goes in circles. look at our courts, some people dont want the 10 commandments in court rooms because they say that it imposes religious ideologies on them, while the next person has every right to hang the 10 commandments in the court room.
Click to expand...

The Supreme Court never ruled that people could not pray in public schools. This is bad information someone passed on to you and now you are passing it on to others. The court ruled that teachers could not lead prayers. It is perfectly fine and legal for a student to pray on their own. Read the ruling yourself instead of listening to Christian myth and propaganda.
 
vauge said:
Where do we get our rights? From the creator, certainly not from the governement. And not from the Constitution.

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."

So, how can we as a free declared nation, claim to have any rights without that creator that gave them to us?

Taking the creator (regardless of religion) out of schools would be denying our equal rights. Would it not?
Click to expand...

The quote you use here is from the Declaration of Independence. It is just that, a declaration, and not a law. A "creator" could mean a person's mother or any god including the muslim god, christian god, multiple gods, etc. It is a neutral word for a reason.

No one is taking away your rights. You have the right to pray and worship the way you want. It just cannot be forced on you or anyone else. If you were in a class with a muslim teacher and they lead you in a prayer to Allah, or any other god you do not believe in, would you be okay with that?
 
alex said:
The Supreme Court never ruled that people could not pray in public schools. This is bad information someone passed on to you and now you are passing it on to others. The court ruled that teachers could not lead prayers. It is perfectly fine and legal for a student to pray on their own. Read the ruling yourself instead of listening to Christian myth and propaganda.
Click to expand...

i realize this, thats why i meant it hypothetically. with that said (as long as you brought it up), there have been instances where students were not allowed to openly pray in public schools, so even if i meant it literally, i dont see how it would be "Christian myth and propaganda".
 
Melchior said:
There is a quarrel in this country over the issue of Separation of Church and State.

Some people believe the idea is clearly written in the Constitution and means we must have a secular government in order to remain free. Some people believe Separation of Church and State is a myth.

To those who think the idea is a myth: Why are you trying so hard to disprove it? Even if this constitutional law did not exist is it really such a bad idea? Do you want a theocracy?
Click to expand...

Christ never taught "separation of Church and state." And only pseudo christians are against a Christian theocracy/righteuos government . . . .

 
Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.

This I beleive is not true, Thomas Edison, produced over 500 failures before getting a light bulb to work, and when he was asked how he felt about it he replied saying "I didn't have 500 failures I just found 500 ways to create a light-bulb."

So I think you might want to change your "quote".
 
he never did the same thing over and over again. He did different things over and over again, to get the desired result.
 
FiremanRyan said:
i realize this, thats why i meant it hypothetically. with that said (as long as you brought it up), there have been instances where students were not allowed to openly pray in public schools, so even if i meant it literally, i dont see how it would be "Christian myth and propaganda".
Click to expand...

If a person is not allowed to openly pray in school, they need to contact the ACLU and it will be cleared up. It is Christian myth and propaganda because there are Christians who want people to believe the right to pray is being taken away. They say that to people so they will think their rights are being removed. Then the people will push for more religion and government mixing. The fact is that no Supreme Court ruling has ever stated that a person cannot pray. It just cannot be imposed on anyone.
 
alex said:
If a person is not allowed to openly pray in school, they need to contact the ACLU and it will be cleared up. It is Christian myth and propaganda because there are Christians who want people to believe the right to pray is being taken away. They say that to people so they will think their rights are being removed. Then the people will push for more religion and government mixing. The fact is that no Supreme Court ruling has ever stated that a person cannot pray. It just cannot be imposed on anyone.
Click to expand...

i dont disagree with this. sadly, while theyre still the minority, there are a lot of christian groups who do promote a fair share of propaganda and the idea that prayer is being taken out of schools is one of their biggest scare tactics. what ive noticed, at least going to school in the San Francisco area, is that individual public prayer is looked down upon and openly christian students are sometimes challenged by teachers. this, however, does not violate any individual rights. maybe a sorry example of hypocrisy from christian rights groups.
 
Shamgar said:
Christ never taught "separation of Church and state." And only pseudo christians are against a Christian theocracy/righteuos government . . . .

Click to expand...

I'm not sure what Bible this link is quoting because that is not what it says.

Acts 5:6-6Then the young men came forward, wrapped up his body, and carried him out and buried him.

Psalms 110:4- The LORD has sworn
and will not change his mind:
"You are a priest forever,
in the order of Melchizedek."

Hebrews 3:1- 1Therefore, holy brothers, who share in the heavenly calling, fix your thoughts on Jesus, the apostle and high priest whom we confess.

These are the verses that the link references and none of that says you shouldn't separare church and state. Please don't misquote the Bible
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top Bottom