Separation of Church and State: Comparing America and Europe

[American]

Separation of church and state is an idea that was largely started in America by the Founding Fathers. They explicitly stated that the United States was not founded on Christianity or any other religion, the complete opposite of what was going on in Europe at the time, where every nation had an official state-funded church.

How times have changed. The line separating church and state has blurred somehow in America due to the rise of the Christian Right, leading to ridiculous displays of religiosity in government from the Ten Commandments on courthouse walls to nativity scenes on display at city governments. Meanwhile in Europe, public school teachers aren't even allowed to wear religious accessories such as necklaces at work. I look at the growth of a firmly secular European Union and the descent of America into religious dogmatism and think to myself "What happened to secular America?" This is a country where senatorial campaigners can insult atheists in campaign ads (2008 NC Senatorial race Dole vs Hagan) and get away with it. We can't get away with making racy, not even racist, comments in politics, but you can get away with attacking a political opponent for accepting campaign donations from atheists.

America needs to take a few lessons from Europe. The ridiculous religiosity in America (something that sets America apart from the rest of the developed world) makes this country look like a, to use Sam Harris' words, "bellicose, dim-witted giant." Any thoughts?

Let's get something perfectly straight here and now. We don't need a damn thing from Europe. Europe is a loser, and the best left to form a new Union that has created more prosperity for more people than the rest of the world combined for all of history.
You can't prove a single word in your second statement.

 

[mpg]

Id say even Europe needs to become even more secular. What place does an organisation which promotes sexism, anti homosexuality, anti other religions... have in a progressive society.

Right now, as I type this, I can hear the church bells breaking what are supposed to be enforcable noise laws, here in Germany. And they ring every 15 minutes. And, this is not the only intrusion of religion into the lives of those who are not affiliated with it. The presence of religion should be tolerated at best, but it should be kept quiet and not interfere with the lives of those who do not want it to.

I agree that noise laws should be enforced but those bells aren't violating your freedom of religion, they're violating your right to peace and quiet.

 

[Lakryte]

America needs to take a few lessons from Europe. The ridiculous religiosity in America (something that sets America apart from the rest of the developed world) makes this country look like a, to use Sam Harris' words, "bellicose, dim-witted giant."

That's why we have been one of the most successful nations on earth, because we are dim-wiited religious idiots, right? Hmm. I wish he had evidence to back up his silly claims.

 

[Ikari]

Id say even Europe needs to become even more secular. What place does an organisation which promotes sexism, anti homosexuality, anti other religions... have in a progressive society.

Right now, as I type this, I can hear the church bells breaking what are supposed to be enforcable noise laws, here in Germany. And they ring every 15 minutes. And, this is not the only intrusion of religion into the lives of those who are not affiliated with it. The presence of religion should be tolerated at best, but it should be kept quiet and not interfere with the lives of those who do not want it to.

I think Europe needs to become more secular as well. But in the opposite sense of what you mean here (BTW, what you're calling for isn't secular government). Government needs to be secular, it cannot speak on religion. Religion is left to the individual and they must make up their own minds. An individual is free to believe and express that belief as they see fit. That's their right. The government is not to hinder this in the least.

See where Europe is going, and actually the tone of your post here is in agreement with that, is a radicalized and a very zealot form of anti-theism. Anti-theocracies are just as bad as theocracies. You get all the same bad stuff. Religion can't be seen. Oh if I see a religious symbol, I'm being opressed. Blah blah blah. Like with your church bells. I mean, seriously they're just bells. They'll stop ringing. You don't have to be all melodramatic pretending that some great injustice has befallen you because you heard church bells. This type of radicalized behavior has devistating effects on the rights and liberties of the individual. Noise statutes are fine, but they're for sustained noise violation like that which you may find at a party or a club; not a brief moment of bells. And the bells do nothing to you, they do not infringe upon your rights in the least. Europe needs to watch the way it's going so it doesn't fall down this anti-theist path. Secular government is what is needed, secular in full. But as I've said earlier, Europe has really adopted this "no one can be offended" route and in the process has become hypersensitive to everything. It's a terrible path to go down, once which can only end in tyranny. I prefer the "grow up, strap on a pair, and get the **** over yourself" approach. Where people recognize the rights and liberties of the individual and deal with anything they don't like by themselves.

It's time not to be a bunch of whinny little children and grow up. Separation of Church and State is important, and America has done it well better than Europe.

 

[Psychoclown]

I think Europe needs to become more secular as well. But in the opposite sense of what you mean here (BTW, what you're calling for isn't secular government). Government needs to be secular, it cannot speak on religion. Religion is left to the individual and they must make up their own minds. An individual is free to believe and express that belief as they see fit. That's their right. The government is not to hinder this in the least.

See where Europe is going, and actually the tone of your post here is in agreement with that, is a radicalized and a very zealot form of anti-theism. Anti-theocracies are just as bad as theocracies. You get all the same bad stuff. Religion can't be seen. Oh if I see a religious symbol, I'm being opressed. Blah blah blah. Like with your church bells. I mean, seriously they're just bells. They'll stop ringing. You don't have to be all melodramatic pretending that some great injustice has befallen you because you heard church bells. This type of radicalized behavior has devistating effects on the rights and liberties of the individual. Noise statutes are fine, but they're for sustained noise violation like that which you may find at a party or a club; not a brief moment of bells. And the bells do nothing to you, they do not infringe upon your rights in the least. Europe needs to watch the way it's going so it doesn't fall down this anti-theist path. Secular government is what is needed, secular in full. But as I've said earlier, Europe has really adopted this "no one can be offended" route and in the process has become hypersensitive to everything. It's a terrible path to go down, once which can only end in tyranny. I prefer the "grow up, strap on a pair, and get the **** over yourself" approach. Where people recognize the rights and liberties of the individual and deal with anything they don't like by themselves.

It's time not to be a bunch of whinny little children and grow up. Separation of Church and State is important, and America has done it well better than Europe.

I was going to reply to this thread, but you said it all better than I could. :applaud

 

[The_Patriot]

The original poster is confusing what is meant by the word 'establishment' from both the Letter to the Danbury Baptist Association and what is in the First Amendment. Establishment does not mean a state-run religion. The original meaning for establishment, in Webster's 1828 Dictionary, is "Settled regulation; form; ordinance; system of laws; constitution of government." In this context, establishment means laws derived from a religious document cannot be passed. Murder is a criminal law that is based off of the right to life not because a religious text says it's wrong. Our entire legal system is based off of property rights and has been since long before there was a Revolutionary War. The bulk of the laws the original colonies had were based off of English Civil and Criminal Law that has a foundation in the Magna Carta, which is the first document detailing the doctrine of property based rights.

 

[CrazyMcCool]

I think that when in public schools like in texas i read, that they teach that jefferson is a red communist who came from hell ( i need to find the article is effed up) Thats an issue.

and this is a PUBLIC school, something that does not let relgion be anything but a side lesson so people know what it is.

When you got laws being passed cause the majorty are Christan, but the law initself is actually a violation of a citizens right thats a problem..
Where do you draw the line?

 

[DrunkenAsparagus]

I disagree. I'm not sure how you're making this comparison but the United States has certainly become, if not more religious, more actively religious. Survey data (from Pew polls and other sources) shows that the percentage of people in the United States that rate religious belief as 'very important' is 61%, second only to Turkey (65%) by comparison with Europe. As a comparison, Britain polled at 33%, Italy at 27%, Germany at 21% and France at 11%. These statistics are further emphasised by weekly church attendance data, with an average of 42% of Americans attending church once or almost once every week compared with an average of 21% in Europe and this gap is growing.

Wait, since when does being "actively religious" mean being a theocrat? I'm actively religious and I don't exactly support the stoning of Homosexuals and adulterers.

 

[C. Gerstle]

You can't prove a single word in your second statement.

On the contrary, I CAN prove that the US was not founded on the Christian faith by the words of the Founding Fathers. This is my proof. In this Treaty, the United States explicitly stated that this great country was not founded on the Christian religion. This is Article 11 from the Treaty of Tripoli of 1796:

"As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion,—as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquility, of Mussulmen,—and as the said States never entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mahometan nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries."

This is irrefutable evidence. You right-wing religious freaks have no right to say that this is a Christian nation. We may have a Christian-majority populace, but we have a secular government (or at least we should).

 

[American]

On the contrary, I CAN prove that the US was not founded on the Christian faith by the words of the Founding Fathers. This is my proof. In this Treaty, the United States explicitly stated that this great country was not founded on the Christian religion. This is Article 11 from the Treaty of Tripoli of 1796:

"As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion,—as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquility, of Mussulmen,—and as the said States never entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mahometan nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries."

This is irrefutable evidence. You right-wing religious freaks have no right to say that this is a Christian nation. We may have a Christian-majority populace, but we have a secular government (or at least we should).

Yes we're all aware of the the Treaty of Tripoli, just as we're all at the letter to the Danbruy Baptists. You can hang your entire argument on religion in the US on those if you like, but there are many other documents to consider. Do a search, this has all been ground through the debate machine before.

 

[FluffyNinja]

On the contrary, I CAN prove that the US was not founded on the Christian faith by the words of the Founding Fathers. This is my proof. In this Treaty, the United States explicitly stated that this great country was not founded on the Christian religion. This is Article 11 from the Treaty of Tripoli of 1796:

"As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion,—as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquility, of Mussulmen,—and as the said States never entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mahometan nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries."

This is irrefutable evidence. You right-wing religious freaks have no right to say that this is a Christian nation. We may have a Christian-majority populace, but we have a secular government (or at least we should).

This topic was debated steadily for over two years on the DP forum, over 350 posts and over 20,000 views. As American pointed out, it was covered rather extensively. And while I hate to be one to rehash the past, LOL, I must take issue with you on the question of whether the US was founded upon Christian principles; indeed it was, and in the words of the very men who created it. Citing the Treaty of Tripoli, which was nothing more than an agreement with the Barbary Pirates in order to guarantee safe passage of American merchant vessels, as proof, is a very far reach indeed. If we're going to use the wording of treaties as "irrefutable" evidence, as you put it, then here are the EXACT words of the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, a much more recognizeable and respected document, I think. BTW bold emphasis - mine

PEACE, FRIENDSHIP, LIMITS, AND SETTLEMENT
TREATY OF GUADALUPE HIDALGO 2 Feb 1848

In the name of Almighty God:

The United States of America, and the United Mexican States, animated by a sincere desire to put an end to the calamities of the war which unhappily exists between the two Republics, and to establish upon a solid basis relations of peace and friendship, which shall confer reciprocal benefits upon the citizens of both, and assure the concord, harmony and mutual confidence, wherein the two Peoples should live, as good Neighbours, have for that purpose appointed their respective Plenipotentiaries: that is to say, the President of the United States has appointed Nicholas P. Trist, a citizen of the United States, and the President of the Mexican Republic has appointed Don Luis Gonzaga Cuevas, Don Bernardo Couto, and Don Miguel Atristain, citizens of the said Republic; who, after a reciprocal communication of their respective full powers, have, under the protection of Almighty God, the author of Peace, arranged, agreed upon, and signed the following

Treaty of Peace, Friendship, Limits and Settlement between the United States of America and the Mexican Republic.

Strange words for a "Secular" government to put in an official document. BTW the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo was ratified more recently, therefore it supercedes your treaty :mrgreen:

 

[CrazyMcCool]

I am a big fan of Thomas Jefferson's religious statements.

here is one.

"Shake off all the fears of servile prejudices, under which weak minds are servilely crouched. Fix reason firmly in her seat, and call on her tribunal for every fact, every opinion. Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason than that of blindfolded fear. "

Thomas Jefferson

This is perhaps the most important statement on religion ever made. It clarified the intent of the founders of the constitution irrespective of the attempts of modern day religious revisionists...

Isnt that the same guy who wrote the Declaration of Independence ( Thanks for the fix Ikari )

 

[Ikari]

Isnt that the same guy who wrote the Constitution ^^

No, it was the Declaration of Independence.

 

[CrazyMcCool]

No, it was the Declaration of Independence.

Rofl, epic fail on my part I ment that >< thanks for the fix

I got 2 many history exams I am losing my basic knowledge x.x

 

[FluffyNinja]

I am a big fan of Thomas Jefferson's religious statements.

here is one.

"Shake off all the fears of servile prejudices, under which weak minds are servilely crouched. Fix reason firmly in her seat, and call on her tribunal for every fact, every opinion. Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason than that of blindfolded fear. "

Thomas Jefferson

This is perhaps the most important statement on religion ever made. It clarified the intent of the founders of the constitution irrespective of the attempts of modern day religious revisionists...

Isnt that the same guy who wrote the Declaration of Independence ( Thanks for the fix Ikari )

What about these quotes/writings by the very same Thomas Jefferson? I've stated before, in previous threads, that Jefferson is an enigma, who often contradicted himself on the issue of Christian principles as applied to our early national government. I'm not sure that he is a great source for being representational of the majority of the Founders.

Thomas Jefferson:
“ The doctrines of Jesus are simple, and tend to all the happiness of man.”

“Of all the systems of morality, ancient or modern which have come under my observation, none appears to me so pure as that of Jesus.”

"I am a real Christian, that is to say, a disciple of the doctrines of Jesus."

“God who gave us life gave us liberty. And can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are a gift from God? That they are not to be violated but with His wrath? Indeed I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just, and that His justice cannot sleep forever.” (excerpts are inscribed on the walls of the Jefferson Memorial in the nations capital) [Source: Merrill . D. Peterson, ed., Jefferson Writings, (New York: Literary Classics of the United States, Inc., 1984), Vol. IV, p. 289. From Jefferson’s Notes on the State of Virginia, Query XVIII, 1781.]

Try these, from the "Father of the Constitution", James Madison, perhaps a better source to cite on the issue of "Principles Upon Which our Nation was founded" seeing as how he actually WROTE, the majority of the US Constitution:

James Madison
“ We’ve staked our future on our ability to follow the Ten Commandments with all of our heart.”

“We have staked the whole future of American civilization, not upon the power of government, far from it. We’ve staked the future of all our political institutions upon our capacity…to sustain ourselves according to the Ten Commandments of God.” [1778 to the General Assembly of the State of Virginia]

• I have sometimes thought there could not be a stronger testimony in favor of religion or against temporal enjoyments, even the most rational and manly, than for men who occupy the most honorable and gainful departments and [who] are rising in reputation and wealth, publicly to declare the unsatisfactoriness [of temportal enjoyments] by becoming fervent advocates in the cause of Christ; and I wish you may give in your evidence in this way.
Letter by Madison to William Bradford (September 25, 1773)
• In 1812, President Madison signed a federal bill which economically aided the Bible Society of Philadelphia in its goal of the mass distribution of the Bible.
“ An Act for the relief of the Bible Society of Philadelphia” Approved February 2, 1813 by Congress

“It is the mutual duty of all to practice Christian forbearance, love, and charity toward each other.”

• A watchful eye must be kept on ourselves lest, while we are building ideal monuments of renown and bliss here, we neglect to have our names enrolled in the Annals of Heaven. [Letter by Madison to William Bradford [urging him to make sure of his own salvation] November 9, 1772]

 

[FluffyNinja]

I am a big fan of Thomas Jefferson's religious statements.

here is one.



Isnt that the same guy who wrote the Declaration of Independence ( Thanks for the fix Ikari )

BTW, have you actually read the Declaration of Independence lately? Here are actual words from it:

IN CONGRESS, JULY 4, 1776
The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America

When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation……..

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………

We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions,………………

And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives,……….

This doesn't sound like secularism to me :roll: And just in case you're unsure about Divine Providence, here's the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy's explanation:

Divine Providence
First published Wed Aug 1, 2001; substantive revision Thu Sep 14, 2006, Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy

Traditional theism holds that God is the creator of heaven and earth, and that all that occurs in the universe takes place under Divine Providence — that is, under God's sovereign guidance and control.

 

[CrazyMcCool]

Indeed it does say "Nature's God" and such, but at the time there was not really anything else to say :lol: they dont have the understanding we do now, so it was really all they could say.

 

[Manc Skipper]

"Nature's God" is a deist term, and certainly not a specific allusion to any of the individual Gods.

According to the CIA World Factbook, the religion of France is Roman Catholic 83-88%, Protestant 2%, Jewish 1%, However, a church wedding has no legal standing, so that a religious couple who wish to lawfully marry must do so twice. Once in the eyes of the state, and once in the eyes of their Gods. THAT's separation.

 

[Ikari]

BTW, have you actually read the Declaration of Independence lately? Here are actual words from it:


This doesn't sound like secularism to me :roll: And just in case you're unsure about Divine Providence, here's the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy's explanation:

No, Jefferson indeed used gods in his public writings on occasion, such as the Declaration of Independence. However, that's not as much a personal endorsement of the particular god and more a common usage. The Declaration of Independence was in part propaganda against the British Empire. We wanted to revolt and we needed reasons to. What better reason than the British infringing upon some god given gift? And what higher authority can there be? You basically make a plea to an authority higher than the King of England and justify the revolution while claiming some god. It not only gives excuse to the British, but it gains sympathy at home. Just because Jefferson put references to god in the Declaration of Independence doesn't mean that the government is a theocracy. The contract which creates the government, the Constitution, has no references to god what so ever. And as for Jefferson, from personal letters he wrote his son he often sounded very atheist.

So yes, invoking god is a time honored tradition in propaganda and Jefferson also used it. In part to raise concerns against the governorship of the King of England, and in part to swing more people over to the Revolutionary side. But that's what it is, invoking a god for propaganda sake.

 

[FluffyNinja]

Indeed it does say "Nature's God" and such, but at the time there was not really anything else to say :lol: they dont have the understanding we do now, so it was really all they could say.

Well, now, isn't that the question here? What were the intentions of the Founders? Or, in other words, what was their "understanding" of laws, morals, nature, and of governments? To try and apply todays morals and "understandings" to the things said by our Founders over 200 years ago is just historically irresponsible.

 

[FluffyNinja]

"Nature's God" is a deist term, and certainly not a specific allusion to any of the individual Gods.

According to the CIA World Factbook, the religion of France is Roman Catholic 83-88%, Protestant 2%, Jewish 1%, However, a church wedding has no legal standing, so that a religious couple who wish to lawfully marry must do so twice. Once in the eyes of the state, and once in the eyes of their Gods. THAT's separation.

Why did Jefferson capitalize the terms Nature's GOD, Creator, and Supreme Judge of the World?

 

[FluffyNinja]

No, Jefferson indeed used gods in his public writings on occasion, such as the Declaration of Independence. However, that's not as much a personal endorsement of the particular god and more a common usage. The Declaration of Independence was in part propaganda against the British Empire. We wanted to revolt and we needed reasons to. What better reason than the British infringing upon some god given gift? And what higher authority can there be? You basically make a plea to an authority higher than the King of England and justify the revolution while claiming some god. It not only gives excuse to the British, but it gains sympathy at home. Just because Jefferson put references to god in the Declaration of Independence doesn't mean that the government is a theocracy. The contract which creates the government, the Constitution, has no references to god what so ever. And as for Jefferson, from personal letters he wrote his son he often sounded very atheist.

So yes, invoking god is a time honored tradition in propaganda and Jefferson also used it. In part to raise concerns against the governorship of the King of England, and in part to swing more people over to the Revolutionary side. But that's what it is, invoking a god for propaganda sake.

Ikari, my friend, you are correct! I agree completely, and, unlike many other posters I've experienced, you know your history, and from a common sense perspective. I like that. But, to the point, I, personally, would never use the Declaration, nor any of Jefferson's remarks to defend the argument that the US Govt. was founded upon Christian Principles for the very reasons you stated above. Earlier in this thread, I said this. I also said that Jefferson was an enigma and always contradictory and flip-flopping in his views on morals, govt. and on social issues. This is quite evident from his many personal letters that have, fortunately, survived the ages. Jefferson was not what we would call a "typical" colonial mind. BTW, I only referenced the Declaration because Crazy McCool did......I only did it as a "lesson" in "Historical Perspective" that's all

 

[rivrrat]

I didn't read all of the thread, but wrt to the OP, I think that the US still has some ways to go to completely separate church and state but that we do a fairly good job of it. I think it's a delicate balance that tips this way and that way depending on the prevailing powers that be. Do I think the 10 commandments should be displayed on government property? Absolutely not. Not unless they're going to display other mythological relics too. No one should feel as though our court system favors one mythology over another and having the 10 commandments displayed implies that our court system favors that mythology over all others. In God We Trust on our money? If I had to vote on it, I'd say remove it. But I'm not going to get up in arms about it and try to force a vote. Because the phrase is perfectly meaningless. Things like teaching creationism, etc in our public schools... obviously, shouldn't be done except in the context of a mythology class - where they would be teaching all sorts of creation myths.

But Europe goes too far the other way, IMO. Europe goes so far as to infringe on the citizen's rights to practice their faiths. Not able to wear certain jewelry? Banning head scarves? They go FAR too far the other way, a path that I hope the US never goes down.

While there are things the US could improve upon, I'll take the US over Europe on this matter.

 

[digsbe]

I think America has a better separation of church and state policy. As Rivrrat has stated, in some European countries the state infringes upon the church (religion) and makes certain religious things illegal like head scarves. Many European countries have a state religion, England as a province has the Anglican church as the state religion for example. The US has no state religion, and we don't infringe (for the most part) upon the religious freedoms of others.

 

[Ikari]

But, to the point, I, personally, would never use the Declaration, nor any of Jefferson's remarks to defend the argument that the US Govt. was founded upon Christian Principles for the very reasons you stated above.

I don't think one can defend the argument that America was founded on Christian principles. If so, more of the 10 commandments would be illegal. As it stands, you have at most 3. Murder, Theft, and bearing false witness; but that last one only counts under oath in a court of law.