Question:
Shouldn't religious people want seperation of Church and State as much as atheists do?
Blargoth
2011-12-20 17:49:45 UTC
This isn't just separation of state from church. It is also the separation of church from state. Imagine what it would be like if Congress made laws that were binding in churches? Horrible right? Ok, now take that and realize that that is exactly how atheists feel when religions interfere with political matters.
24 answers:
Not Buying It
2011-12-20 17:51:34 UTC
I'm a Christian, and I agree that there should be total separation. The history of Europe is full of incidents where either the church or the secular powers had the power and the upper hand and thereby controlled the other.
DimensionalStryder
2011-12-20 17:56:24 UTC
In theory yes.. But some people don't see why THEIR religion can't be included in the state while keeping the state out of their religion. And any attempt to block their religion from being included in the state, or removal of parts that snuck their way in, is considered by them to be causing the state to deny them their religion...



Wish I could figure out a good way to explain to these people. Most of the time they ignore me, say I am persecuting them, or say that the state is NOT supposed to be separated from the church even though they still believe church is separated from the state.
Stella
2011-12-20 18:00:54 UTC
As a Pagan, I fully support the separation of church and state. I don't want any religion - even my own - being sponsored or shown favoritism by the government. Only a secular, religiously neutral government has any hope of living up to our country's ideal of treating all its citizens equally.



Problem is, Christianity has already infiltrated our government and seeks more and more power and influence, putting the freedoms of everyone else in jeopardy. But anytime anyone tries to correct the situation, the Christians cry "persecution" for not being allowed to impose their beliefs on everyone else.
R. C.
2011-12-20 17:58:36 UTC
Separation of church and state only holds that they cannot force you into a certain belief system. Such as "mandatory ______ religion" any others, or non belief will be prosecuted. That's all it says. You have to understand the constitution was written by a group who were trying to protect Americans from a tyrant king. In some countries, if you say you're Christian, they take an axe and execute you the old fashion way. It was this that they were protecting from, and only this. It had nothing to do with all these arguments. Constitutional arguments would be obsolete, if the old rule of interpreting legal documents still applied. Although they changed from "sentence construction" to "layman" style writing, I believe all documents written before that time should be read as they were written and intended. Therefore the constitution should be read where EVERY word takes on its dictionary defined meaning, with no interpretation, or expansion to anything other than.
Gabby Little Angel
2011-12-20 18:00:13 UTC
The term, when Jefferson coined the phrase in a letter to a Baptist Church, meant that the government would not attempt to dictate to the church what it should or should not do.



It DID NOT mean that people of faith should not be involved in the affairs of the Government, or that they should abandon their morals when they are involved in the Government.



If the Government gets involved in telling the church (or any religion) how to worship God, we lose our freedom. If people of faith do not get involved in the Government, we end up with an ungodly government.
Abby B
2011-12-20 17:54:56 UTC
As long as we have the right to worship freely when ever we want without atheist interfering or calling ot "offensive" You will never ever hear me complain about the law of church and state. If the law of church and state falls we are all screwed! Yes christians want this law DESPERATELY
anonymous
2011-12-20 17:53:24 UTC
Religious people would love separation of church and state. The church of anyone else, that is.
No More Democrats or GOP, please
2011-12-20 17:52:51 UTC
They should, but many really don't.



What many religious people want is for the separation of church and state to be a one-way street. They want government to stay out of their affairs but want to retain the right to interfere with the workings of government, e.g., requiring prayer in public schools.
Owl
2011-12-20 17:58:16 UTC
>>realize that that is exactly how atheists feel when religions interfere with political matters.<<



Then atheists have no right to say the Catholic Church didn't do enough to stop the Holocaust. Their contemporary complaints sound just like the Nazi complaints:



“This treasonous political Catholicism is once again at work today, eagerly attempting to sow weeds that will destroy the constructive efforts of the National Socialist government. Then there are those familiar practitioners of Jesuit sophistry who hide behind the mask of the innocent citizen who attempt to tear down everything that does not agree 100% with their opinions and theories. We know the phrases that these peculiar politicians always use, phrases of ‘racist nonsense,’ ‘false nationalism,’ ‘hate-filled enemies of religion,’ of the ‘nationalization of religion,’ we know them all — these eternal arguments of political Catholicism, this if and but.”



“At present, the political agitators are making the most noise about the Law for the Prevention of Genetically Ill Offspring, and there enough cases known in which the faithful have publicly urged the violation of this law. They urge disobeying the law, even if the result is unhindered births of the physically, mentally, or psychologically ill, resulting in thousands and tens of thousands of cripples running about, vegetating to the honor of political Catholicism, half human, half animal!”



“According to the dogma of the Roman Catholic Church, these people are more important than all scientific knowledge, so they cry bloody murder about the National Socialist state whose wise genetic policies and careful, justified elimination of incurable defectives are working to make the German people once again into a healthy, strong, youthful people.”



“Closely related to the agitation against the Law for the Prevention of Genetically Ill Offspring is political Catholicism’s battle against the powerful discoveries in the area of racial science. Bishop Gföllner is even clever enough to declare that the National Socialist standpoint is completely irreconcilable with Christianity, calling it a return to despicable heathenism. Nearly all Roman Catholic politicians fighting the National Socialist state play the same tune.”



“Every German-thinking people’s comrade must resist the arrogant attempts of such people to oppose the state and National Socialist principles. When, for example, an itinerant Catholic preacher stands behind the pulpit and preaches to Catholic Germans that he prefers a *****, a mulatto of pure soul, to a sinful Aryan, when he says that the Semitic race must be esteemed because Christ the man is of Semitic ancestry, when he calls on his hearers to fight for Rome and to be dissatisfied, then even the most faithful Catholic can only shake his head about such backwardness, narrow-mindedness, and ignorance, and leave such an apostle of agitation and hatred to himself.”



“We must now consider whether the countless attacks and complaints of Catholic agitators against National Socialism and the German people are isolated events, or whether they are part of a systematic, organized campaign. The multitude of such occurrences makes it clear that political Catholicism’s battle against the new Germany is organized, that it is aimed at disrupting National Socialism’s constructive efforts, that both an open and a concealed war is being waged against the German people, a war in service of Catholicism’s centuries-old plans for world domination, a continuation of a centuries-long Catholic battle against the German spirit. Consider the various statements by bishops and cardinals, above all the arrogant behavior of the Bishop of Münster, who had the gall to call for a speaking ban for Reichsleiter Alfred Rosenberg, the Führer’s representative, and threatened protests from Catholic circles if his demand was rejected.”



http://www.calvin.edu/academic/cas/gpa/rim5.htm
anonymous
2011-12-20 17:54:27 UTC
The religious want to get into congress and take power so not they don't want the separation.
The Dave
2011-12-20 17:56:46 UTC
Every atheist will hate this answer, but God's laws and our responsibilty to be personally ethical and moral are still binding even if faith is not present. The Gov't needs a conscience, so to speak, and that is the role of biblical religion; not to control gov't but to direct the ethical sense and direction of how it conducts itself.
anonymous
2011-12-20 17:55:48 UTC
I think everybody should be for seperation of church and state. Also why is flower such a *****.
anonymous
2011-12-20 17:52:11 UTC
I wish congress would TAX churches since they are businesses. They enjoy all of the benefits that the rest of us taxpayers do at no cost to them.
quartermon
2016-11-30 00:18:32 UTC
the twin-actuality doctrine has no longer something to do with the separation of powers clause of the 1st replace. the 1st is mere philosophy, the 2d is political and social necessity. And the respond on your question is "the founding fathers of the U. S.."
Godsproblemchild
2011-12-20 17:53:22 UTC
Atheists don't want separation of church and state. They want to be left to their denial and they can't do that unless they do away with every remembrance of Christ private and public. If they were really confident in their assertion that there is no God then religious symbols would not bother them at all.
no-one in particular
2011-12-20 17:56:50 UTC
Yeah, separate the state from the church and all other aspects of my life, please
Light and Truth
2011-12-20 17:54:18 UTC
....meaning that the government should not support a religion. Not take it out of life itself. It is very clear in the early papers, the Federalist Papers, and the signers.
anonymous
2011-12-20 17:51:11 UTC
Christians want separation of Church and state.



Militant athiests want to ban all public expression of religion and call it separation of Church and State. There is a difference.
anonymous
2011-12-20 18:35:56 UTC
Christians have to push their views on people some how.

Government is one way to do that.
anonymous
2011-12-20 17:51:58 UTC
No, because if religion isn't compulsory and taught in schools, then less people might become believers, and hence more might end up in Hell.
anonymous
2011-12-20 17:53:10 UTC
Yes, except when it's THEIR religion.
Mfh H *A*
2011-12-20 17:51:38 UTC
or imagine if they brought in islamic law....
anonymous
2011-12-20 17:54:36 UTC
good point bird brain
anonymous
2011-12-20 17:51:10 UTC
Don't ever assume I'm anything like you ever again in yo LYF!


This content was originally posted on Y! Answers, a Q&A website that shut down in 2021.
Loading...