What is "Separation of church and state"....?
Separation of State was to protect religious people from trying to influence laws that would harm people of different religions - or even different sects of the same religion. Quakers and Puritans, for example, were Christians. But the majority of Christians did not accept them to be "true" Christians. But just because you were a Quaker or a Puritan, didn't mean that anyone had the right to prevent you from attending a school where Protestants went to school. That would go against your rights granted to you by the Constitution: freedom of religion. So you're right in the sense that the government has no right to completely abolish a religion. But the government *Does* have a right to keep religion out of public schools. (Private schools are funded by the parents and founders. Because they are paying for it, they can have religious private schools). I am also fine if someone is praying in public. I respect that and I don't bother them about it too. I'm an atheist. Please do not assume that all atheists disrespect Christianity - I know it's easy to get that vibe off of here. But two of my best friends in the world are Christian. If they pray I wait quietly and say nothing What people have a problem with is an ENFORCED prayer in public schools. You see, it wouldn't be fair if all the public schools were required to make everyone pray. Think about it - say you happened to go to a school where the population was mostly Muslim. And the teachers said "You must pray to Allah now". Well that wouldn't be very fair to you, would it? That's why we have separation of church and state. It's so all religious people have the freedom to worship as they will. If a Muslim starts praying at the beginning of the school day, then I certainly don't mind.
Do you AGREE with SEPARATION OF CHURCH & STATE?
This Nation was founded by Christians for Christians the separation of Church and State was meant to keep the State out of Religion... Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or the free exercise there of .... Not Religion out of the State.... As a Christian they follow Gods direction in what they do and say.. That God might Bless what they do ... thus Bless the Nation. They did not make a State Religion because what if the Baptists are no longer are the Christians but the Catholics are ... Catholics are not considered to be Christians by real Christians - man made religion ect... Well the Baptists are still the Real thing.. Note: They throw out the bible out of schools and said don't pray and ask God for Help in understanding anything Well we use to be Number 1 to Number 3 in education to the point that a college degree is not Honored here from other countries... But now we rank 27 below everybody else in the world, and 17 below everybody else in science in the world.. sad shape... Throw God out... He says your on your own... buddy... Do you think the Devil will help you... Not... or your little understanding by yourself...
Why should church and state be separated?
“Why is it important to separate church and state?”Because if you don’t, then one has the power to destroy the other.The founders of our nation came from a situation in which church and state were melded. It gave undue power to both the church and to the state. Think about what your life would be like if the organization that claimed to be able to save your soul is interwoven into an organization that has the power to throw you into prison or to execute you.If the church has only the power to excommunicate members, then those members do not have to live in fear of their life or personal freedom for disobedience to its statutes.One way that church and state are separate in the United States is that churches are not taxed as other organizations and individuals. My understanding of the reasoning behind this, and I believe that it is upheld by Supreme Court rulings, is that the power to tax is the power to destroy.If the government has the power to tax, and the organization fails to comply, then eitherThere is no enforcement and the government’s power is uselessorIt does enforce the taxation and the government has the power to incarcerate, disband, etc., as law dictates.So either the two entities — religion and government — must remain separate, or one has power over the other, and there is no true freedom for the one that is subject to the other with respect to its jurisdiction.
Would it be a violation of the separation of church and state if gay marriage was imposed on churches?
Only to the extent that it was a violation of the separation of church and state for the state of Massachusetts to give my parents a marriage license in 1970, despite the Catholic Church's claim that they weren't eligible to be married.Now, would it be a violation for the state to force the Catholic Church to hold the wedding service, and for the Priest to be forced to sign as the celebrant? Yes, that would be. However...that's not happening, and has never happened. So long as the Church remains in the realm of *religion*, they aren't forced to do anything. Where some "churches" run into trouble is when they start performing some marriages that are outside of their membership and then claim the right to deny others that same service. Once you are secular, you don't get First Amendment protections.(and my parents are not alone in this...any straight couple that has a non-Catholic member marrying a catholic one, or a divorcee, or anyone else that doesn't meet the Catholic Church;s requirements are not eligible to be considered "married" by the Catholic Church)
Where did the concept of "separation of Church and State" originate?
Does it say specifically in the Constituition, or imply it? Was it because of a Supreme Court decision? Please cite references, you won't get best answer without them.
Is this violating any laws of separation of church and state?
The Church exercised its right under the First Amendment to state their position on a topic and directly ask those who opposed the Church's stance to drop their opposition. The fact that the Church had influence because the majority of constituents were church members doesn't reduce that right in any way. You may feel it's heavy-handed, but it's certainly not illegal. As to losing a temple recommend: Could they? Yes, of course. Most of the things people lose their temple recommends over aren't actually illegal. The temple recommend is granted based on adherence to moral principles, not civil laws. And civil law certainly has no place defining the moral basis on which the Church may or may not grant a temple recommend.Now, would they? It strikes me as very unlikely. The letter that was sent, in conjunction with previous statements about this being an essentially civil matter, seems to me to be the Church's way of saying, "Look, this isn't some whimsical idea. It has the support of the highest levels of Church leadership. You may not like the effect on the skyline, but we need to train missionaries. Please help us by supporting this." That's a far cry from staking someone's church standing on their support of the building.Again, sending a letter from the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles may seem heavy handed -- it was certainly designed to send a strong message -- but it's definitely not illegal.