English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

2006-10-04 10:39:48 · 8 answers · asked by mayris 2 in Politics & Government Law & Ethics

8 answers

The Supreme Court is asked this question every term, so it's a complex subject, really!

Let me try. There are two distinct parts to freedom of religion (and some rather religious people confabulate the the two in order to gain an advantage). The first part is the free exercise clause. Everyone has a right in the US to believe or not believe whatever they want and to freely exercise their religion without interference from the government. The second is the establishment clause. The government cannot favor any one religion over another and it cannot become unduly entangled with religion. (The founding fathers did not like the concept of the state Church of England or the theocracies of the Puritans and they did not like how these 'established' religions worked hand in hand with the government to limit peoples' freedom to choose and preactice other religions. Think witch hunts and banishment).

For the past 30 years or so, religious groups, (principally evangelical Christian ones) have been trying to erode the separation of church and state by advocating things such as prayer in public schools, religious instruction in public school classrooms, and displays of the ten commandments in courthouses.

The two clauses together were meant to guarantee religious freedom, and you can see how conflicts can happen. If a kid in public school, let's say he's a Jew, is forced to say Protestant prayers or listen to instruction about Jesus, then he's not being allowed his free exercise of religion -- his right to believe whatever he wants. He's being involuntarily indoctrinated in the beliefs of another religion because he has to sit there in class and perhaps be tested and graded on how well he's learned these beliefs. This instruction may be good for him if he's learning moral and ethical values, but nonetheless, it's in violation of the constitutional freedoms our country was founded on. The government would also be improperly entangled with religion in violation of the establishment clause because it would be favoring one religion over another when it chose the Protestant doctrine over that of all other religions.

2006-10-04 10:43:58 · answer #1 · answered by ? 5 · 0 0

The United States Constitution (the supreme law of the land) protects religious freedom in the First Amendment. It states, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;..." Many scholars and the legal community refer to this text as the Establishment Clause (Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion) and the Free Exercise Clause (Congress shall make no law...respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof). When people refer to the “the separation of church and state,” they mean that the governments in the United States—federal, state or otherwise—must not involve itself in religious issues as much as possible. It may not interfere with a person’s right to exercise his or her religion nor favor or disfavor one religion over another. Essentially, our federal and state governments are expected to be as neutral as possible regarding religion.
A good example of this is the fact that religious organizations (churches) are not taxed the way other organizations are. The basic explanation for such is that taxing these organizations requires government involvement in a scope is too intrusive and thus the First Amendment prohibits it. Another reason is that if a religious organization is unable to pay the taxes and had to shut down, the government has effectively prohibited the establishment of that religion.
However, like all our individual liberties, these protections are not absolute. Despite the fact that the language says “Congress shall make no law”, the government can make such law if the law furthers a compelling government interest and it does so in the least restrictive means possible.

2006-10-04 18:12:09 · answer #2 · answered by cld0478 1 · 0 0

It means that the government does not have the right to tell anyone what their religious beliefs have to be or what church they have to belong to. On the other side no one religion can have direct control over what the government does. Before the exploration and settlement of the New World (America), the Church had control of the monarchy and the government of most of the countries in Europe. At the time it was mainly the Roman Catholic Church, but Henry the VIII of England broke away form the Catholic Church and formed the Church of England. All subjects had to worship the way the government (King) said or they were persecuted, sometimes to the point of being killed for following their own beliefs. The framers of the U.S. Constitution wanted to be sure that the citizens of the new country were free to worship as they chose and not have government force upon them to do otherwise. They also didn't want one single Church to control the government and force people to act against their will.

2006-10-04 17:51:26 · answer #3 · answered by Joanne B 3 · 1 0

The text of the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution (in the Bill of Rights) states:

"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."

The first clause, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion," is referred to as the Establishment Clause. The common interpretation of this clause is the idea of separation between church and state. The constitution doesn't actually say the words "separate of church and state," but it does say....read the above.

2006-10-04 17:44:25 · answer #4 · answered by Yahooracle 3 · 0 0

Separation of church and state means that the state should not interfere in a purely secular affairs of the church and likewise the church should not interfere in political matters of the state. This is to secure the independence of the two institutions.

2006-10-04 23:28:06 · answer #5 · answered by Thess 1 · 0 0

It means that all faiths (or lack thereof) are to be treated equal under the law; one should not get preferential treatment over another.

2006-10-04 17:42:10 · answer #6 · answered by kent_shakespear 7 · 0 1

it means you can't live in public with your moral views because it might offend someone else

2006-10-04 18:57:37 · answer #7 · answered by prometida 3 · 0 0

it means if you say In God We Trust in school you'll get kicked out so fast you're head will spin

2006-10-04 17:42:23 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

fedest.com, questions and answers