Is sep church state freedom OF religion or freedom FROM religion?

Question

For me, in an ideal society of open respect, people are allowed to express and choose their religious values, including of course the right to "not have a religion". That's why sometimes, both the political right and political left annoy me to no end. For me its about choice. Honest choice, means it should be easy enough to find out about what one is chosing or not choosing.

What do you feel?

P.S.

As to the American constitution, I'll take it on faith that your constitution does not explicitly state that.

However, there is NO question that separation of church and state (or freedom of religion) is a FUNDAMENTAL value in most western democracies including the U.S. To state otherwise, is to ignore at least two centuries of western literature and culture.

P.P.S For those who care, I'm don't adhere to "great three" religions myself. I believe freedom of speech also includes right to ignore and an obligation to respect those that clearly express disinterest; there is line between harassment and expression.

I like most of answers so far.

Answer 1

It should be both. Fundamentalist Christians wish to define atheism as a 'religion' on one hand, then when it comes to the separation of church and state, vehemently state that it's only freedom OF religion, not freedom FROM religion -- they try to have it both ways.

Thankfully, most people understand that Freedom of religion includes the freedom not to have one, just as freedom of speech doesn't demand they spend their entire day speaking -- silence can be just as powerful a means of communicating an idea.

Fundamentalism sucks, be it Fundamentalist Christianity, Fundamentalist Atheism (Yes, as in -- "I accept evolution ... no, I don't know about it... why?"), Fundamentalist Islam, Fundamentalist Buddhism, etc.

Fundamentalism closes the mind, regardless of the religion or lack thereof.

Answer 2

Freedom Of personal choice
AND
Freedom From a State established religion

"Separation" has been inferred, not actually stated......

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof...

The point of such an amendment is twofold. First, it ensures that religious beliefs - private or organized - are removed from attempted government control. This is the reason why the government cannot tell either you or your church what to believe or to teach.

Second, it ensures that the government does not get involved with enforcing, mandating, or promoting particular religious doctrines. This is what happens when the government "establishes" a church - and because doing so created so many problems in Europe, the authors of the Constitution wanted to try and prevent the same from happening here

Answer 3

Our founders had lots of experience with churches that were linked together with govt.
The nations of Europe all had state churches. An official church supported by the govt.

If you did not want to give your tithes to the official church (maybe you wanted to be a member of an independent church group, or no church at all), the local police would sent around to arrest you, and take your house, to pay them.
Then, because you were destitute, your children would be taken from you.

On the other hand, if you weren't being a good citizen (as defined by the local lord), the priest would be sent to threaten you with being put out of the church, and allowed to go to Hell.

That's why the independent Christians, and other non- state church people in America were determined to not have that system here.

It means that Anti-church folks have a right to exist, too, but they should not have the right to push religious people from govt. activity, just make sure that they don't force others to conform to their religious ideas.

Answer 4

It should be freedom of religion but I think the left would have you believe freedom from religion. Our founding fathers wanted us to be able to worship the way we wanted without a state religion which could persecute us. (thus the original reason for the pilgrims arriving here) Anyways, I dislike the vile that comes from the extreme left and I'm sure people think I lean right but I don't wish my religion to be forced on anyone. I like it right in the middle but I won't deny our Christian roots.

Answer 5

Hey RockyRoad: I didn't know that the right to bear arms was in the ten commandments. You premise is delusional. I believe that people are free to do as they will, provided it causes no harm to anyone else. This is inclusive of religious beliefs. However, when that fine line is crossed, and the religious claim a monopoly on morality, and inflict their morals on everyone else, the premise of freedom of worship is threatened.

Answer 6

NO WHERE in the Constitution is the phrase Separation of Church and State. Pull the Constitution up online IF you do not have a copy of it, AND READ it and you will NOT SEE anywhere where it states that. Read it for yourself if you do not believe me.

Answer 7

Freedom of speech protects freedom of concept and perspectives and faith. same first modification. The business enterprise clause basically restricts the state from having an stable faith. courtroom interpretation decides whether which potential freedom of religion, freedom with faith, or freedom from faith.

Answer 8

"Sepperation" is a fallacy. For a church to exist it has to get permission from the IRS. Or they go to jail just like in many countries. The difference is in the U.S., this new rome is pluraltheistic instead of monotheistic.

Answer 9

Either way in the Constitution it says you have the Freedom to Express, but unbelievers like me have the Freedom from it and not have it shoved down our throats.

Answer 10

Our forefathers based our laws on the ten commandments. There is even Moses on the courthouse holding the ten commandments.