Why is it that, in the US, that the separation of church and state is not followed?

Question

According to the basic doctrine layed out in this country's constitution, the church and the state should be kept separate. This applies to public schools as well. Religion is something for the home and the church/synagogue or mosque, not for basing the direction of this country and the basic teaching of our young. I am not against religion, but am just wondering why the religious groups always try to make political agendas their focal points, rather than enlightening their followers. Also, i am in favor of dropping the "one nation, under god" phrase from the pledge of allegiance and removing religious wording from all US currency. Please, i do not want bible quotes, i want original thoughts.

Reeann, what about public schools, they are mixed with all different religions, what if one religion didnt share your morals, shouldnt religion stay out of public schools?

Lol, what is it with you guys offering a 500 dollar check?

Answer 1

You are 100% correct. The idea of the founding fathers was to let rationality guide the politics and policies of this nation. The citizens have fallen far short of this lofty ideal.

Answer 2

'Church' and 'State' are 'separate' in the U.S. ... by LAW ... but there is a HUGE 'gray area' between the two things, and that's where the 'trouble' is. We ALL live IN 'the state' and many of us also belong to 'churches' ... but each church/type is different from the others in some 'weird' ways. What you 'can't see' because it may be too close is that the word CHURCH is not the same as the word RELIGION. I have many 'religious' views that are COMPLETELY SEPARATE from the CHURCH I go to, but that's okay with me ... and it is the 'individual' that really 'counts' in this. You are in 'favor' of dropping the "One nation, under God" phrase, and removing 'religious words' from ALL U.S. currency ...but it doesn't bother me at ALL because there's really nothing either OVERTLY 'church-like' in those 'state'-ments. Basically, our country is formed on Judeo-Christian history, and I know that most Jews think of themselves as 'an ethnic group' and NOT 'a religious group' ... so the 'state'-ments are easily taken with that in mind. The FACT that this country is 'home' to people of 'any and every' 'religious (or not)' beliefs shows me that the separation of Church and State really WORKS. This is the ONLY country that I know of that is that way, though ... even England has a 'state church' ... the Anglican (Episcopal in the U.S.) Church, and so do all of their other 'colonies.' BE GLAD that we have AS MUCH of that 'separation' as we do, and 'forgive us our sins' if we're all really just individual people who sometimes have a great deal of 'trouble' keeping Church and State SEPARATE. We aren't 'done' as a nation, but are 'ever growing and changing' and I think THAT is what COUNTS IN THE END.

Answer 3

you may evaluate the Roman Catholic Church it truly is a faith and a state in a unmarried. smart determination in case you want Italian nutrients. you may play Bocce Ball, drink the perfect wine and could no longer ought to argue with the staggering those who imagine church and state should be separate. they are both unaware that a faith of their midst is already a state; or in basic terms want to experience imaginary white horses. considering, interior the perfect, power relax with the individuals; if there's no separation you save on with the church; because you're already the authorities! See how that works? that is extremely common. Such can't be performed with religions that are not any further theocratic; the position power is exceeded down from above to beggars, polygamists, quick talkers and fakers. those different religions in many cases contain a existence time of wandering parts of the earth attempting to decide what that is that they should be following or what precisely they should be doing. For those human beings the church might want to no doubt clarify that they want to stay living house play Bocce Ball and enjoy some good wine. for sure you've gotten to take catechism which contains a even as and interest. yet after that they say you're tremendously a lot good to bypass. you somewhat shouldn't problem about the definitions because there's no answer on your question till you locate out which faith wins out over the others. If heritage is any indication perchance you should comprise paganism. you may start up on that with some fierce video games of Bocce Ball for funds, a lot of wine and wild boar roasted over an open pit. remember the apple.

Answer 4

Newt Gingrich narrated a special report on the relationship between the founding fathers and the church a few weeks ago. He pointed out the phrase in the constitution that states something to the effect "the government shall make no law promoting religion nor any law restricting the free exercise there of". He went on to point out where the "separation of church and state" phrase came from. As president, Thomas Jefferson, in a letter to a group of babtists church leaders, wrote a line saying that the goverment has built a wall of seperation between the church and state. To fully understand the reasoning surrounding this line, you have to go back to Europe and study the religious situation there at the time. Europe as a whole was a theocracy, the church and rulers were one in the same. After the reformation, the religious affiliation of the ruling monarchs changed often. The people who lived within any particular monarchy were instantly transformed into whatever faith the monarchy happened to be. For example, the prevailing religions in Germany were Lutheran(Evangelisch) or Catholic. People fled to the Americas where they could br free to worship as they choose, regardless of who was in power. I can imagine that the Baptists were sort of on the short end of the stick in Europe. Jefferson was assuring them that the new government was sufficiently separated from meddling in the affairs of any church

Although the constitution precludes laws restricting the exercise of religion. No where is there any mention that God will be restricted in any way. People confuse God and religion as being one and the same. George Washington was the first to add the phrase to the inauguration oath... "so help me God".

Another very interesting fact newt brought out was the supreme court building. The walls are decorated with such historical figures as... Moses, Mohammed, Charlmaign, Confucious, and a few others of that sort. For the supreme court to ban any reference to God or any religious symbols from any government building, currency or whatever sounds very hypocritical.

Thats my take on the subject.

As far as churches having political agendas, that seems to be the paradigm shift of recent years. I think in many ways they are totally justified, in that the government has crossed into the affairs of all churches with their social welfare programs. If you read the constitution, you will see that all these programs are un-constitutional.... the governemnt has no authority to tax people and give the money to less fortunate people. It has always been the role of churches to provide for the needy. Politicians have stolen this duty in an effort to gain votes and political power.

Ah... "someone who cares" must type faster than I do!!

Answer 5

Separation of church and state is followed in the United States. In fact, the whole political correctness push has taken it well beyond what the Founding Fathers (oh, sorry, I realize that's a politically incorrect term too) had in mind. The idea of the separation of church and state was that the "state" would not sponsor a particular religion and that people would be free to practice whatever religion they choose. The last time I checked, there are plenty of different churches, synagogues, mosques, and other places in the U.S. for people to practice whatever religion they want to. That doesn't mean that morality and values have no place in politics or the "state" though.

And the reality is that the USA was founded on Judeo-Christian principles.

Answer 6

No where in the constitution does it state that the church and state should be kept separate.

In fact, the entire "constitutional separation of church and state" is a recent fabrication of activist judges who have ignored the Constitution's clear meaning.

Indeed, says U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice William Rehnquist,, "There is simply no historical foundation for the proposition that the Framers intended to build the 'wall of separation' [between church and state]."

Often the sword of separation is used to smother, rather than promote, religious liberty. There is nothing in the Constitution mandating a separation of church and state. That phrase actually comes from a letter written by President Thomas Jefferson in 1802 to the Danbury Baptist Association, who were concerned that Anglicanism might become the official (or Established) denominational preference of the new nation. Jefferson was trying to reassure the worried Baptists that no such "establishment" skullduggery was afoot. When you hear people talking about the supposed "separation of church and state," what they usually mean is "the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment requires a separation." But it doesn't.

Answer 7

I also feel that there should be a separation, but the Constitution is kinda vague. The First Amendment says, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; ..."

Some people say that means "the government can't say one particular church is now the official church of the American government." But, ya know, it shoulda said that, then!

I think faith and religion is too important for the stupid government to tell us anything about faith and religion. There should be lots of it in the home, lots of it in houses of worship, but none coming from government.

The Pledge should be "One nation, indivisible." And the money should not try to tell me anything about faith and religion.

Bottom-line, the Constitution is vague. Sometimes that's a good thing, sometimes not.

I have no problem with people who want people to be more religious. I have a big problem with using the might and force of government to do it.

People should be nice to their mothers, but that's none of government's business. People shouldn't over-eat, but that's none of government's business. People shouldn't be sexually promiscuous, but that's none of government's business.
_
_

Answer 8

Well, you make an interesting point. I think the church/state line has been blurred too much myself. As for the why, I can't explain that.

I think that the 'under God' needs some modifications, but it shouldn't be viewed as offensive. To me, it means under our beliefs, under whatever it is we follow. Even atheists have a belief: the belief in nothing, which means they discern right and wrong for themselves. This perception of morals, whether people come up with it from their own ideas or those of a church exists in everyone. One Nation, under Virtue, might work better. Even if you don't believe in God, you must believe in some form of virtue that one should seek to attain.

Well, that's my opinion, and you seem like an educated sort to discuss it with. You don't have to agree.

Back to church and state, I think that it just gets too confusing as to what IS church and what IS state? Does religion have to include a divine being? It's all some form of governance, and that's why it's so dificult to discern where the line is drawn.

Answer 9

In case you haven't noticed, the Constitution and Dec. of Independence were both based on the VERY Christian principle that all men are created equal. that concept wasn't always followed, but its definately there. and have you LOOKED at the Supreme Court building. Moses' all over it! And the 10 Commandments. This country was started because people didn't want religious persecution. Not lack-of-religion persecution. they came because they were a certain Christian denomination

And by the way, they're doing a pretty good job as far as the separation goes. At my high skool, some girl had to turn her shirt inside out because it was from church. but it didnt even say anything about church. All it said was "even a drop in th bucket makes a difference" and "youth week '06" howv is that wrong? of course you'll understand how we students rectified the situation. we all wore our "youth week '06" shirts! and asked (politely and respectfully) how we were in the wrong. and it worked! HA!

Answer 10

In theory this is a great idea but the only way to keep church and state seperated would be to have all elected officials be Atiests. When some one goes to church or believes in god it shows up in thier everyday life and beliefs and when we have officials that believe in god that tends to sway thier beliefs one way or another and we end up geting politics and religion mixed. It works the other way also if an official has an agenda alot of times he will take that with him to church and then the church gets involved in politics. In a country where there is freedom of speach there will alway be a mixing of politics and religion.

Answer 11

The writers of the Constitution were believers of God. The gave freedom of religion and the right to practice it in their land. They history of how that legal theory emerged into today's definition of Church and state is interesting. However, the forefathers obviously did not ascribed to that meaning whatsoever. Law is always ruled on by the basis of public opinion, and even the justices are now using their own interpretations to make rulings creating laws. There are many cases challenging this. Again, in the political arena, I will be voting for those who preserve the rights.

Schools were first held in and run by churches. As a parent, I should be able to determine which morality I raise my children with, and I would support those politicians who ascribed to my morality. After all, that was constitutional too.