what happened to the seperation of church and state?
i say remove it.
(Skwisgaar Skwigelf rules!!!)
2007-01-29 03:49:25 · 9 answers · asked by NickName 2 in Social Science ➔ Other - Social Science
I'm against removing it....
i think separating the state from religion is not going to be the best move forward on....
2007-02-04 08:34:00 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Interesting discussion. Agreed that there is nothing in the constitution about "separation of church and state" per se. But the Supreme Court has determined that the constitution be interpreted with this idea in mind.
Further agreed that acknowledgement of god alone does not constitute a state sponsored religion. However, the forcing of this idea in a 'declaratory' manner, such as in the Pledge of Allegiance that is forced upon school children is stil an interesting debate (especially since 'under god' was added well after the original Pledge was written).
As to the question, I would support removing "In God we trust." from money, but as was pointed out, this is hardly the bigger battle.
2007-02-04 00:50:37 · answer #2 · answered by NvestR3322 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I agree, the only reason it is on US money is because of the red scare in the 60s. Joe McCarthy decided that all atheists were communists and therefore someone who doesn't believe in God is 'unamerican'.
Unfortunately, this attitude is still shown by many Americans today, and quoted by Dubya's daddy, the ex-president himself.
For a country that makes such a big deal about the constitution, I really think people should stick up fot it.
2007-01-29 11:55:45 · answer #3 · answered by callum828 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Show me in the actual Constitution (if you have ever seen it) where the separation of Church and state exists, and where it says the first amendment is suspended when it comes to expressions of faith. The writers of the Constitution, who were all praying men, were not trying to smash the expression of a person's or a nation's faith in the public forum when they forbade the establishment of a state church. Please note, they also forbade the government from interfering with the free exercise of faith. Too many of the intolerant athiests we have now never get that far in the Constitution.
Having "in God we trust" on our money does not establish a state church. Preventing taxpaying people of faith from expressing the principles this nation was founded on from expressing those principles IS establishing the athiestic faith of Secular Humanism as an official state church.
IF it says "in God we trust" on your money, just be thankful you HAVE money. Get over it!
2007-01-29 17:28:01 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think you and your first responder need to read and understand the Constitution of the United States before asking such a question and removing all doubt.
2007-01-29 11:58:17 · answer #5 · answered by snvffy 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I believe in the separation between church and state but I also believe we must choose our battles. . . so no. There are far more important, life-and-liberty threatening issues for our government to deal with.
2007-01-29 11:57:20 · answer #6 · answered by kimpenn09 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
i would, in today's society it is very politically incorrect. not everyone who spend money believes in god....
2007-01-29 11:56:58 · answer #7 · answered by frost7216 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
No, I'm not in favor of removing it.
2007-01-29 11:56:51 · answer #8 · answered by bandit 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
what is your problem with God anyway?
2007-02-02 10:41:22 · answer #9 · answered by vern7us 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋