What's your take on Separation of Church and state?

Question

State your reasons.

Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exorcise thereof. For me religion in public schools for example cannot encompass all religoins, therefore it prohibits free exorcise of those religions not supported. Therefore, we should keep the schools free from religion.

Answer 1

The separation should be absolute. No prayer in schools, no mention of God on money, no "under God" in the pledge, etc. This adheres to the spirit of what the Founding Fathers (and for that matter the never mentioned Founding Mothers) had in mind, and a big part of why they left their original homeland on a dangerous, courageous, and grand adventure.

Answer 2

Our country finds itself in the odd position of supporting religious freedoms while at the same time not endorsing any particular worldview. It sometimes is hard to draw the line between religious freedom and religious tyranny.

Quite simply though, Separation of Church and State should mean that the State is not allowed to endorse a particular religion. This seems to be the obvious implication of the law, and I have no problem with this sort of practice.

This does not mean, however, that the State cannot ‘mention’ religion at all. It is impossible to deny that religion plays a huge role in the United States. It would be foolish to totally ignore religion. Most people are religious after all!

Answer 3

I think the phrase has been redefined

we have the establishment clause in our constitution and the writers knew very well of the separation language and did not choose to use it...

originally it came from a quote from Roger Williams "the garden of the church should be protected by a high wall of separation from the howling wilderness of the world" It meant nothin like as used today

in the 21st century the establishment clause was set aside and the separation of church and state language was redefined and adopted by Hugo Black, a former KKK and mason.. interestingly Hugo Black believed humanism and atheism were religions... so in effect this would mean we traded one religion for another I suppose in his view

by the way.. for decades after ratification of the us constitution, some states continued with an official state funded state religion... not a federal one but a state one... one of the last to end was Massachussets and many decades after ratification of the constiution Massachussets continued to have an official state church

Answer 4

That is a doctrine that Jefferson wrote about in a letter but is actually not in the constitution. What it DOES say is that the govt shall not establish religion and it shall allow the free expression of it. I take that to mean the govt shouldnt tell people what to believe and should not hinder it in anyway unless it specifically takes away the rights of others expressed elsewhere in the law.

Answer 5

Since nothing like that sentence exists in the U.S. Constitution or the Bill of Rights, I have no take.

The "Establishment Clause" says that Congress shall make no law that establishes a State Religion.

That I am for 100%. We broke off from England - and - looking back - having a State Church is not a good idea.

Answer 6

No special religion should monopolize or dictate the laws.
The 10 Commandments should be allowed in public places as well as Buddha's 4 Noble Truths.

At present, the religion of No Religion is dictating this issue.

Same with prayers in school. If No Religion wants to implement their no prayer policy this should be an option for any student.

Answer 7

It is something that cannot be legally held up in court, but they continually misuse it. People claim it is in the constitution, yet it is not there. The only place it exists is in a letter from Thomas Jefferson to a church assuring them that the government cannot tell them how to run the church.
We are moving closer every day to the church being run by the government, they already tell us things we cannot do and say.

Answer 8

It exists and should stay.

The phrase "separation of church and state" does not appear in our constitution. However, the absence of this phrase does not mean that it is an invalid concept or that it cannot be used as a legal or judicial principle.

There are any number of important legal concepts which do not appear in the Constitution with the exact phrasing people tend to use. For example, nowhere in the Constitution will you find words like "right to privacy" or even "right to a fair trial." Does this mean that no American citizen has a right to privacy or a fair trial? Does this mean that no judge should ever invoke these rights when reaching a decision?

Answer 9

Religion is an opinion, and there is no reason the opinions of some should rule over all. Not to mention when the government DOES promote a certain religion, its in essence saying that all other religions don't count (I'm looking at Mr. George W. "Lets have an official Jesus day in TX" Bush).

So, I'm very for seperation of c&s.

Answer 10

The separation of church and state maintains the integrity of both institutions.

Just because a majority of people in this country could be labeled 'christian' doesn't mean this country should adopt exclusively christian ideals.

The US is a land where the majority rules, but also ensuring the rights of the minority are upheld.