isn't it just not having to pay taxes to the church? cuz people are saying that having the ten commandment is against that.
2007-04-27 09:00:34 · 10 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Government
According to the first amendment of the US constitution, the government "shall pass no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof." For the most part, people interpret it to mean that the government has no role in religion, no role in the support of religion, may not prohibit any religions, and must keep religion out of governmental decisions.
2007-04-27 09:08:47 · answer #1 · answered by Political Enigma 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Actually there is no such thing as the separation of church and state in the Constitution. It only says Congress shall make no laws regarding the establishment of religion. It simply means Congress cannot create a federal church. What the states wish to do is up to them, including taxing churches. There were state churches well into the 1800’s.
People have distorted this by changing the meaning to no government can support a religion over another. The ironic thing is, by banning the Ten Commandments or prayer in school, laws are being made regarding the establishment of religion.
2007-04-27 16:18:14 · answer #2 · answered by J C 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Separation of Church and State came from a letter written by Thomas Jefferson.
The separation we were supposed to have was to avoid having one religious group dominate others such as was done in England. It was to protect all religions. It was not a separation from religion.
History is debated and your view will depend on what side of the fence you stand on. I personally agree with Benjamin Franklin who was not a religious man in any way shape or form. He believed religion was needed for it's morals. I think the world would be a better place if Christian values were still taught in schools.
Also, did you know church services were held inside the White House. Yeah, good separation there eh
2007-04-27 16:16:38 · answer #3 · answered by Jasmine 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No, what it means is we cannot be ruled or oppressed by religion no matter what that religion may be.
The reason people came to the "New World" in the first place was because they were not allowed to practice their religion and were oppressed by Catholicism. I hate to admit this, but the original colonists were actually more conservative with their region than churches in England even.
Government agencies, schools, or government sponsored organizations cannot utilize religion in conjunction with their own rules and regulations.
That's why we don't say the Pledge of Allegiance in schools anymore. That's why when you're in court, you do not swear on a Bible anymore. They simple say "Do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?" The "so help you God" has been taken out.
I'm not religious in any sense of the word, but I still think some of the little things are harmless and people should be allowed to say the Pledge if they want for instance.
It's the big things where I'm happy the First Amendment protects secular people such as myself.
2007-04-27 16:10:21 · answer #4 · answered by Josh 3 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Displaying the 10 commandments on government property is an example of the state showing favoritism towards a religion and thus is banned by the first amendment of the constitution.
If you want to go againt that ban, you would also be allowing the government to interfere in your church's operations.
2007-04-27 16:09:32 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
People go on and on about the 10 commandments being part of our system of laws, and therefore should be allowed in our court houses. I wonder if they have read the commandments. Four of them are specifically about how to practice certain religions. (One god, the sabbath, idolatry, and taking the lords name in vain). Laws to punish citizens for violating these commandments would be unconstitutional as they would be based only on the Abrahamic faiths. Would you want to be judged in a Court that looked to Sharia law rather than US law?
Adultery is pretty much a civil matter these days. We have no laws against coveting wives or houses or forcing people to honor their parents.
That leaves only three of the commandments that are also secular laws: Killing, Stealing and False witness (Perjury).
So if a person in a US court can only be criminally judged on 3 of the 10 commandments why would any judge want to post them all?
2007-04-27 20:41:34 · answer #6 · answered by jehen 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Do you mean having the ten commandments posted in an official government building to the exclusion of other religions? Yes. That is a violation of the Constitution as well.
2007-04-27 16:07:00 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
There is actually nothing in the consitution that creates a separation of church and state. What the constution does say is that congress will make no law that favors one religion over another. God and religion is alowed in government and politics. Hence why when elected to office you take an oath on the bible. Hence the words in God we trust. No public funds can be used to show favoritism toward a religion.
2007-04-27 16:11:00 · answer #8 · answered by dglaze11 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Based on what?
2007-04-27 16:04:16 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
No, its more than that.
2007-04-27 16:05:31 · answer #10 · answered by kevbro9 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋