English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Or do you think they made a mistake and should have declared this country a christian country with preferences for christians?

I think they were very wise. They came from a continent with a history of state established religions, inquisitions, witch burnings, infidel killing, holy wars against other religions and even against other christians, forced conversion of jews under threat of death, anti-semtism, and opposition to science.

They didn't want any of that crap in America. I think we all need to take a look when you mix religion with government. You get the mess you have in the middle east.

2007-05-04 20:55:48 · 10 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Politics

BARRY GOLDWATER, OLD STYLE CONSERVATIVE, ON THE RELIGIOUS RIGHT

"Well, I've spent quite a number of years carrying the flag of the 'Old Conservatism.' And I can say with conviction that the religious issues of these groups have little or nothing to do with conservative or liberal politics. The uncompromising position of these groups is a divisive element that could tear apart the very spirit of our representative system, if they gain sufficient strength."

"By maintaining the separation of church and state, the United States has avoided the intolerance which has so divided the rest of the world with religious wars . . . Can any of us refute the wisdom of Madison and the other framers? Can anyone look at the carnage in Iran, the bloodshed in Northem Ireland, or the bombs bursting in Lebanon and yet question the dangers of injecting religious issues into the affairs of state?"

2007-05-04 20:57:11 · update #1

10 answers

I think they were very wise for the time period, and maybe even today, but I would be lying if I said that I don't consider someone's religious affiliation to be an expression of their governing character

i am wary of odd belief-patters and question the sorts of thinking that goes into decision making in relation to religion as an expression of the sort of thinking that will go into policy decisions
i don't mean the specific beliefs, but rather what it was that caused a person to adopt those beliefs -- and whether these reasons were rational or reasonable

2007-05-04 21:00:23 · answer #1 · answered by Steve C 4 · 0 0

Yes, the religious right has been on a campaign to mix religion and government for at least 30 years. Under Bush, they have made more gains than in all the years before. One of the abuses the founders wanted to avoid was state support of a particular religion. Now our tax dollars go to religious charities through the "faith based intiatiative" and these charities are allowed to discriminate on the basis of their religion.

I never thought we'd see a problem with relgious tests for holding office until right wing Republicans claimed that Keith Ellison, an American Muslim, could not properly be sworn into office since he didn't believe in the bible. Fortunately, thanks to our founders, no bible is used.

Goldwater saw the danger, but he would have changed his tune - the religious right has extended its tolerance to Jews. This is why they now say the United States was "founded on Judeo-Christian" principles.

2007-05-04 21:10:27 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

I would agree with all except that I think that an honorable person does not need religion to have a code of ethics or a code he lives by. It really has more to do with the person than religion. I am not a Christian and I believe I have more honesty than a lot of Christians I know...I don't lie and cheat because God is watching, I don't do those things because it is part of my character....a Christian can have an honest character as well as any person...religion is laid over top of our nature...and many people have a fairly honest nature, but if they have a dishonest nature, religion just masks it.

I would never vote for someone just because they had religion...it doesn't make them automatically honest or good. The Founders were very practical men

2007-05-04 21:15:11 · answer #3 · answered by Ford Prefect 7 · 0 0

Well, what you need to remember is that they wanted to make sure that the will of the people wasn't being over ridden by the dogma of a single religion.
They do expect that the individual members have some kind of religion or religious training so that there was a standard of morality for the members.
I believe that people need to go back and research what living was like for the colonists, not some Hollywood fantasy, but the reality.
As to your view of European history, well, some of that was current to the colonists, but much of it wasn't. The real problem was that you were required to worship the way the ruler did. You as a citizen had no option and if you chose to disobey, you were persecuted. (By the Way, that is the reason for the 2nd amendment)
They wanted to ensure that the leadership was not able to force citizens to worship only one way.

2007-05-04 21:10:24 · answer #4 · answered by Talen 2 · 1 0

Separating Religion and State is the foundation for a healthy Government. Religion is entirely faith based and has nothing to do with facts. You can only govern democratically with facts, even if most politicians entire life is spend, spinning them. The underlying truth and facts will come out eventually.
In Europe, people are leaving faith more and more behind, holding themselves to more mature values, then that of some goat herders and murdering nomads 2000 years ago. The USA is following that trend more and more

2007-05-04 21:30:51 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Freedom of religion was respected by the Founding Fathers because they are not sure if Christianity was really true. They feel that people should have the choice to believe in God or not and to choose the religion they deem what is right.

2007-05-04 21:00:51 · answer #6 · answered by FRAGINAL, JTM 7 · 0 0

any smart u . s . separates church from state because of the fact church homes coerce human beings on the foundation of arbitrary 'non secular' rules, a number of that have not have been given any foundation fairly, however maximum are fairly particularly clever and desigend to maintain societies below administration. whether interior the US there's a de facto non secular bias in government through effectual non secular foyer communities which includes fundamentalist christians who vote. Their impact is so good that the present Mid East conflicts would be seen as one team of fundamentalists (the US) scuffling with yet another (Muslims). something human beings seem on with terrified amazement and horror.

2017-01-09 12:52:23 · answer #7 · answered by ? 4 · 0 0

Yes absolutely wise. Just read God Is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything
by Christopher Hitchens (Author)

2007-05-04 21:26:36 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

The theoracies of the middle east show why a distinct seperation of church and is important. The fact that even at the time of the framing of our constitution it was decided that there be no state sponsered religion is one of this nation's strongest points

2007-05-04 21:00:52 · answer #9 · answered by auhunter04 4 · 0 0

If you're trying to say the Founding Fathers were not religious than you need to do some research.

There are references to God by almost ALL presidents and in case you don't know Congress starts each session with a PRAYER.

The day God gets kicked out of US will be the day Bible prophesy comes true and the US is brought DOWN.

2007-05-04 21:27:18 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0 2

fedest.com, questions and answers