Let's move on. Should the Baptists or the Catholics be in charge of state religion and school prayer?

Question

Seperation of church and state has lost its popularity in the USA. Let's move on. Choose one and let's pray.

Answer 1

I am a Catholic; however, I do not agree with the idea that we should have prayers in public schools. What we can have instead is optional religious instruction for those who want it.

Peace and blessings!

Answer 2

The concept of the separation of church and state is an invention of the Supreme Court. In our nation, the state is supposed to acknowledge God, unless the Founders were wrong, and just about everybody was wrong until the Supreme Court discovered our error.

That said, the First Amendment (which does NOT ban school prayer) does prohibit an official state religion. And since we are prohibited from having an official state religion, we need to get evolution out of the schools. Evolution is a belief in the origin of life, and as such, qualifies as a religion. It is based on faith, not observation. Evolution is a religious belief masquerading as science.

Answer 3

The Bill of Rights outlaws theocracy outright. State-sponsored religion is a political and legal impossibility in America - and this is good thing.

Having said that, I absolutely not not object to prayer in public schools. They must be non-denominational, and offer at least the recognition in a Higher Power of some sort.

When I was in public school, we had a mimute of silent prayer time at the beginning of school. Perhaps there could be a non-denominational prayer recited, followed by a moment of silence for specific prayer.

I would not object to that at all.

Answer 4

I'm a Southern Baptist, but I say let the Catholics be in charge. They are more powerful as a worldwide denomination, and they take stances on certain Biblical/Social issues that your average Baptists would be split on.

Answer 5

No, that would interfere with people's freedom of religion.

The Catholic Church supports the freedom of religion for all human beings.

In the Vatican II document, Declaration on Religious Freedom, Dignitatis Humanae (Human Dignity), the Church states:

The human person has a right to religious freedom. This freedom means that all men are to be immune from coercion on the part of individuals or of social groups and of any human power, in such wise that no one is to be forced to act in a manner contrary to his own beliefs, whether privately or publicly, whether alone or in association with others, within due limits.

With love in Christ.

Answer 6

Pastor Billy says: why do so many people have the historical understanding of Church and State all reversed. It was created for the preservation of Church.

I think you all need a wake up call if you really think Christianity is the oppressive force, take France for example the Atheists and Islamists have taken over and are duken it out for final authority over the entire nation and the final decision.

Answer 7

the two faiths ultimately have self assurance in an analogous issues. they are the two Christian. the two faiths renowned salvation by way of Christ's crucifixion, the two faiths have self assurance in an all-powerful god. Now the two disagree on the extra superficial factors of religion. maximum severely, baptists take the Bible via fact the literal and unquestionable word of God. They study it therefor, that's actual. Catholics study the Bible as usually a metaphor, something that needs to be interpreted. to no longer distinctive from fixing a riddle. This distinction in interpretation finally leads to many diffused modifications. Transubstantiation, via St. Thomas Aquinas' reason, is a mix of theological interpretation and Aristotelian good judgment. Baptists reject transubstantiation, via fact this isn't any longer, word for word, in the Bible. this thought is a sort between the two faiths and on their disagreements. additionally worth of no longer, besides he limitless somewhat diffused modifications, their is an excellent distinction between non secular tone amoung the two faiths. As i'm specific you are able to tell in basic terms from the responces, Catholics look much less confrontational, mutually as the Baptists look extra agressive. This stands to reason that a faith this is predicated of absolutes would be a sprint extra fanatical and much less accepting of modifications. mutually as maximum of Catholicism fairly recognizes the smaller Protesant denominations. in reality, maximum Europeans have on no account heard of a in demand Baptist. So thats fairly the conflict in a simplistic nut shell. i could additionally opt to word that the Catholic Church has an exceedingly advantageous relationship with Anglicans, Lutherans, and the jap Orthodox faiths. exciting to word, none of those faiths take the Bible actually eather. all those faiths have their disagreements, whether that's often extra theological and much less fanatical, in the in demand era besides. As a Catholic, I could desire to assert that no faith is thoroughly actual or thoroughly incorrect. and that i think of that's immportant and morally actual to grasp the Baptist faith, look at their ideals and honor its finer factors mutually as rejecting is worse traits. i actually desire all faiths could desire to respectfully disagree, yet they cant.

Answer 8

I'll go with the squirrel here and vote for the Episcopalians. They've done a bang-up job with state religion in England.

Answer 9

That is a bad idea. This country would never agree on who's interpretation of the Bible should be taught. You have to keep them separated. If parents what their kids to go to a faith based school, then they should put them in private school.

Answer 10

Neither. Not having you (or anyone else) shove your religion down my throat or indoctrinate my child trumps anyone's "right" to do so. Trust me - the loss of dominance by Christians in general is a forgone conclusion. Just a little more time and sacrifice (and lawsuits) to make it so.