Why wouldn't you want the separation of Church and State?

Question

I don't understand this. Not only would religious beliefs taint government, but government would taint religious beliefs.

What outcome would you desire by having Church and State integrated at more advanced levels? And would the downside of mixing the two be worth the desired outcomes? Explain please.

Sigh ....

Some of you didn't really read the question. I didn't ask whether our country was founded on the concept. I asked why would we want it. As you go through these answers, please give a "thumbs-down" to anyone whose answer is about what our country was founded on.

"Live for Jesus" and "howdigethere" - please reread the question.

Answer 1

I'm a Christian and I absolutely believe in the separation of Church and State...but as it was originally intended, not as it is interpreted and practiced today.

The 1st Amendment reads as follows:

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..." (it continues to talk about freedom of speech and of the press but this is the essential "separation of church and state" clause).

This basically says that the government does not have the right to pass any law that shows favoritism to ANY religion AND that the government does not have the right to pass any law that restricts a person's freedom to practice their religious beliefs. The problem is that the first clause is the one enforced today often at the expense of the second (and even at the expense of freedom of speech).

Eliminating prayers (or displays of the 10 commandments or any other religious expression) from public places (schools, court houses, mountains, whatever) isn't separation of church and state, it is the state interferring with religious practices! To satisfy the both clauses, the government needs to stay away OUT of religious issues.

I AM opposed to the idea children being forced to say a Christian prayer in a public school...but the constitutional solution isn't to forbid children who believe prayer is an important way to start school to do so publicly! Instead, the proper solution would be to give every child the opportunity to share his or her "faith" (beliefs) with the class. Respect no one religion but respect all. Take turns...let each child have the chance to lead the class in something they think is important...let the Christian children say a prayer when it is their turn...let each child share his or her beliefs in turn. That would create an environment where people had true freedom to practice their religious beliefs (and speak about those beliefs) without respecting any religion!

Display of the 10 commandments...if mandated clearly against the first separation clause....but if a judge wanted to put a poster listing them on the wall of his court room and even refer to them when he passed sentence, then he has the right through the freedom of speech and religion clauses. Requiring people to swear on a bible...wrong (and rather ridiculous not to mention insulting to God)...but if someone wants to do it, what's the problem?

One of the most difficult things about religious freedom (and freedom of speech) is that to claim your own right to freedom, you have to grant the same right to everyone else. You have to be willing to put up with listening to (or walking away from) people who advocate things you don't like, don't believe, and even things that make you blisteringly angry if you want to have the right to say anything about your own beliefs! ...brings to mind my favorite lines from the movie "The American President":

"America isn't easy. America is advanced citizenship. You gotta want it bad, 'cause it's gonna put up a fight. It's gonna say "You want free speech? Let's see you acknowledge a man whose words make your blood boil, who's standing center stage and advocating at the top of his lungs that which you would spend a lifetime opposing at the top of yours."

Freedom of religion isn't easy either...the state should make NO law that supports the establishment of any religion nor can it make a law that infringes on a person's freedom (privately AND publicly) to practice that religion.

Answer 2

Having church and state closely integrated can have serious destabilising consequences. If, for instance, your country's religious belief was Muslim and your neighbouring country religion was Jewish or Christian then that would make for a volatile relationship between the two countries political ideologies. We see the results of this type of situation in the middle east where the warring religious factions have been at each others throats for millenia. In other countries and in other centuries, religious run states have committed "ethnic cleansing" in the name of their God. This is nothing new. Cortez practised it in the New World under the guise of "Catholocising the Americas" during the un-holiest of times, the Spanish Inquisition.
However, after saying all of that, most of our laws are based on the moral teachings of the Ten Commandments in the "Old Testament".

Answer 3

I'm all for the separation of Church and State. The government should not give any religion or religious organization preferential treatment over any other. The government should make sure that laws do not prohibit people from worshiping except in a few cases (no spousal or child abuse, no cruelty to animals, etc).

I would not tolerate a government which disallowed the consumption of pork just because a couple of religions find it impure. OTOH, I would want an alternative to pork to be served for lunch at public schools so Jewish students could follow their faith.

Answer 4

The ***PRAYNOGRAPHER*** will speak to this question, because his wisdumb is All knowing. You would be wise to listen to his words of wisdumb.Speaking to the amendment to the constitution in regards to religion, and government. It reads like this. The government shall not RESPECT the establishment of any religion, or block the establishment of any religion. For you children of god that do not know what the word RESPECT means please look it up.Many of you can not read ,or comprehend what you read. I The ***PRAYNOGRAPHER***will explain it to you. RESPECT: To show, or hold in high regard for one thing over another Now do you think you can figure out what that means. When it comes to religions the govt. must stay neutral. In other words stay out of the business of promoting , or demoting any religion,be separate from,not encourage one over the other. Do the simple xristian minds on this panel get it. The***PRAYNOGRAPHER***thinks the term should say "The separation of church and brain.I think it would be safe to say that xristians, at least most of the ones I have known , do not have a working brain.They must be led around like a puppy on a leash. Churches do not pay their fair share in taxes,or don't pay any . Then they should stay out of a government they do not support. The ***PRAYNOGRAPHER***has spoken. Now go away and be born again before I spank you!!!!

Answer 5

I think I may be answering this question a little differently than you intended- but since you asked this question, I have to answer as honestly as I can.
What does not and should be separated is God's truth from state. How can I say that? Because God's truth is universal, or at least should be. As a Christian , I cannot separate the Holy from the Secular-because we are to live as children of God first, and people of the state second= and if God's laws differ from the government's I am to follow God's. Religious beliefs or better said, God should influence the government. Taint is not a good word here. Government tries to change God's laws at times, and this is not right either. You can try and separate God and government like we are doing, and one day God will judge us for putting human thought and laws about His. What is the downside of having God and government working together- A BETTER WORLD!! No downside there.

Answer 6

Muslims want an Islamic state. They want religious law not religious freedom. They want religious law, not spiritual law.

Why? The answer is simply pride. Pride makes a person want to fit the infinite into a finite system. Pride is the root of all sin.

I agree with you. I am for separation because either the state would corrupt the church or the church would corrupt the state. While the world is still corruptible until Jesus returns, we're better off with checks and balances. That's why even though Capitalism and democracy are corruptible, they're still better than socialism.

Answer 7

I think religion should be honored, they do a lot of good in their communities and around the world. As far as church from state, I dont want people teaching my kids about koran verses or pagan chants. As far as the public show of religion, you cant erase the Christian influence of our forefathers. Im tired of people trying to erase that from the world.....if its old leave it there....the verses that are on statues and on walls are historical and should be left alone, especially when they are over 100 yrs old. It was obviously a part of their lives. Leave the new stuff out and I am ok with no new crosses or religious symbols in public places...there are too many religions out there.

Answer 8

I WANT the seperation of Church and State. when any religion rules a country, your reputation becomes extremely important so you arent accused of being a devil or whatever. think the salem witch trials. or look at europe when they were really religious, if your innocense was questioned then you were as good as f***ed. and not to mention how many people have been killed for converting. so yes I do want religion to stay away from the government.

Answer 9

This 'separation of church and state' thing is so misconstrued. It has become the belief that saying or displaying anything related to GOD is violating the 'separation of church and state'.
What the founders were saying is that the government will not interfere with one's belief. They came here to escape the governments mandates concerning beliefs and how one will worship. It had nothing to do with prayer or belief in God. In fact, it was meant to allow the practice as one wished. But GOD was not to be taken out of everything and every place.

Answer 10

actually, the Church should never have any connection with the State because it was intended to be separated...
if you are going to ask me, the Church should not directly influence the steps done by the State because it would be unethical, wouldn't it??and besides, both of the two aims to help the people...They only differ in the way or manner they help people...If the two would be together, there would be a lot of misunderstandings and debates...