the seperation only applied to legislative power, as much as i wish it would have, it never ment to obliterate ties between the church and the state just ensure an islamic-type(church is law) or monarchy (king gets power from god thus he is king). in the end it was a big f you to the russians, that is all, luckily some early athiests spinned it around against the church and are slowly eliminating the fairy tales from our government...
i personally would never trust god, cause man did he f this place up... really all powerful and uh decided to a) create man b) create women c) let bush win.
edit
john adams was not an idiot, he simply said that our government wont be run by a group of people who still believe in the easter bunny and tooth fairy... oh wait ... god sorry i get make believe things mixed up
2007-09-04 18:52:53
·
answer #1
·
answered by Clifton F 1
·
1⤊
2⤋
This is one of the most misunderstood amendments. Separation of church and state means that the church is not allowed to tax people to support itself. Early colonials could literally be put to death or given a jail sentence if they did not pay the church. The church also took it upon itself to make the laws in the towns it occupied and if those laws made by the church were not followed people could be jailed or put to death. Much like the religious persecution that people fled from in Europe.
2007-09-04 19:05:37
·
answer #2
·
answered by Rae K 3
·
0⤊
1⤋
tek and deuce, fellows, you are wrong. deuce, our government was originally much less into religion than now. and tek, the no establishment of religion clause is the one you are not getting. it says that our federal govt may NOT give an official sanction to religion, which is just what separation of church and state means. this is the technical use of the word 'establish' that came from britain, where the church of england is the 'established' church of that part of britain, for ex. please note that the constitution is careful to say swear or affirm, and it is only recently that presidents have started adding 'So help me God' to their oath. In our courts one is allowed to affirm but most witnesses are scared to because it would make them seem less than credible.
2007-09-04 18:54:31
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
Because this country thinks God is on our side and nobody Else's, when in fact God is not on any ones side. He is on the side of those who do his will. Which was given to mankind by his Son Jesus. That is to spread the Good News Of Gods Kingdom through out the earth until Dan 2:44 has been full filled. This country nor any country is doing that today. The only people on the face of the earth who is spreading the Good News Of Gods Kingdom through out the earth is Jehovah God's Christian Witnesses, The largest army of witnesses on the face of the earth with over 100 thousand congregations, in over 237 lands, country's, Islands, mountain regions, the amazons, north and south poles, deserts, and building over 10 congregations every three days with over 7 thousand trained baptized witnesses every week. All getting ready for the Great Day Of God Almighty Jehovah to take over earths affairs and transform this earth back to the paradise it was originally intended for, with all those people who want to live under that kingdom Government. All those who refuse will be destroyed just like in Noah's day. Luke 17:26
Sincerely yours,
Fred M. Hunter
2007-09-04 19:08:14
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
2⤋
McCarthyism (spelling?). Int he 1950's the governemtn wanted to distance us from communism so stamped "In god we trust" on all of our money if you look at bills before that time it is not there.
The "Under god" in the pledge was added at about the same time, not sure about swearing in, in court but you can ask for secular swearing in and they are obligated by law to do it
according to John Adams in the Treaty of Tripoli 6/7/1717(year might be off) "The United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion"
2007-09-04 18:50:36
·
answer #5
·
answered by Alicia F 3
·
3⤊
1⤋
The rational for that nonsense is that, in theory, while no specific god is named, the US is, allegedly, subject to a "supreme being", as stated in nine states' constitutions as a precondition for holding public office.
"prompted to acknowledge the existance of god when being sworn in court"
Only in certain jurisdictions.
ADDENDUM
"McCarthyism (spelling?). Int he 1950's the governemtn wanted to distance us from communism so stamped "In god we trust" on all of our money if you look at bills before that time it is not there."
Not entirely. The motto has been on US coinage since 1864.
2007-09-04 18:47:53
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
2⤋
When the country was first founded, "In God We Trust" was not displayed on our currency.
2007-09-04 18:49:58
·
answer #7
·
answered by Johnny 5
·
3⤊
0⤋
It's an oxymoron of the worst kind if you think about it- "blood money"; "war" money. I think it's more for the illusion of freedom and patriotism than any real "trust" in God. Personally, I think it wouldn't matter if it said 'In Rodney Dangerfield we Trust".
2007-09-04 18:51:17
·
answer #8
·
answered by RIFF 5
·
1⤊
1⤋
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof
There is no "seperation" of church and state.
There is a prohibition of the state from establishing laws that interferes with free exercise of religion. Period.
2007-09-04 18:49:15
·
answer #9
·
answered by TEK 4
·
3⤊
2⤋
The constitution basically just says there can't be a sponsored state church. (like Anglican).
Besides the first amendment, there ain't too much listed about it.
2007-09-04 18:50:05
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋