Separation of Church and State?

Question

A man just asked an interesting question about mormons and polygamy. It raised a question in my mind that I am sure has been answered and considered but still it is interesting to think of. The First amendment states "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

It says that congress shall make no law prohibiting the free exercise thereof in regards to religion. Laws forbidding polygamy interfere with the mormon practices or did until mormons decided not to practice polygamy. So do laws forbidding mormons to practice polygamy violate the constitution?

I do realize that if religions could do anything they wanted and no law could stop them we would have problems. Especially if the religion called for human sacrifice. However in this instance we are talking about something that does not hurt someone or violate their basic human rights.

D'oh this question just got very annoying. Making me rethink my stance on gay marriage. Going to have to give that some thought. Would this apply equally to gay marriage? Gay marriage is not a religious issue exactly though. Prevention is but gays don't wish to be married as part of their religion though. Do they? A question for a later date.

Answer 1

In some backward places, religious leaders have their thumbs on the nation's leaders.

That has never been the problem in America or Canada. It never will be, as long as the radical islamics don't conquer "the great satan".

The problem in North America is that the nation's leaders have their thumbs on the church, along with the supreme court and the ACLU!

Instead of non-interference between church & state, our ungodly ACLU, courts and governments seem to believe in "Seperation FROM church, by the state!!!" NO FAIR!!!

The world can plainly see that this is not true democracy!!! It is reminicent of the atheist USSR where teaching the bible became a CRIME! Don't laugh, it's going that way here.

Answer 2

Marriage is a secular institution. If a particular religion said that 5 year olds could be married then the government has every right to prevent that from ocurring. Obviously, the government has long held that polygamy is socially distasteful and runs counter to prevailing views on the role of marriage in society. Those views may certainly be governed by religious attitudes, but not necessarily so. Either way, the government does have the right to regulate the institution of marriage.

Answer 3

This has already been decided by the Supreme Court. In Reynolds vs. United States, the Supreme Court held that laws against poligamy were not in violation of the constitution. The government can restrict you from doing a religious practice if it is harmful to people/society etc, but it cannot prohit your BELIEF in that practice. Here is an excerpt from the decision:

"This being so, the only question which remains is, whether those who make polygamy a part of their religion are excepted from the operation of the statute. If they are, then those who do not make polygamy a part of their religious belief may be found guilty and punished, while those who do, must be acquitted and go free. This would be introducing a new element into criminal law. Laws are made for the government of actions, and while they cannot interfere with mere religious belief and opinions, they may with practices. Suppose one believed that human sacrifices were a necessary part of religious worship, would it be seriously contended that the civil government under which he lived could not interfere to prevent a sacrifice? Or if a wife religiously believed it was her duty to burn herself upon the funeral pile of her dead husband, would it be beyond the power of the civil government to prevent her carrying her belief into practice?

So here, as a law of the organization of society under the exclusive dominion of the United States, it is provided that plural marriages shall not be allowed. Can a man excuse his practices to the contrary because of his religious belief? [98 U.S. 145, 167] To permit this would be to make the professed doctrines of religious belief superior to the law of the land, and in effect to permit every citizen to become a law unto himself. Government could exist only in name under such circumstances.

A criminal intent is generally an element of crime, but every man is presumed to intend the necessary and legitimate consequences of what he knowingly does. Here the accused knew he had been once married, and that his first wife was living. He also knew that his second marriage was forbidden by law. When, therefore, he married the second time, he is presumed to have intended to break the law. And the breaking of the law is the crime. Every act necessary to constitute the crime was knowingly done, and the crime was therefore knowingly committed. Ignorance of a fact may sometimes be taken as evidence of a want of criminal intent, but not ignorance of the law. The only defence of the accused in this case is his belief that the law ought not to have been enacted. It matters not that his belief was a part of his professed religion: it was still belief, and belief only."

Answer 4

No the law is not in violation of the constitution. The law does not prohibit people from living together, having sex, or anything that goes with marriage as far as religion is concerned. The law prohibits the "legal" representation of multiple spouses. According to Mormon (as well as most christian) faith the people are married in the eyes of god if they have had sex. This does not make them married by the laws of the land. The law cannot actually stop people from having multiple "partners". It just prevents the legal representation of them as multiple spouses. They would not have the legal rights as a wife or husband when it comes to certain issues.

Answer 5

The number of too many atheists you face on Yahoo Answers is result of separation of Church and State.

They are empty of spiritualism that right religion teaches. When state has nothing to do to promote teaching of religion this is what happens. Unfortunately religious community was killing too many men and women accusing them wrongfully and made public sick of them and now you are facing another big problem.

Islam teaches people in power to govern according to the teachings of religion and can not make any laws that contradict the religious commands. Therefore all law makers have to have knowledge about all fields of knowledge and knowledge of Islam also. So they can make laws that serves man king best.

In democracy majority can vote (after taking favors from lobbyists and serve their interests. If Liquor Store Association wants Liquor Stores in every street, and majority law makers vote in favor they will get what they want. But in Islamic country such legislation can not even be present to the legislation because God forbids alcohol consumption. God does forbids because alcoholics loose control of their minds and that is terrible thing to do ourselves. They also get more heart attacks, divorces, spouse abuse, child abuse and kill too many people by driving under the influence.

Answer 6

Good point. This is why I constantly try to make the point that morality should not be legislated. There are various things that are clearly moral issues, but are legislated, i.e. sex and marriage in same sex couples, prostitution, polygamy, when and where alcohal can be sold, to name a few. None of these have any real reason to be legislated.

Answer 7

God does not condone polygamy.......he made Adam and eve in the garden of Eden......if his stance was on polygamy he would have made Adam and eve and sue, Jane, Sarah, and Joanne in the garden of Eden. Furthermore, Mormon's have the rights to practice their religion. they just don't have the right for an adult man to have sex with children ( 12, 13, 14 and 15 year olds) or commit incest.

Answer 8

Of course and in exactly the same way that laws forbidding gay marrige do. Quite simply only the christian church thinks they have the right to decide for consenting adults what consenting adults ought to be able to do.

*Edit*
Good face... you are wonderful.

Answer 9

I think it has to do with the fact we have a civil mandate that states the definition of marriage as respected by the government. Though, I tend to agree with you on this, also I believe if we were to allow them to change our definition of marriage, gays should be able to get in on the action too.

Answer 10

I think Thomas Jefferson put it very clearly how the Government and religion should relate. He said "The legitimate powers of government extend only to such acts as are injurious to others. But it does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are 20 gods or no God. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg."