Do liberals really believe in separation of church and state?

Question

If so, why do they want people to act Christian about welfare?

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=AqWXYdEGrndUTfB0zsp9g0_sy6IX;_ylv=3?qid=20071020213937AAnrHg9&show=7#profile-info-6549f62618a0063b85e5155bb6f6d791aa

It sounds a bit preachy to me.

I am not against welfare for those who need it. I am against being told I "should" treat the state as if it were my church. It may be your church but it is certainly not mine.

If the point is to be humane, then why not use the word humane.

I think a pragmatic view of welfare is best. There is no reason to confuse it with religion.

Answer 1

Well seeing as this was taken from another questioner let me say that politics is not black and white when it comes to every issue. NOT ever Liberal agrees with everything on the liberal platform.
AS for Welfare anyone who has taken Psychology 101 and understands the course would know why welfare exists. It's has nothing to do with Christianity.

Answer 2

With all my heart I believe that The Founders intended our nation to NOT be a theocracy. So government doesn't tell churches how to worship and churches don't tell government to give force of law to their sect's beliefs.

I don't know what liberals you have been talking too, but most liberals I know take a very pragmatic view of welfare. Social ills, like physical ills, do far less harm if there is early preventive treatment. Operation Head Start isn't about warm fuzzy feelings, it's about empirical studies showing it to be one of the most cost effective social programs ever. Over the decades OHS grads are less likely to receive government assistance or be incarcerated, saving thousands of dollars per child over and above the cost of the program. A long range view and enlightened self interest are the rationale for social programs, not "WWJD".

Answer 3

Everyone should believe in separation of church and state. A good example of religion ruling a country can be found in the Mideast. You could choose ANY religion and somebody could show you why it infringes upon the rights of somebody else. I wouldn't want to be told what to wear, what to eat, where I could or could not go, etc. For those who have no faith, it would be even more restrictive. The State allows us freedoms, but religious interjection would surely take away some freedoms. As an American, and as a Democrat, I would find that unacceptable.

Answer 4

Being a constitutionalist wacko i understand some thing approximately this. the 1st replace is a one way highway. It keeps government out of religion yet does not sidestep the religious from influencing government. to that end sayeth the surprising courtroom. the concern with this concern is that the Obama administration takes no understand religion (or the form) and believes that The State (Federal gov) can dictate despite it needs. Obama stepped right into a cow pie in this one, he had no thought what a firestorm it would create. except of direction this ploy is a distraction to misdirect our interest from greater important issues. this is all a magic act; they distract your interest to the right hand so which you do no longer look at what the left hand is doing.

Answer 5

Separation of church and state has to do with not promoting a specific religion in places that are federally funded and the federal government can not make laws that are based on religion. This is to prevent a national religion or a theocracy. There are many religions within the U.S. and all people have the freedom of their own religion.

That would have nothing to do with welfare although welfare is partially based on compassion and empathy. It is also based on the national shame it would cause to have people starving in the streets in such a rich country.

Answer 6

Constitutional issues can be confusing, and partisans often try to confuse them further.

Yes, liberals believe in the first amendment. The government cannot provide aid to churches under the establishment clause of the first amendment. There is nothing in the first amendment that says the government cannot give aid to people who are poor.

The question you've linked to concerns the case where the government is not helping a religion or a religious group in violation of the establishment clause, it's helping citizens who are poor.

The question points out that Christ said we should help the poor, and if the government is doing that through the use of our tax money, then Christians should not object, they should think it is a good thing.

Separation of church and state is not involved; the tax money does not go to a religion or a religious group, it goes to the poor.

I hope this helps.

Answer 7

Acting christian isn't an act of government, it's a way of acting as Christ would act.

Acting on your beliefs is not interfering with the operation of the affairs of state, it is our right as an American.

As far as welfare is concerned, you try and live on what they give on welfare.

I feel it should be abolished, we have far too many highways that have trash on them, far too many parks that need to be cleaned. Crops that could be harvested, beachs cleaned, and so on.

Your conservative drivel dwells far too much on that little problem so it can place attention away from the reality of the situation. Make it work fare, not welfare.

Besides, you have got a lot of nerve speaking about welfare, when you pay more for your Internet service than some welfare families have to live on for a month.

And you say your party is based on a Christian Morality Platform. I don't think Jesus would want his flock to starve because they couldn't get a job now ... do you ???

All you liberals out there, don't you love how the Conservative are so hypercritical about the pennies they have to shell out????

I think JC had right when he said " Give to Caesar what is Caesar's " but I never heard about JC saying we could ever be too compassionate to our fellow man.

Answer 8

All liberal thought, philosophy, policies, values and beliefs are based on lies. All liberal rhetoric is simply justification for the lies. In the separation of church and state issue. The lie is there is no such thing. The constitution merely prohibits the state from forcing the people to have a given religion. The people and those who are the leaders are welcome to have a religion. Christians are not supposed to steal money to help the poor. They are supposed to do it, because they want to, out of free will

As far as being Christian about welfare. The bible says 1/10 goes to the church. The State takes much more. Conservatives do give more to charity than liberals. The true leader of the liberals is the father of all lies. If you tax someone who is rich, to give to someone else, you only succeed in making more poor people. Stealing money from people is not Christian. Voting for others to steal money is just as bad. When you tax the rich, they make their employees work harder for less, they make their customers pay more for less, and they make their shareholders earn less on investments. Taxes do not harm corporations or their CEO's. The father of all lies fosters envy and makes all that misery and poverty, all the while People think taxation is a Christian thing because it helps the poor.

All social programs are designed by the father of all lies to break up the family and to promote immorality.

Answer 9

Why do you think the term 'liberal' applies only to non-christians?

As a non-christian independent who is 'liberal' in many ways, I feel that if noting the teachings of Jesus might wake up a few 'Christians' to do as Jesus would then I'll use it.

I saw C-span on Saturday. There was a Christian from CBN who said that when you are in certain groups you say certain things. He was refering to the way Fred Thompson acted when he was around Christians.

Answer 10

The constitution insists on separation of church and state and rightly so.

You are guilty of trying to hijack any moral concern or wish to help the unfortunate to Christian values! A very unchristian thing to do.

Muslims carry out good deeds and charitable giving as part of the requirements of their religion as do many other religions. In no way would they try and hijack these ideals as purely their own,

Shame on you!!!!!