Do you believe in "Separation of Church & State"?

Answer 1

Yes, absolutely. But this is something that gets so badly misinterpreted by both sides that we're in danger of loosing it in a Culture Tug-of-War. We're torn between the ones who want to ram religion down our throats, and the ones who got so pissed off at the former that they want to eliminate religion entirely from the public sphere.

The best way to explain this is with a controversial example -- the role of religion in Public Schools. Now, Separation of Church and State means that the state can neither impose nor restrict religious expression. So, if the school (state) forces the students (individual citizens) to pray, then they are imposing religion. If they tell the students that they can't pray in school, then they are restricting religion. Both extremes -- forced prayer, and banned prayer -- violate Separation of Church and State.

So, if properly interpreted, there would be no prayer lead by the teacher, no "Under God," in the Pledge of Aliegence, and no "Intellegent Design" in the science classroom. However, it also means that if a student wants to mention God in a validictorian speach, or even pray, then they should have a right to. The students should have the right to wear religious symbols and clothing, speak in class about thier faith, create art that expresses their faith, and form extracurricular clubs based on their religion. The teachers, being representatives of the State in a Public School, must remain neutral in these matters.

Now, take Public School as a microcosm, and apply it to the entire country. "In God We Trust," on the money is Unconstitutional. The Faith Based Initiative which gives tax money to churches is exactly the sort of thing our Founding Fathers warned against. But, a manger scene in a public square should be protected. Ten Commandments monmuments are a different story. Putting them on the Court House is provocative, implying that the Judeo-Christian religions are somehow superior in the law -- but ultimately it depends on who paid for it. Taxpayer money going to such things is a violation, but if a private citizen or group paid for it, and if other such monuments from other faiths were also allowed, then it should be protected.

Does that make sense? Good. Can we PLEASE stop fighting about this, and come together to protect ALL of our freedoms?

Answer 2

Yes. I love my Lord, but I would truly understand the benefit of separating the church and the state when for example if we had a Muslim President.

Answer 3

Yes, but I take it further. I believe in separation of church altogether.

Answer 4

Absolutely.

Answer 5

yes but i personally think it should be interpreted in the spirit of why we have religeous freedom ... the law should be to protect a persons right to practice religeon freely without state or govt restriction ... instead it gets interpreted to protect the state from the religeous ...

Answer 6

yes

I'm a Christian and I believe they should be separate, which to the founding fathers and me meant no "state run" religion.

Answer 7

It was incorporated on the constitution but I believe it is not strictly followed because of the abusive manner of the Catholics in forcing their acts against the state. It is the mistakr of the catholics to force their religion.
jtm

Answer 8

Yes I do! This may not be a popular answer with my Christian brethren, but I worry about people with religiosity being in high places..

Answer 9

Absolutely yes.

I believe that the government should keep its hands out of religion completely.

Answer 10

Yes, and anyone who does not understand it's importance, Christian or otherwise, needs to take a history course.