For there to be true separation of church and state, the government must be out of religion, and religion must stay out of government.
Agreed but the key distinction is religion. I have no problem (and neither does the Constitution) with things like "Under God" and "In God We Trust," as they favor any specific faith.
As they DON'T favor any specific faith.*
You could make the argument that they favor theism, but it also would favor atheism not to include them. Political correctness makes my brain hurt.
Personally I think under god and in god we trust are technically constitutional, although I think the spirit that got those put in (ie communists and atheists somehow equal another) are wrong on many levels.
I don't think it would favor atheism t not have them in, especially since the original pledge was written by a preacher and didn't include under god, and the motto was opting ally E Pluribus Unum, which has nothing to do with a deity in any sense
Those people just wanted to do everything the opposite way the USSR was doing them.
You're right mr E, should in your opinion, should they be kept or removed?
That makes sense. I guess it would have to say "One nation, not under some magical sky daddy that doesn't exist." for it to favor atheism.
Yeah, and that IMO would be just as wrong.
I think it's wrong, but people have gotten used to it being there. Frankly, I think it wouldn't be worth the trouble to take it out.
I just always skip "under god" in the pledge and cross out "in god we trust" on my money.
Which is your right. I couldn't care less what you color on your dollar bills.
You cross out the in god we trust? I know many people even those that believe in a deity or deities who don't say under god out of principle, but crossing out something on money?
Quite obnoxious isn't it? I consider myself as someone who values science over faith but I believe in God due to my physics beliefs. I make no distinction between a creationist and an atheist who so blindly hates religion that he can't doubt his...
... own stance every now and then. Both are ignorant and refuse to engulf themselves in further knowledge.
The only way too learn is to be willing to question. And that goes for anything.
Completely after, Matt.
... What? Haha
What did you mean by completely after? Did you mean agree? If not, what did you mean?
Oh my God, haha ... definitely meant agree and didn't catch the mistake until now!
The hard part about this though is that your religion helps shape your philosophies and ideas of morality. Your religion can have a great amount of influence on your decisions that might not seem directly related.. I feel like I'm being unclear.. Meh
No I feel the exact same way. That's why I take it as religious authority out of govt. Religious convictions are impossible to separate, same with philosophical or moral convictions.
I'm meaning more from a direct point and more of the not using religion to directly create legislation. No one, certainly not myself, wants to stop personal convictions. There is a line, especially when people openly promote a religion OR irreligion, where you've crossed a line, at least IMO
The way I see it is there is nothing wrong with religious beliefs inspiring laws, as long as those religious beliefs aren't the argument behind making it a law. Murder is a sin in most religions but there are clearly other reasons to make it illegal.
Agree. Govt authority out of religion, and religious authority out of govt.
Influence however, in its broadest meaning, is impossible to separate without being oppressive.
I'm meaning religious authority and using religion to dictate legislation. Not influence itself, that old be impossible to get rid of without becoming a worse evil
Good question. I've also often though for those who want religion in government - do they want a theocracy? Also, which
Religion do they want in the government - Islam; Buddhism; Hinduism; Satanism; or, oh, yea Christianity? It's hard to have
real freedom of religion if one favored one is part of the government. I say separation is the only option that offers true freedom of religion - not religious tolerance but freedom. Unique argument; huh Matt?
Oh, and in case anyone wonders I am a practicing Christian - Sunday and Wednesday service, I tithe, the whole deal and more I won't say. Nearly every time the church door opens I'm there. Still feel separation is fully best.
I don't want religion in govt either.
False. Only govt out of religion. The people working in govt should not be prevented from expressing their faith.
No one is saying you can't be religious. Just dint use religion OR irreligion to govern