Separation of State and Religion

[justarandomteen]

So, what are your opinions on the separation of state and religion? Should religion be separate from our government, or dictate every action we make. If so, what religion?

[TheN3rdyOutcast]

To have a fair society, either all religion must be excluded from government, or all religions must be included or equally represented in government. Seeing as the latter results in alot of conflict and a government that would likely never get anything done, a secular government is the best choixe for a diverse nation.

[CharlieHorse]

if religion became part of the government, i'm moving. I will not be a citizen of a country driven by beliefs based off of individual faith.

[kryptonite]

If you want to pray, it should be optional. People that don't want to pray can either leave the room or at least be respectful.

The US Constitution basically states that Congress can't set up an official religion. Likewise, they can't force it on anyone.

In a way, it's like a drug. If you want it, you know where to get it. If you don't want it, there's plenty of other things to do.

[Gamma Male]

Absolutely 100% for the separation of church and state. Biblical sentiments should be removed from public courthouses and the only religion taught or condoned in public school should be an objective, scientific history class on world religions.

[James Dean]

I think religion is usually forced upon you as you are growing up and you have no choice. I can speak from experience. Religion as far as American society should be based on that choice. For example we have bible study at school but it's based on whether he or she wants to go.

[Miserabilia]

Religion and State aren't even seperated enough as it is.
Our laws should be modified to equalize religious idealogies to any other idealogy, opinion, or expression.
Having a seperate issue for religious freedom is an outdated idea that can only be used to build religious privilege on, instead of including religious freedom in freedom of speech and expression.

[Stronk Serb]

All for it. Also implement taxes on religious organisations because they represent companies which offerr services.

[JamesSuperBoy]

I think it should be separate but for most countries that will never happen.

[CosmicNoodle]

It should be compleatly seperate, 2000 year old camp fire storys shouldt influence modern politics, in any slight way

*prepares anus for the haters*

[Babs]

Absolutely not. Religion has no business in the government. I'm gettin' the fuck outta here if they ever do.

[Leprous]

Well, I don't live in the US, but if any government in any country starts making decisions that are because of religion, then I'm guessing allot of things will go wrong.

[Jean Poutine]

IMO religious precepts are every bit as legitimate in government debate as any other ideological precept. I mean, push aside religious law and deism/supernatural shit, and what's left? Just an ideology, like any political ideology.

I tend to want to distinguish religious moral precepts and religious law nowadays. The former is okay as an influence in government (sometimes I think we'd be better off following these), the latter is strictly DO NOT WANT.

There's nothing really incompatible with well-understood Christianity and government, to name that which we are most familiar with. Imagine a State that would be pacifistic, turn the other cheek, care for the meek and the poor, etc. People, and myself included, shoot a lot of flak at the religious right because their beliefs are so out there and out of touch with the book they profess to follow that it's pretty much ridiculous, but the core message of Christianity is pretty common sense and universal, so I don't see why the legislator couldn't inspire himself with it. Most of the ridiculous shit in Christianity is from the Old Testament and quoted by people who've probably never read the Bible in their life. According to them, Jesus fulfilled the law for us, so why quote the law on homosexual relations, to name the best example?

As an example, in Quebec's Charter, section 2 requires to offer assistance to a person in distress as much as possible if it doesn't endanger one's life.

2. Every human being whose life is in peril has a right to assistance.

Every person must come to the aid of anyone whose life is in peril, either personally or calling for aid, by giving him the necessary and immediate physical assistance, unless it involves danger to himself or a third person, or he has another valid reason.

Additionally, in the Civil Code, section 1471 protects anyone offering assistance from most lawsuits that may be brought due to his/her actions.

It's called "la règle du bon samaritain" (the Good Samaritan rule). Care to guess where the inspiration came from?

You want to know another Christianity moral precept? Render unto Caesar what belongs to Caesar. So, ironically, taxing the churches as a means of removing religious privilege would be itself Christian religious doctrine. Is there something wrong with taxing the churches? Should we not do it because it comes from Christianity?

People hate on religion a lot, and it's understandable, because religion has made a lot of people's lives shitty, but there's not just shitty stuff in there. Like most things, it can be good or bad. Depends on the use you make of it. As an agnostic, I would be perfectly comfortable living in a state guided by Christian moral precepts such as brotherly love for all humankind, the importance of free will, forgiveness, welfare for the poor and tolerance, but I would not tolerate any God or law being imposed on me that contradicts with my free will and choices, which is it itself quite Christian.

And as a word of parting, what about free will? Humans are born with free will and it is their choice to accept JC Denton as their lord and saviour and recognize the almighty Helios as their personal God or not. Having religious law in the State apparatus would be unacceptable to any Christian worth his salt. So basically, separation of church and state can be said to be Christian dogma.

Should we throw that out?

[DeadEyes]

IMO religious precepts are every bit as legitimate in government debate as any other ideological precept. I mean, push aside religious law and deism/supernatural shit, and what's left? Just an ideology, like any political ideology.

I tend to want to distinguish religious moral precepts and religious law nowadays. The former is okay as an influence in government (sometimes I think we'd be better off following these), the latter is strictly DO NOT WANT.

There's nothing really incompatible with well-understood Christianity and government, to name that which we are most familiar with. Imagine a State that would be pacifistic, turn the other cheek, care for the meek and the poor, etc. People, and myself included, shoot a lot of flak at the religious right because their beliefs are so out there and out of touch with the book they profess to follow that it's pretty much ridiculous, but the core message of Christianity is pretty common sense and universal, so I don't see why the legislator couldn't inspire himself with it. Most of the ridiculous shit in Christianity is from the Old Testament and quoted by people who've probably never read the Bible in their life. According to them, Jesus fulfilled the law for us, so why quote the law on homosexual relations, to name the best example?

As an example, in Quebec's Charter, section 2 requires to offer assistance to a person in distress as much as possible if it doesn't endanger one's life.



Additionally, in the Civil Code, section 1471 protects anyone offering assistance from most lawsuits that may be brought due to his/her actions.

It's called "la règle du bon samaritain" (the Good Samaritan rule). Care to guess where the inspiration came from?

You want to know another Christianity moral precept? Render unto Caesar what belongs to Caesar. So, ironically, taxing the churches as a means of removing religious privilege would be itself Christian religious doctrine. Is there something wrong with taxing the churches? Should we not do it because it comes from Christianity?

People hate on religion a lot, and it's understandable, because religion has made a lot of people's lives shitty, but there's not just shitty stuff in there. Like most things, it can be good or bad. Depends on the use you make of it. As an agnostic, I would be perfectly comfortable living in a state guided by Christian moral precepts such as brotherly love for all humankind, the importance of free will, forgiveness, welfare for the poor and tolerance, but I would not tolerate any God or law being imposed on me that contradicts with my free will and choices, which is it itself quite Christian.

And as a word of parting, what about free will? Humans are born with free will and it is their choice to accept JC Denton as their lord and saviour and recognize the almighty Helios as their personal God or not. Having religious law in the State apparatus would be unacceptable to any Christian worth his salt. So basically, separation of church and state can be said to be Christian dogma.

Should we throw that out?

Hmm, poutineee, hehe.

In all seriousness, religion shouldn't even exist.

[Lovelife090994]

I think it should be 90 to 10%. Religious people have a voice and have opinions. At least here what we have to say. Minus the zealots of course.

Hmm, poutineee, hehe.

In all seriousness, religion shouldn't even exist.

Good luck swaying a good 70% of the human population. Religion has existed for millennia and religions like Christianity have stood the test of time, war, trial, and now science. It's not going anywhere. At least the core beliefs are good.

Take the Ten Commandments. What do these 10 laws have in common with today? One, most are common sense, and two they are universal i.e. no bear of false witness, loving thy neighbor, and not stealing, murdering, or envying. Those are pretty useful.

[CharlieHorse]

Hmm, poutineee, hehe.

In all seriousness, religion shouldn't even exist.

agreed, at least not in its current state

[Aajj333]

I wasn't aware everyone in the wesite has the same government but hey let's make a new one. In this ft government, religion will be seperate to insure the best decision for all is made.

[Miserabilia]

Take the Ten Commandments. What do these 10 laws have in common with today? One, most are common sense, and two they are universal i.e. no bear of false witness, loving thy neighbor, and not stealing, murdering, or envying. Those are pretty useful.

yes, thank goodness I read the bible every day to remember the ten commandments, I can imageine that otherwise we'd all be running around raping eah other and violently killing each other. </sarcasm>
Seriously though,
we have laws. Most people do what they do because they were raised to do it or by fear of law, not because they are eager to follow the 10 commandments.

[Capto]

yes, thank goodness I read the bible every day to remember the ten commandments, I can imageine that otherwise we'd all be running around raping eah other and violently killing each other. </sarcasm>
Seriously though,
we have laws. Most people do what they do because they were raised to do it or by fear of law, not because they are eager to follow the 10 commandments.

The 10 commandments are arguably laws in the same sense that what you would call laws are indeed laws.

[Typhlosion]

If you're going to claim laicism, you might as well want to remove that tax exemption on churches.

I'm all for it.

[Miserabilia]

The 10 commandments are arguably laws in the same sense that what you would call laws are indeed laws.

Yes, so? I follow things that I was taught when I was raised, things I instinctively know, and legality laws. Those things keep me from murdering raping and stealing, not a book neither me nor my parents care very much about.

[Capto]

Yes, so? I follow things that I was taught when I was raised, things I instinctively know, and legality laws. Those things keep me from murdering raping and stealing, not a book neither me nor my parents care very much about.

Basically the same thing.

The X Commandments were, in essence, a set of laws.

A glorified set of laws, yes, but a set of laws.

[Miserabilia]

Basically the same thing.

The X Commandments were, in essence, a set of laws.

A glorified set of laws, yes, but a set of laws.

Lol? Yes, and the rules of chess, are, in essence a set of laws.
I see what you mean but it's pointless; the fact that they are laws does not make them more important or make me follow them.
But you were probably just correcting my statement and poor choice of words and you were absolutely right.

[dakeep18]

there is too little of this these days