It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Church vs. State

page: 1
1
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 16 2008 @ 05:15 PM
link   
I have a couple of serious questions...we are not supposed to mix church and state, we can not allow our children to pray in school (nor have the mere mention of "God"), they are removing the Ten Commandments from court houses, they are contemplating removing "In God We Trust" on all our currency and so on and so on. Now, here is my question(s).

1. Why do we vote in CHURCHES????? Does the government say that they don't want ya, but we'll use you for whatever we may need. Imagine that. Why don't we goto courthouses to vote? Or police stations?

2. Why do we put our hands on the BIBLE to swear to tell the truth IN COURT CASES and to be ELECTED INTO OFFICE????? But we are not suppose to mix the two??

Sounds like a bunch of hypocrisy to me!! What do you all think?




posted on Oct, 16 2008 @ 05:31 PM
link   
In answer to your questions:

1: I've voted in nearly every election [including "off-years"] in four different voting districts, since 1996. Yet I have never voted in a church, nor even heard of such a thing. Until I read your thread, that is. Voting in a police station would create a logistical nightmare for our already over-worked and under-paid police forces.
Usually, I vote in a school, since of course it's empty of students and staff--Election Day being a federal holiday.

2: Noone is forced to swear on a Bible. One could swear on a Qu'ran, if that's their persuasion. And I suspect that our Jewish politicians are sworn in on a Torah. Furthermore, you don't even have to "swear". Certain groups urge members of their particular faith community that it is sinful to "swear" to anything [and no, I don't mean "cuss", I mean take an oath]. So you're given the option of swearing or pledging. I've been to court, and they merely asked if I swore or affirmed that I would tell the truth. No Bible. No holy book of any type. In fact, no book. Just my right hand in the air and my word. As far as politicians, they are sworn in on whatever holy book they ascribe to. Not many open atheists get to far in American politics. But it's got to be up to the individual how he wants to be sworn in.

They are removing the "Ten Commandments" from courthouses because they shouldn't be there in the first place, IMO. Like you say, we have a clear separation of Church and State. Even though it's on the money, which is the true religion for the sad millions, anyhow.

I hope I helped answer your questions.



posted on Oct, 16 2008 @ 05:57 PM
link   
It seems like the only separation is from christian practices. If you tell a muslim they cant pray... well no one does that. I'm just saying, it should be the separation of religion and state.



posted on Oct, 16 2008 @ 05:59 PM
link   
And why does "King George" always say "god bless america?"



posted on Oct, 16 2008 @ 06:22 PM
link   
First of all you are aloud to talk about religion at school. I should know I go there and have asked more than one teacher about it as well as my sunday school teacher; they all said it was okay. It's just the teachers have to treat all religions equally and not prefer one over another. The students have the right to talk about religion in whatever manner as long as it is not disruptive towards others' rights to do so. For example you can pray while at lunch if you would like, just not so loudly that others can't pray their own prayers, not that anyone ever does. Just saying. Also, when talking about God, that is very vague, anything can be a God or everything can be God, or you can be your own God. So when it talks about God in the constitution or the pledge of allegiance, it is not necessarilly talking about a particular religion.
You sound angry that they are taking christianity out of public places. Why? If you are a christian I see exactly what the problem is; you want everyone to be a christian like you. If you are not a christian than why do you care if they take the ten commandments out of the courthouses? Do we really have to keep the Sabbath day holy if we are hindu, buddhist, atheist, agnostic, etc. Or are we just supposed to ignore that commandment and obey all the rest, because they are a code of conduct?

"Good people do not need laws to tell them to act responsibly,
while bad people will find a way around the laws."
- Plato (427-347 B.C.)

I don't know about the removal of "in God we trust" from the currency, but I don't even think it is worth contemplating since, like I said before, God can be anything you want it to be. God does not always mean the God of the Bible, Koran, or Talmud, or whatever else.

I also don't know about the voting places, but I imagine the church you are referring to might have had a say so in if they would like it to be there. It's just a place to some people after all.

I will have to go with the poster(ItsTheQuestion) on the swearing on the bible one.

"As the government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian Religion..."
-From Article 11 of the Treaty of Tripoli 1797.  Unanimously ratified by the U.S. Senate and signed by President John Adams.



posted on Oct, 16 2008 @ 06:39 PM
link   
I am glad to see so many resplies so quickly. Where I am from, we have always voted in churches, not schools. So this is as odd for me to hear as my post was to some of you. Therefore, I have always wondered why. As for the student, I am glad that school's at least haven't taken the right to practice any religion you want (only quietly and to yourselves) from you, hopefully that will never change. I don't think I ever said that I preferred everyone be a Christian, I think that everyone should seek their own personal relationship with whatever "God" they choose to worship, unfortunately when some people enter a "church" they lose that want. They want to be told what the "preacher" thinks the bible says to them (preacher), not what the Lord is saying to each one individually. Just like no one is going to experience the same situation in the same way, so is the relationship with a Higher Authority. I can admire any one who believes in something and follows it with their whole heart and actions, regardless of if I believe what they believe or not. I am not here to judge anyone. What is wrong with the Ten Commandments? Are they not all true morals for everyone to live by? If the Ten Commandments where not linked to the Christian Bible, more people might not be so against them.



posted on Oct, 16 2008 @ 06:44 PM
link   
I've never voted in a church.

Here's the thing with church and state.

The first amendment says that no laws shall be made respecting a religion. Actually, it says, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof."

If I had my way, kids would be allowed to pray in school if they wanted to. And they would be allowed to talk about all different kinds of religions. And instead of just learning about and celebrating Christian religions, they'd learn about all the major religions of the world, and explore atheism as well. They'd make little paper dreidels for Hanukkah and during Ramadan, they'd learn about fasting and call to prayer...

And in the courthouse, they could have the 10 commandments, a Star of David, a Hindu Aum and maybe an Islamic flag. If we treated all religions with equal respect, then we wouldn't have the problem we do with separation of church and state.


That's my theory, anyway.

But it's also my suspicion that Christians wouldn't allow all religions to be treated equally. So, here we are, having to completely separate religion from government in every way.



posted on Oct, 26 2008 @ 10:27 PM
link   
My preacher ignorantly held a sermon on this topic this morning. He had no clue as to what he was talking about and the sad part is he will be voting soon.



posted on Oct, 27 2008 @ 10:06 AM
link   
I remember saying the pledge of allegiance in school every morning.
en.wikipedia.org...

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic for which it stands: one Nation under God, indivisible, With Liberty and Justice for all."



The Pledge of Allegiance to the United States flag is an oath of loyalty to the country. It is recited at many public events. Congress sessions open with the recitation of the Pledge.


i still don't understand why after 222 years all the sudden its wrong ?

our country is based on Christianity..if you don't want offended..don't live here lol
and we lived just fine...soon as church and state got separated...America is turning to pot.
So something is wrong somewhere.

[edit on 27-10-2008 by beforetime]



posted on Oct, 27 2008 @ 10:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by beforetime
i still don't understand why after 222 years all the sudden its wrong ?


222 years? It's only 116 years old!
Besides, The Pledge was written WITHOUT "under God". That phrase was added in 1954. So, make that 54 years.
(You should have read your link)



Congress inserted the words "under God" into the pledge in 1954 as a means of advancing religion at a time when the nation was engaged in a battle against the doctrines of atheistic communism. The court further noted that when President Eisenhower signed the bill, he stated, "From this day forward, the millions of our schoolchildren will daily proclaim . . . the dedication of our Nation and our people to the Almighty."


Source
That is a PERFECT example of destroying the line between Church and State.



our country is based on Christianity..


Have you read the first Amendment?

[edit on 27-10-2008 by Benevolent Heretic]



posted on Oct, 27 2008 @ 10:18 AM
link   
The town I live in has it's polling location in a church. I think it might just be the small towns that do this.





2. Why do we put our hands on the BIBLE to swear to tell the truth IN COURT CASES and to be ELECTED INTO OFFICE????? But we are not suppose to mix the two??


I wonder if there has ever been a case of someone who refused to put their hand on the bible in court? Are atheists exempt from this? What about muslims, etc. I'm sure there has, but what were the repercussions?

Just curious.



posted on Oct, 27 2008 @ 10:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by Clark W. Griswold
I wonder if there has ever been a case of someone who refused to put their hand on the bible in court? Are atheists exempt from this? What about muslims, etc. I'm sure there has, but what were the repercussions?


You can just affirm that you are telling the truth. "Swearing on the bible" is totally optional.




Before you give your evidence you will be asked to swear that you will tell the truth. This is being sworn in. You may be sworn in by taking a sacred oath that binds your conscience, for example by swearing on the Bible, or you may affirm or promise to tell the truth without religious belief. If you lie in court, you could be charged with a serious crime called perjury. The penalty for perjury can be as high as 14 years in jail.


Court Proceedings

[edit on 27-10-2008 by Benevolent Heretic]



posted on Oct, 27 2008 @ 10:44 AM
link   
reply to post by Benevolent Heretic
 


Hmm...if a person on trial refuses to put his hand on the bible to be sworn in, that very well might hurt him. If there are god fearing folks on the jury, and say this person is an atheist, I do believe that would be one strike against the atheist. We all know this shouldn't happen, but I'm sure it does. That doesn't seem fair to me. Unless the swearing in happens in private somewhere.

[edit on 27-10-2008 by Clark W. Griswold]



posted on Oct, 27 2008 @ 11:07 AM
link   
reply to post by beforetime

If I remember my history correctly, the phrase "under God" was not originally in the Pledge of Allegiance. It was added at a later date from the penning of the Pledge itself. Please read on for my personal views on this, however. It falls under the same category as placing "In God We Trust" on our currency.


our country is based on Christianity..if you don't want offended..don't live here lol

No, it's not. And although I am a proud Christian, I do not want it to be.

Why? Because I understand how politics and religion can taint each other. All of the horrors that are likely to be specified in this thread (the Inquisition, the Crusades, even the Witch Trials) can be attributed to a theocracy moreso than a religion. Just look at the fighting going on in the Middle East under the supposed approval of Allah to understand this.

As a more modern example, allow me to quote from the KJV version of the Bible itself:

Mark 10:25

It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.

Please visit the link provided for the complete story.

That sounds pretty straightforward to me. He who loves money more than God will never enter Heaven. However, it can also mean that anyone with any money is banned from Heaven. It can mean that we need to breed very small camels and manufacture very large needles to be allowed to own anything. There are several versions of how this one verse is translated into modern reality.

That's all fine and good, until politics gets mixed in. Politics is all about the control of others. So we could have a new set of laws that outlawed money and threw us into pure communism. Or, although a bit laughable, I could suggest that every funeral home carry a supply of needles large enough for a camel to walk through their eye and every person who died must buy one.


That's one verse, out of how many in the Bible? Not only that, it is one of the most obvious verses as to meaning that I am familiar with. If it can be twisted, how much more so can other verses be twisted? That 'freedom of religion' that we tout in the USA is nothing more than a requirement that the people be allowed to form their own interpretation of their holy books and customs, without governmental involvement.

It also carries with it another requirement, although not as much specified but implied: equality of religious practices. Government cannot favor one religious practice above another. Thus, my worship on Sunday is no more or less valid from a political perspective as a Jewish practice of Saturday Sabbath. That does not mean I have to accept the concept of a Saturday Sabbath; it means I cannot legally force someone to not practice it.

Now for the controversial part: the US Constitution does not prohibit people from acting preferentially toward religious practices, only government. An elected official, therefore, cannot show preferential treatment toward a citizen based on a method of worship, but a citizen may do so. As such, it would be improper for a judge to declare that the Ten Commandments (which are not Christian, btw, they are Jewish) will be displayed in his courtroom, but the citizenry of that jurisdiction may do so, and in that case the judge may choose to uphold the rights of the citizenry to have it displayed. A judge may not, under any circumstances, allow one display to exist and deny another from a different religion. A judge may also not base his decisions in any way on religious texts or beliefs, be they of the citizenry at large or his own. Legal decisions are to be based strictly on the laws properly passed and applicable in the jurisdiction he presides in and which are in effect at the time of the issue before him. Nothing else.

If the members of Congress wish to have a prayer before sessions, that is their right under the US Constitution. If the Supreme Court wishes to do so, that is also their right, not as elected officials, but as citizens. But by the same legal theory, children in school have the right to pray as well, as long as the exercise of that right does not interfere with the right of other citizens to pray. In a perfect world, children would be given a few moments of silence to bow their heads (or cross their eyes, flap their arms, or whatever) and pray quietly (although not necessarily perfectly silently). A teacher would have the same time to do the same thing, but would not be able to lead the children in prayer. The mention of God, Jehovah, or Jesus would be acceptable officially, but also other religions could mention their customs/practices/beliefs/deities.

As to the money issue, I do not see the problem with placing "In God We Trust" on our currency. 'God' is a generic term and is not necessarily synonymous with Jehovah, Allah, Buddha, Gaia, etc. Such only recognizes that the money of this country is backed by the free people who place honor and virtue above monetary gain alone. Now exactly what's wrong with that?

I pray daily to Jehovah the Father, in the name of His son, Jesus of Nazareth the Christ and Messiah. If someone else wishes to pray to another, in another way, or even to declare their belief that there is nothing higher than our own consciousness, that is their right. But please don't tell me I can't pray as I wish, and do not tell me my freedom of speech does not include the mention of my faith. To do so is to actually invite theocracy, since if you can silence me, I can also silence you. Please do not grant me that 'right'; I do not want it.

TheRedneck



posted on Oct, 27 2008 @ 11:12 AM
link   
Clark - If that happened, and anyone mentioned it, say, in the jury deliberation room, someone mentioned that it bothered him that the person didn't swear on a bible, it would be grounds for a mistrial.

Niice post, Redneck!



posted on Oct, 27 2008 @ 11:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by beforetime
our country is based on Christianity..if you don't want offended..don't live here lol
and we lived just fine...soon as church and state got separated...


Oof! I'm not even American and I seem to understand early American history better than you do! Your country is based on Christianity? Since when?


America is turning to pot.


I don't know about America, but it might explain some of your posts.

[edit on 27-10-2008 by Merriman Weir]



posted on Oct, 27 2008 @ 12:19 PM
link   
Its all well and good they added it in 1954

but the fact remains us the few born between 1954-1990

said that pledge RELIGIOUSLY!! for30+ years

Do you not think in 30+ years we would not honestly take GOD and our country first?



posted on Oct, 27 2008 @ 12:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by beforetime
but the fact remains us the few born between 1954-1990


The "few" born in the last 50 years??? :lol

Look, I said the Pledge growing up, too. What's your point?



Do you not think in 30+ years we would not honestly take GOD and our country first?


What? What ARE you talking about? What does "putting God and our country first" really even mean? First before what? You don't make any sense. I'm sorry.



posted on Oct, 27 2008 @ 01:22 PM
link   
reply to post by beforetime

Its all well and good they added it in 1954

I thought it was a bit earlier, but I am honestly not sure on that. I'll take your word for it; the exact date is not really relevant to this thread.


but the fact remains us the few born between 1954-1990

said that pledge RELIGIOUSLY!! for30+ years

That would include me. And yes, I take it religiously as well. Did you read my entire post? I think it was the last paragraph where I expounded my faith.


Do you not think in 30+ years we would not honestly take GOD and our country first?

The two are not synonymous. God comes first in my life, followed closely by country because the USA has freedom of religion. So my country then is the reason I am able to freely worship in the way I see fit.

Check your history. The early settlers on this continent from England were fleeing religious tyranny from a Christian nation. Think about that for a minute. Christians fleeing religious tyranny from a Christian nation. If the freedom of religion clause is not followed, we could have the same situation here, only there is nowhere left to flee to.

Think, reason, think again, and extrapolate the possibilities. You will find, my friend, that what the preacher says, unlike what God or Jesus says, is not always the truth, the light, and the way.

TheRedneck



posted on Oct, 27 2008 @ 06:13 PM
link   
reply to post by beforetime
 


do you think the pledge brain washed you a bit?


also i dunno about people saying the pledge for 30 years? do they continue after they leave school?


[edit on 27-10-2008 by yeti101]




top topics



 
1
<<   2 >>

log in

join