Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
the power to tax is the power to restrict or destroy, so is exempting religions from taxation a means of ensuring their independence
No, it means that we have had biased governance that has not maintained the original intent of the constitution.
A religious institution enjoys all the benefits of a government, including the security, and yet doesn't have to pay for it, unlike the people and most other institutions.
"Give to Caesar what is Caesar's, and to God what is God's"
- Matthew 22:21
No, it means that we have had biased governance that has not maintained the original intent of the constitution.
A religious institution enjoys all the benefits of a government, including the security, and yet doesn't have to pay for it, unlike the people and most other institutions.
"Give to Caesar what is Caesar's, and to God what is God's"
- Matthew 22:21
And what happens in God's house stays in God's house.
When people can have free expression of their beliefs again publicly, it will be then the original intent of the constitution will be upheld and all benefits withstanding. Until then, there is no real security for any one, believer to non-believer as free speech has taken a turn south. For each ruling against public expression of a believer the right of the non-believer grows weaker as well.
This is a two edged sword, that cuts both ways.
Also the church is unable to back a political candidate. Do the people of the United States, do they really want to open those flood gates?
The people will continue to test those waters (laws) and at some point, the dam will burst.
And what happens in God's house stays in God's house.
When people can have free expression of their beliefs again publicly, it will be then the original intent of the constitution will be upheld and all benefits withstanding. Until then, there is no real security for any one, believer to non-believer as free speech has taken a turn south. For each ruling against public expression of a believer the right of the non-believer grows weaker as well.
This is a two edged sword, that cuts both ways.
Also the church is unable to back a political candidate. Do the people of the United States, do they really want to open those flood gates?
The people will continue to test those waters (laws) and at some point, the dam will burst.
Nobody will have an issue if what happens in God's house stayed there. It is meant to be. No intrusion of politics into God's house, and no instrusion of beliefs in God's house into politics. This is, likely any logical approach, a two-way system.
This also affords people to express their religion freely (although, it might be quite a challenge for people of some religions to do so in America compared to many other countries due to some nonsensical ideas), a freedom you think doesn't exist. And I couldn't disagree more with you. I'm one of the VERY few Americans who ALWAYS thanks God before every first bite of the food. Nobody has intruded into my religious beliefs. But, from the sound of it, you sound persecuted that your personal freedoms have been questioned. Could you elaborate on it?
Churches do back political candidates, directly or indirectly. They should not, as an institution, preach politics. They should preach the word of God, and help people follow the teachings of Jesus Christ. How many verses can you quote from the Bible where Jesus talked about how the political landscape of the country should be?
And if you truly believe this is an issue of dealing with a double edged sword, then you should think seriously how much damage you could take if one establishment were allowed to takeover. Need I bring back lessons from history?
"For we know that the common law is that system of law which was introduced by the Saxons on their settlement in England, and altered from time to time by proper legislative authority from that time to the date of Magna Charta, which terminates the period of the common law. . . This settlement took place about the middle of the fifth century. But Christianity was not introduced till the seventh century; the conversion of the first christian king of the Heptarchy having taken place about the year 598, and that of the last about 686. Here then, was a space of two hundred years, during which the common law was in existence, and Christianity no part of it.
. . . if any one chooses to build a doctrine on any law of that period, supposed to have been lost, it is incumbent on him to prove it to have existed, and what were its contents. These were so far alterations of the common law, and became themselves a part of it. But none of these adopt Christianity as a part of the common law. If, therefore, from the settlement of the Saxons to the introduction of Christianity among them, that system of religion could not be a part of the common law, because they were not yet Christians, and if, having their laws from that period to the close of the common law, we are all able to find among them no such act of adoption, we may safely affirm (though contradicted by all the judges and writers on earth) that Christianity neither is, nor ever was a part of the common law." - Thomas Jefferson
1- Constitution clearly states the need to keep religion and government separate. Neither is to influence policies. Need help? And you should really quote from the constitution to be taken seriously.
Please follow your own advice.
Quote:
The general principles, on which the Fathers achieved independence, were the only Principles in which that beautiful Assembly of young Gentlemen could Unite....And what were these general Principles? I answer, the general Principles of Christianity, in which all these Sects were United...Now I will avow, that I then believe, and now believe, that those general Principles of Christianity, are as eternal and immutable, as the Existence and Attributes of God; and that those Principles of Liberty, are as unalterable as human Nature and our terrestrial, mundane System.
Good quote. I have an encyclopedia of quotes from the founding fathers that is hundreds of pages of quotes by our nation's leaders.
Quote:
This Country was never intended to be Christian, hence "Separation of Church and State".
From the House of Representatives and the Supreme Court building both being used for church services to Jefferson and Madison having the Marine Corp Band play during church services, it's clear that our founding fathers did not intend a "separation of church and state" as we interpret it today, but sought to discourage a national religion or denomination. In fact, many of the founding fathers when writing their state's constitutions required a person swear allegiance to Jesus Christ before being eligible to hold public office. Additionally, the first book approved and published by Congress to be used in public schools to instruct students was the Bible. Aa separation of church and state as it is defined today, wasn't intended. There is plenty of evidence among the other writings (including the Federalist Papers) as well as the actions of these men to suggest they intended no separation of church and state as we define it today. As to whether or not that makes us a "Christian nation", that would depend upon how you define it.
Good quote. I have an encyclopedia of quotes from the founding fathers that is hundreds of pages of quotes by our nation's leaders.
And that must make you a genius. Would you mind quoting, where in the constitution does it suggest to that religion can influence the legislature, and vice versa, or a mention of God that forms the basis for the nation as a whole.
I think you just might be confusing the issue with individual liberty. Allow me to quote Jefferson, again:
1- History, I believe, furnishes no example of a priest-ridden people maintaining a free civil government.
2- Christianity neither is, nor ever was a part of the common law.
Two quotes that demonstrate the underlying idea in the framing of the first amendment. I'm pretty sure you can find these in that encyclopedia of yours.
And that must make you a genius. Would you mind quoting, where in the constitution does it suggest to that religion can influence the legislature, and vice versa, or a mention of God that forms the basis for the nation as a whole.
Could you first tell me where in my post I said anything about the Constitution giving religion the right to influence the legislature or that God forms the basis for the nation? I don't believe I said anything of the kind. Why can't you just address what is said instead of making stuff up? What my point was is that those who interpret the law as prohibiting any religious symbols, practices, utterances, or anything else that really means freedom from religion is misinterpreting the Constitution. I never said anything close to what you claimed. I'm not sure where you even came up with that.
By culture, yes. By law, no. The whole problem with this argument is that people will use the past to justify the present or future.
Edit: this from the article in the original post:
Quote:
The Pentagon canceled Graham's appearance at Thursday's event (Graham will still take part in a Capitol Hill service) because his previous criticisms of Islam as an "evil" religion were "not appropriate" to a prayer service for armed services personnel of all faiths.
Perhaps if prominent Christians practiced what they taught, that is not to judge, then Christian values would be more universally accepted these days.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
