Separation of Church and State

page 1 of 1 17 total items

Mnemeth

Mnemeth

Rider of the Currents

Cancel

Kind key words in US Law, yet there are a whole bunch of undereducated people out there who think that moving religion into politics is a good idea.

As for me, my response will always be, WHAT! ARE YOU NUTS? Politics should have nothing to do with religion other than to maintain the separation between the church and state. Why would we want to expose any religion to a sphere that has corruption as one of its defining points. The answer is unfortunately that religious leaders want to dictate how a country acts, which means that they are actually after power and as we all know.

Quote by Lord Acton in a letter to Bishop Mandell Creighton in 1887"power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely"

Well thats my view on the matter. What are your views?

Do not interfere in the affairs of dragons, for you are crunchy and good with ketchup.

  • Jan 14, 2008

Nubes

Nubes

Blah blah blah!!!

Cancel

well if u referr to politics as Political parties, i will say yes... but if u referr to politics plain plain, i say u're wrong..

politics is everything in our life. everyone needs a way of behavior and that's what politics give us.

I'm not religous so my point of view will be exonerated by you. but imagine if religions could be a full part of Political parties with the tremendous disaster those parties are.

they only worry about their stuff not the pple.

is sad... but u cant deny that religion makes a big and such an impact and influence in political parties matters.

so u cant never separated their links, becuz any way or another their going to be linked forever.

everything is a business and religions are not free of that.

Sulibres

Sulibres

Avert your eyes from the truth.

Cancel

Unfortunately, realpolitik now of days involves a vast amount of foreign policy especially in the turbulent Middle East.

The consequences of 9/11 and the invasion of Iraq has ramifications far beyond the U.S because it could lead to a war of cultures between the Middle East and the Western World. Or more specifically, a war between the Christian and Muslim Worlds.

The thing about politics and diplomacy is that it's a delicate issue. Negotiations can only go so far so long as the other party is sufficiently reasonable in their search for personal gain. But religion can turn an already complicated issue into a God awful mess.

Take the Arab-Israeli conflict for example. Both Palestinians and Israelis believe that it is their God given right to have the soil that they are both fighting over. Negotiations may be difficult but add religious dogma and propaganda regarding "God's Chosen Ones" from both sides and you have a feud between two factions that are so caught up with their self righteousness that the only solution they can find is the complete extermination of each other.

Then there is the spreading of the word. The Muslims and Christians are both people of the book and I'll say this; both are imperialistic. The whole goal of both religions is to "Go Forth And Multiply" in a somewhat aggressive manner. The denunciation and utter destruction of the "false gods" is horrifyingly reminiscent of the invasion of a foreign land and stripping it of its identity, culture and any resistance. Once that is done, the entire populace must conform to the new culture and norms set out by the hierarchical leaders of the Church/Invader. Once a large percentage of the population, especially its young (Orwellian Brainwashing?) has conformed to the new way of life, it becomes an operational base from which the Imperial Power/ Religion can extend its influence towards other areas utilizing the resources of its newly acquired territories.

And let's face it, the world is seeing a rejuvenation in religious organizations. China might eventually become the biggest Muslim and Christian country in the world! But if both major religions are imperialistic, and to anger either would have consequences of incredible proportions then inevitably, religion will be drawn into politics.

  • Jan 14, 2008

Eisritter

Eisritter

Cool As Ice

Cancel

Combining both is quite a problem since the both the church and the government have different views on certain issues(Poverty, Population Control and any others that I need to find out) so making certain laws is also a problem

  • Jan 14, 2008

EternalParadox

Retired Moderator

EternalParadox

.:Enigma Mod:.

Cancel

The United States is not a secular country, in case anyone hasn't noticed. The word God is featured prominently in the founding documents. As long as this nation is "endowed by the Creator," the evangelical Christians in this nation will have ammunition to push for an expansion of religion into political life. Just look at their power now. An ignorant pastor farmer is in hot pursuit of the presidential nomination, simply because he can cite the Bible verbatim.

EternalParadox
Previously the Forum, Vector Art, and Policy Moderator

  • Jan 14, 2008

ProgramZERO

ProgramZERO

The Lost Generation

Cancel

The wall between church and state should stand for all time!

Sleeping peacefully on the edges of No Man's Land... Not all good is rewarded, not all evil is punished.

angelxxuan

angelxxuan

ぬいぐるみ !

Cancel

hmm from what I remember politics have always been together, from the findings of america, won't get into that nor to get into the problem with keeping this status...but I will make the point that these two should not be mixed, unless they want more blood to be shed for careless matters

Undertaker:Kuroshitsuji: How sad it would be, should laughter disappear.


Signature
	Image

Mnemeth

Mnemeth

Rider of the Currents

Cancel

Quote by Nubesis sad... but u cant deny that religion makes a big and such an impact and influence in political parties matters.

Nah I won't deny it but unless people stand up and realize that, it continues you'll eventually end up in a theocracy and at that point a country is pretty screwed because the decisions will be made based on religious "rules and guidelines" and not on real world information.

Quote by Nubeseverything is a business and religions are not free of that.

I'll pull a page out of your book and say that a religion has no business basis but religious institutions do.

Suilibres, I understand the geo-political impact of "religions" however as history has proven, each and every time a religion has become involved in a states political affairs the religion has suffered a loss of its basic identity through the twisting of its tenets to satisfy the few in power.

Quote by EternalParadoxThe United States is not a secular country, in case anyone hasn't noticed. The word God is featured prominently in the founding documents. As long as this nation is "endowed by the Creator," the evangelical Christians in this nation will have ammunition to push for an expansion of religion into political life. Just look at their power now. An ignorant pastor farmer is in hot pursuit of the presidential nomination, simply because he can cite the Bible verbatim.

That is true the country itself is not really secular due to the amount of influence by Christianity (the Founding Fathers time) and various religions (today). However even our founding fathers intended the government to be secular if nothing else to protect the religions from being exposed to the graft and corruption that is rampant in politics. I would also point out that most of the Christian symbolism in government (currency, seals, etc...) has been added post the founding of the country. In fact some of it such as the currency is actually a fairly recent addition respective to the age of the US.

I am also interested in hearing about other countries and their policies, views, and opinions on religious and state matters.

For example is there a country where combination actually works.

Do not interfere in the affairs of dragons, for you are crunchy and good with ketchup.

  • Jan 15, 2008
Cancel

Mnemeth, Church and State must be separated. Middle Ages teach us how tough things become when Church acquires State power. The terms 'Dark Ages' and 'The Thousand Years Night' are properly applied when talking about that History time span. Misery, fed ignorance and lack of freedom. I don't believe in a country where Church and State are together and its people don't suffer more than other countries where religion is free -- please if someone knows such country, I'm curious about it.
Religion is something so personal I can't imagine some kind of Church being the State. The State must protect its citizens from any kind of Church who wants to impose its rules.

Mene, mene, tekel, parsin

  • Jan 15, 2008

EternalParadox

Retired Moderator

EternalParadox

.:Enigma Mod:.

Cancel

Quote: That is true the country itself is not really secular due to the amount of influence by Christianity (the Founding Fathers time) and various religions (today). However even our founding fathers intended the government to be secular if nothing else to protect the religions from being exposed to the graft and corruption that is rampant in politics. I would also point out that most of the Christian symbolism in government (currency, seals, etc...) has been added post the founding of the country. In fact some of it such as the currency is actually a fairly recent addition respective to the age of the US.

The intent of the Founding Father, if not set forth explicitly, will not have nearly as much weight as the presence of the word God in the Declaration itself. That is how the Christian right have been able to push for great religious presence in politics. They see that this nation is founded by a document that recognizes God and can claim, with legitimate documentary support, that this nation was never intended to separate God from government.

I know this argument first hand. I attended a lecture by Justice Scalia and a devout Catholic friend passionately agreed with his argument that faith ought to play a large role in governance.

Faith in politics is not necessarily a bad thing. It all depends on how it is "spun," as the political world goes.

EternalParadox
Previously the Forum, Vector Art, and Policy Moderator

  • Jan 16, 2008
Cancel

I think the two are intertwinned esp. if the country has a majority religion.

Politics are for the nation and the people, and people have their own faiths. I dun find it surprising that the two will be linked.
And esp in countries where religions is highly regarded (eg. muslim) u need politics that doesnt offend the masses.

There aint many nations with a fair distribution of religion. US/UK is slided to christainity, china/japan/India to buddist, muslim nations to islam.


There are limits to how much religion can interfere with politics though. Politics are more practical than religion but people believe in religions more than their govt (generally).
So its a compromise. I dun think theres a religion-guided state that does well in 21st century.

  • Jan 16, 2008
Cancel

Quote by nainex52china/japan/India to buddist

China is officially secular, and the population itself follows more a fusion of Taoism and Buddhism. India is predominantly Hindu, with little or no Buddhist influences in the government.

I do not approve of theocratic governments, or ones that run on constitutions that draw too heavily on religious texts. It is almost inevitable that those not of the ruling/predominant religion suffer discrimination, under-representation, etc. The point of a religious government is that it will always favour its own religion, it will always consider its own moral code and beliefs to be right and all others to be wrong. A theocracy can never be objective. There is also the problem of zealots or fundamentalists, which results in inflexibility and adherence to outdated and obviously inhumane practices. For example, in certain Muslim nations I can rape a girl and be free to laugh at her stoning because of loopholes in the Shariah law. Which, btw, is very specific about stoning as the method of execution.

My own country, Singapore, is secular. My government's stand is that country comes first, and your religion or race be damned. Disrupt the peace in any way, whether it be refusing to sing the national anthem or inciting of protests/riots, and we will destroy your life in a slew of jailings (we can jail u for no reason for indefinite periods), defamation suits, tax fraud investigations, and quietly denying your kids entry to any good schools. If yours is a small religion of little influence, such as that imbecilic Jehovah's Witness group, we place so many restrictions on your faith (i.e. no convening or preachings, no tax exemptions) that it becomes crippled.

  • Jan 19, 2008

Mnemeth

Mnemeth

Rider of the Currents

Cancel

Quote by EternalParadoxThe intent of the Founding Father, if not set forth explicitly, will not have nearly as much weight as the presence of the word God in the Declaration itself. That is how the Christian right have been able to push for great religious presence in politics. They see that this nation is founded by a document that recognizes God and can claim, with legitimate documentary support, that this nation was never intended to separate God from government.

Yes the Declaration is a founding document of the US however it does not define the governance of our nation. It is a declaration to Britain that we refuse to treated unjustly and we are going to start our of independant nation. The inclusion of God in the text is more a reflection of the fact that it was sent from one predominantly Christian nation to another predominantly Christian nation. The real meat of how our nations government is supposed to work is spelled out in the Constitution of the US where it mentions several times that relgion is not the purview of the state and that religious affiliations shall not be held against anyone applying to hold positions in the governement, as well as the Freedom of religion spelled out explicitly in the text.

Quote by EternalParadox I know this argument first hand. I attended a lecture by Justice Scalia and a devout Catholic friend passionately agreed with his argument that faith ought to play a large role in governance.

Faith in politics is not necessarily a bad thing. It all depends on how it is "spun," as the political world goes.

I consider faith to be different from religion as it can exist independantly from religious organizations. I agree that faith in a higher power is not necessarily a bad thing for politicians (in fact quite a few of them would do a whole lot better if they would practice what they preach), however it is not a requirement, which in my opinion is a good thing given the idea of free will.

Quote by nainex52There are limits to how much religion can interfere with politics though. Politics are more practical than religion but people believe in religions more than their govt (generally).

The problem arises when you have people that think the relgious beliefs can replace the practicality and impartiality required of the government.

Quote by EspadaMy own country, Singapore, is secular. My government's stand is that country comes first, and your religion or race be damned. Disrupt the peace in any way, whether it be refusing to sing the national anthem or inciting of protests/riots, and we will destroy your life in a slew of jailings (we can jail u for no reason for indefinite periods), defamation suits, tax fraud investigations, and quietly denying your kids entry to any good schools. If yours is a small religion of little influence, such as that imbecilic Jehovah's Witness group, we place so many restrictions on your faith (i.e. no convening or preachings, no tax exemptions) that it becomes crippled.

Interesting and very much like China like you described earlier. I applud the secularism of the govenrments but deplore the governments acting like dictators and restricting the rights of freedom of speech, religion, and others. Of course mine is a biased view based on where I was born and raised.

Do not interfere in the affairs of dragons, for you are crunchy and good with ketchup.

  • Jan 21, 2008

EternalParadox

Retired Moderator

EternalParadox

.:Enigma Mod:.

Cancel

Quote: Yes the Declaration is a founding document of the US however it does not define the governance of our nation. It is a declaration to Britain that we refuse to treated unjustly and we are going to start our of independant nation. The inclusion of God in the text is more a reflection of the fact that it was sent from one predominantly Christian nation to another predominantly Christian nation. The real meat of how our nations government is supposed to work is spelled out in the Constitution of the US where it mentions several times that relgion is not the purview of the state and that religious affiliations shall not be held against anyone applying to hold positions in the governement, as well as the Freedom of religion spelled out explicitly in the text.

The Constitution stipulates that Government cannot impose any restrictions on or support any religion. It makes no mention of religion exerting influence on government, hence the power to the religious right.

EternalParadox
Previously the Forum, Vector Art, and Policy Moderator

  • Jan 22, 2008

cerealjoe

cerealjoe

The day we caught the train...

Cancel

Well, for me it's easier. They're so paranoid about anyone being offended by religious stuff that as long as you're in public, you can't show any sign of religion. We can't even wear things like crosses from when you get baptized (for me it's a gift, not a religious thing, I'm about as religious as a dog but it's just that my family wanted me baptized) or Malta crosses (which are totally not religious but they remind of the Christian crosses...)! Just because they told Muslim girls that they couldn't wear the veil in school. Of course, that's all law stuff, in truth lots of people don't give a damn.

But it's true that we only have Catholic-related holidays but that's more historical than anything else, France is, after all, known as the daughter of the Church. But god forbid anyone should mention religion during an election, they'd be stoned to death for sure. We even had this huge conflict when the Pope died, some people refused to follow the minute of silence because they said it was religious, others said that they followed it because he was a State leader before being a religious person. I just followed it because I respected the guy.

Signature Image
What do you call a girl with a rifle in a corn field? A cereal killer.
In TARTIFLETTE we trust!

  • Jan 22, 2008

Mnemeth

Mnemeth

Rider of the Currents

Cancel

Quote by EternalParadoxThe Constitution stipulates that Government cannot impose any restrictions on or support any religion. It makes no mention of religion exerting influence on government, hence the power to the religious right.

Ahh but its the excercise of that power to attempt to drive religious power/rules into government that I have the problem with (that and the fact that those moron waste all that money supporting different people financially when that money would definintely be spent better elsewhere.

Quote by cerealjoeWell, for me it's easier. They're so paranoid about anyone being offended by religious stuff that as long as you're in public, you can't show any sign of religion. We can't even wear things like crosses from when you get baptized (for me it's a gift, not a religious thing, I'm about as religious as a dog but it's just that my family wanted me baptized) or Malta crosses (which are totally not religious but they remind of the Christian crosses...)! Just because they told Muslim girls that they couldn't wear the veil in school. Of course, that's all law stuff, in truth lots of people don't give a damn.

Wow, depending on how thats enforced I can see plenty of material for a civil rights lawsuit. I can understand restricting the open display of one faith through symbols but I wear a cross daily underneath my shirt and someone better be ready for a serious fight if they ever tried to force me not to wear it. This is actually one of the reason I like the idea of school uniforms and dress codes in that it makes it that much harder for students to create a "mountain out of a mole hill" through the way they dress. It also helps impress the fact that they are all equal at school regardless of their faith, wealth, etc... Thats how its supposed to work anyway.

Quote by cerealjoeBut it's true that we only have Catholic-related holidays but that's more historical than anything else, France is, after all, known as the daughter of the Church. But god forbid anyone should mention religion during an election, they'd be stoned to death for sure. We even had this huge conflict when the Pope died, some people refused to follow the minute of silence because they said it was religious, others said that they followed it because he was a State leader before being a religious person. I just followed it because I respected the guy.

Yeah but I don't think I would mind that much if they took the religious holidays off the official holiday list and gave that same amount of time off into a pot that each individual could spend on their own. As for popular religious leaders funerals etc, yeah I agree its a respect thing and not really a religious thing.

Do not interfere in the affairs of dragons, for you are crunchy and good with ketchup.

  • Jan 22, 2008

cerealjoe

cerealjoe

The day we caught the train...

Cancel

Quote by MnemethWow, depending on how thats enforced I can see plenty of material for a civil rights lawsuit. I can understand restricting the open display of one faith through symbols but I wear a cross daily underneath my shirt and someone better be ready for a serious fight if they ever tried to force me not to wear it.

Oh, you can wear whatever you want, as long as other people don't see it. So a cross under your shirt is nothing, a huge cross painted in pink over a black shirt, that could be troublesome... but as I said, no one's really doing anything, it's just in the laws and therefore if ever there was a problem, they could take out the law books and say "look here, we warned you about it".

Quote by Mnemeth
Yeah but I don't think I would mind that much if they took the religious holidays off the official holiday list and gave that same amount of time off into a pot that each individual could spend on their own.

I don't really want the "normal" holidays to go away because in France, it's part of history. It's like denying everything that has happened for the past couple of centuries... but in a way you're right, the only reason the Church created holidays is to give people days off and therefore have more people come to church (what else could they do besides?). So holidays should really just be days off.
But that brings another problem, the prime minister from a couple of years ago tried to make a "shifting" holiday and that was a catastrophe!

Signature Image
What do you call a girl with a rifle in a corn field? A cereal killer.
In TARTIFLETTE we trust!

  • Jan 23, 2008

page 1 of 1 17 total items

Back to General Discussions | Active Threads | Forum Index

Only members can post replies, please register.

This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Read more.