Separation of Church and State

I was reading a thread on NS about church taxation and it got me to thinking about something. In particular judicial activism. what the Constitution says on this matter is

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.

Now what this to me clearly means is that Congress should make no laws that prefer one religion over another or prohibiting the practice of any religion. What the concern clearly was was the establishment of a state church such as the Church of England. However, in modern times, this has somehow morphed into government should stay in this corner and religion should stay in that corner and never the twain shall meet. Such that some people are arguing that giving all religious institution tax exempt status is a violation of this clause. Which IMO it isn't because it is being applied universally to all religions, thus not respecting a particular establishment of religion.

This has been an issue which trouble me deeply, particularly because the government actually seems to favor the idea of atheism and agnosticism over any religion.

What really seems strange to me is that the press always wants to do photo opps of the President attending church on holy days. But let a candidate actually say they have personal beliefs...

Well it is the President...even if he was in a sewer they would still want to take pictures of him. Doesn't matter whether it blurs separation of church and state. But then during campaigns. Each media station is biased in some way...I mean CNN might be the most non bias. But they still lean more to the left than I would like. Then you have Fox and all the rest.

But you see, what you just said is part of the issue I was talking about in my OP. The first amendment has nothing to do with the President going to church. The first amendment is about congress favoring one religious institution over another through legislation or prohibiting the exercise of a religion. But somehow it's morphed into this weird idea the the government, or members of it, should have nothing to do with religion.

The Liberal Media(Some conservative media) Sees it like this. If a politician does is too involved in his/her church they will always think of it when they vote on legislation. So in a sense the media is just saying too much religion=bad politician.

But a "good" politician should have firm principles of some sort. Ideally that is one of the things, along with desire to serve their nation, state, or city, that should have driven him/her into politics. And, truthfully, as long as a politician is voting from a moral standpoint rather than a theistic one, eg abortion on demand is wrong because it takes a life, or potential life, rather than it's wrong because God says so. How is that in reality any different than a person who is voting because they morally believe that a woman's body is hers to do with as she will?

Personally I believe the battle over abortion can be defined with one sentenced. And solved. To define where life begins you need to define death. If life ends when the heart stops. Then life starts when the heart starts.(My view is death is when all the cells in the body stop functioning. And that with the heart stopping is that point of no return to stop that.)

On topic. I feel a politician should have firm principles. But they shouldn't be based too strongly on religion is how I think it should be.

Well actually you aren't considered dead until the brain stops functioning

I consider it the cell. since they are smallest block of life there is. But stop right around the time the brain does. But doctors consider the heart since that is the final point of where humanity can save someone.

I wouldn't mind a politician being a strong believer as long as he were an equally strong believer in constitutional principles. For instance here is how I instruct ny my kids. Do not lie because it is a sin and God doesn't like it. Do not steal because it is a sin and God doesn't like it. Do not hate because it is a sin and God doesn't like it It is every person's right as an American to believe, or not believe, whatever they wish.

I also am in the brain camp. Because whether you believe in souls or not without a functioning brain there is no person. Go to a nursing home with an Alzheimer's unit sometime and observe a stage 4 Alzheimer's patient.

I guess it depends whether you are a believer or not....since I am personally an atheist and I feel politicians should be more constitutional and not use religion as a basis for voting.(But considering I don't agree with democrats I just go with republicans and libertarians)

Just asking a question and i mean no offense to you or your beliefs but did you like grow up in an atheist environment?

Actually my mother is Bulgarian(Parents are divorced) and is part of the Eastern Orthodox Church so my house was religious. But she got to me after I started watching science channel and scifi when I was four. So it didn't work out.

I may be strange because I love science, always have. I'm also not one of those nut jobs who would try to date the Earth by figuring out how long people in the Bible lived. I also wonder how many of those people realize the Jews use a lunar calendar for religious purposes. And that the moon is slowly moving away from the Earth. So if this has been occurring from ancient times a lunar year may have changed since then.

It isn't strange to love science. I mean I love challenges which is why I love science. I might be wrong. But for now I'm right. And you would need to keep working to prove things. And some of those things might be impossible in the end. You never know

I meant strange to love science and be a person of faith at the same time. In many ways I view it as trying to understand God's handiwork. For instance why couldn't "And God said let there be light" = The big bang. I'm also a believer, to a certain extent, in evolution. It definitely happens and why would any intelligent person, let alone an omnipotent, omniscient deity not design the species of this world so that they can adapt to changes if they need to rather than require constant tinkering with the thing to keep it going.

Still isn't strange. I know alot of people who are devout Christians and love science. I will even bet that most scientist believe in god to a certain extent.(Even those at NASA...considering how much work they put in stuff. I mean have you seen their reactions for landing curiosity on mars? And most of them were praying before it happened )

Hahaha! There are so many things here that I could comment on. As for me, I am a Christian, but I shan't bore you with explanations and dialogues on scriptural interpretation that many of you have undoubtedly heard before. As for politicians voting by religion, if that means voting according to what their pastors and their church leaders say, then of course I am against that. We have many historical examples such as the Roman Empire, the English Empire, the Holy Roman Empire, etc., where the church effectively ran the state this way. However, politicians should be able to vote according to their moral beliefs, many of which extend from their religious beliefs. But I'm pretty sure none of us disagree with that.

I rather they vote from the moral beliefs of the majority of those they represent.Which in most cases is the same as their own. But it's the thought really.

You have an excellent point. I think politicians should do a better job of stating what exactly they believe, instead of vague generalities designed to get votes.

Ok another issue of today. The electoral college!

New thread?

Why just use this to talk about issues about our broken political system!