Discussion in 'Every Day Debating' started by Tatharlin, Nov 11, 2004.
this goes along with my previous thread, 'Where do we draw the line...'
Of course church and politics should be seperated.
I would vote but there's no answer that suits my opinion.
There really isn't an answer that suits my opinion either.
If people wish to base their decision on their beliefs what is wrong with that?? I voted NO!
there must be a moral basis for government, I'm not saying the gov't should go around envoking god's name at all things, but they are two things that can't properly exist without one another
Alright first of all, tell me what you mean. Many people today think that "seperation of church and state" means that the church should have no influence on the government. Then there is Thomas Jefferson's definition and I'll let him speak for himself.
There is a separation of church and state. But the amendment was made so as to protect the rights of man to worship God in whatever way he chooses; not to regulate how and where. In fact, the public schools were instituted to teach children to read so that they could read the Bible among other things.
Here is what I wanted to say. I think that church should be removed from politics. I think that there should be no laws passed that are based on one religion's beliefs and that there reallys shouldn't be any other icons that respect a certain religion. However, some have said that we should give preachers or religious leaders any say in politics. Which I think is absolutely wrong and that anyone who says that is just as much an abridger of civil liberties as the one that wants to pass all these laws that are christian based. We all have a right to say what we want. And I still think that preachers should be alowed to say what they want even if I don't agree with it. They can try and pass laws that are religiously based or speak out in political situations about religion and such. And if religious laws are passed then they are passed and we will have to just go through the court system and declare it unconstitutional.
So what I am ultimately trying to say is that chruch should be removed from politics but not so much to the point where we have to silence people for it.
If a person's religion teaches them that something is wrong, yet they say it is right in politics, it seems to me that their religion isn't important to them. I did not vote because the the choices were so limited.
Well if you choose not to have them based on a organised religion and having it so that organised religion has nothing to do with it then what you are doing it having it based on the religion of athesisim(sp?).
I don't think that you should ignore religion or at least not the morals that go with them
Some viewatheism as the lack of belief. The absensence of a religion. I view it as the belief in no god and that it is a religion. Anyway the moral of the story is that this country does not base its laws off of atheism or any other religion for that matter
This was not a separation of all things religious, but written so that the government would not control the church.
I agree, politics and the church don't go together
Please debate this in my other thread. This is only a poll.
Go here for the thread: Where do we draw the line between church and state?
church + state = bad. too many conflicting religions.
Separate names with a comma.