CreateDebate is a social debate community built around ideas, discussion and democracy.
If this is your first time checking out a debate, here are some quick tips to help get you started:
Arguments with the highest score are displayed first.
Argument replies (both in favor and in opposition) are displayed below the original argument.
To follow along, you may find it helpful to show and hide the replies displayed below each argument.
To vote for an argument, use these icons:
You have the power to cast exactly one vote (either up or down) for each argument.
Once you vote, the icon will become grayed out and the argument's score will change.
Yes, you can change your vote.
Debate scores, side scores and tag scores are automatically calculated by an algorithm that primarily takes argument scores into account.
All scores are updated in real-time.
To learn more about the CreateDebate scoring system, check out the FAQ.
When you are ready to voice your opinion, use the Add Argument button to create an argument.
If you would like to address an existing argument, use the Support and Dispute link within that argument to create a new reply.
The separation of church and state is a religious and political doctrine derived from the first amendment of the United States Constitution. The establishment of America was greatly motivated by the desire to worship freely without involvement from the government.
Religion is between the person and their God. That person is not accountable to any other person for their beliefs. The right of the government can only influence actions, not beliefs.
Religion is interpreted differently by everyone, scholars and everyday practitioners alike. For any one person - yourself, or government to claim to know God's will is completely arrogant. I mean whose moral and religious principals shall we use to govern this nation? Shall we use that of a Catholic, or a Baptist? Maybe a Mormon or a Lutheran? How about Pentecostal or Wesleyan? We could really go out on a limb and use the moral and religious principals of Islam or Buddhism. And each of these will also be subject to interpretation of those moral and religious principals which might be a completely different interpretation than mine or his.
Of course the government is influenced by the religious beliefs of those we elect. It becomes a problem when those beliefs step on the beliefs of others. That is another purpose of the doctrine - to provide an absolute - that we are one nation under God indivisible with liberty and justice for ALL.
-History I believe furnishes no example of a priest-ridden people maintaining a free civil government. This marks the lowest grade of ignorance, of which their political as well as religious leaders will always avail themselves for their own purpose. -(Thomas Jefferson, in a letter to Baron von Humboldt, 1813; from George Seldes, ed., The Great Quotations, Secaucus, New Jersey: Citadel Press, 1983)
Also keep in mind that a person's beliefs will influence their actions as well, and in a democracy such as that of the united states, we are allowed to vote on what actions we think should be taken about a certain issue. what we believe will influence our actions, which will influence the actions that the government takes.
Of course there's a separation of church and state. The state cannot impose it's will on a church. It is constitutionally protected against this. So the state is also protected against the will of the church.
It is one thing for a church member to vote his conscience. Few would question that. But it is an entirely different matter for a church to tell their members how to vote. That is the IRS code regarding tax-exempt status.
If you, as a church, want to tell your people how to vote, fine. No law against it. But pay the taxes on your income, and your property, like everyone else. Can't have it both ways. If you want to stop being a church, for instance, and start becoming wing of particular party, go right ahead. Knock yourself out. But the IRS rules are quite specific about this. Proceed at your own peril.
In my own little Episcopal church here in Tucson, even though we're a mostly liberal congregation, there is a spectrum from quite liberal to quite conservative in the pews. You can feel the resentment whenever a political view is expressed from the pulpit - whether we share that political view or not. No one wants to be told how to vote. It's stupid to even try.
Look at the situation with gay marriage in California and the Mormon church. One side paid taxes as a lobbying group, the other didn't. That's inherently unfair, and that's what the IRS regulations are there to enforce. That church has a question to face. Was it more important to have a tax-exempt status, or act as a lobbyist in a political choice. Make the choice and live with it. If you loose tax exempt status, so be it. But don't whine when it happens.
i honestly do not think that the separation of church and state exists. people practice what they preach in their everyday life, and it seems impossible to me that a person could have an opinion on one thing without the reasoning behind their opinion being formed on what they do believe.
take the topic of abortion. some people are for it, while others are against it. some people who are against it say that they are because they believe that life exist at the moment the child is concieved and that people aren't supposed to kill. that is a catholic belief. this is just one example of the many opinions that people place their religious beliefs on.
if there is such thing as the separation of church and state, does that mean that people who have a religion have to have two opinions on one subject ?
there's no way that there can be such a separation.
"if there is such thing as the separation of church and state, does that mean that people who have a religion have to have two opinions on one subject ?"
Sort of. You have your own personal beliefs; but when it comes to making laws that affect everybody, you have to work from universal principles that we can all agree on.
"Democracy demands that the religiously motivated translate their concerns into universal rather than religion specific values. ...It requires that their proposals be subject to argument and amenable to reason. Now I may be opposed to abortion for religious reasons to take one example; but if I seek to pass a law banning the practice, I can't simply point to the teachings of my church or evoke God's will; I have to explain why abortion violates some principle that is accessible to people of all faiths, including those with no faith at all."
Why does every religious person feel they are somehow obligated to make everyone follow their beliefs? Okay, if you're Catholic you don't believe in abortion, so you don't get an abortion. Don't worry about what someone else is doing. Same thing with gay marriage. If I'm a dude, and I'm against gay marriage, guess what, I shouldn't marry another dude.
This is why I hate religion. It turns otherwise intelligent and normal people, into these indoctrinated mindless zombies who cannot even wrap their heads around the idea of separating religion from the laws of the land.
We have too many morality police out there imposing their belief system on people whether they like it or not. If we wanted to live in a country where we wanted to be told what we have to believe in we could rename our country china or become a part of the middle east. This is America and in it we are supposed to have freedom of or from religion.
"Okay, if you're Catholic you don't believe in abortion, so you don't get an abortion."
Imagine you are telling someone that you don't like it when they commit murder. They say to you "Okay, If you don't like it, don't murder people." Are you going to let them keep murdering people?
i think the separation of church and state doesn't really make sense, considering we are all entitled to our opinion, meaning it shouldn't matter if we make decisions based on our faith or not.
Church and State should not be separate. Christianity is still America's biggest religion, and until another religion becomes bigger here, Christianity should have a large part in making laws.
Lets please not force our religious beliefs on eachother. We should share with eachother of things we have learned and we can either take as fact or not. But please! No more self righteous vigilantes.
Separation of Church and State was mentioned between a private letter from Tomas Jefferson to a group of people who wanted a state inforced Church. The First Ammendment states that a State government or the Federal government can not have an inforced religion. This does not say that people can bring their beliefs to the table of making laws.
necessary, but i think the Secular moment has gone far beyond just wanting to end Theocracy, they're trying to end any public forms of religion.
fuckers, if the US Troops want to erect a Crucifix in their memory in a public square, please stop the bullshit of "separation of church and state, i don't want to have to see this christianity being shoved down my throat."
hell, the Founding Fathers were very open about their religion. George Washington even said it would be impossible to have a country without religious influence. and you know that whole "so help me God" thing that Seculars want to ban actually came from George Washington.
i think there are just things that don't matter, and are actually necessary. reminds us of what this country is about.
OK. Then I don't want to hear one single word from you when Pagans, Jews, Muslims, or anyone else wants to erect anything in that same square. It is public property supported with the same taxes you pay.
Might want to check your facts on the religious beliefs of the founders. You'll be pretty shocked to learn what they actually said about religion. The "So help me God" stuff is from the 1950's. If Washington brought that up, it was as a Zombie my friend.
Guess what? The televangelists you're listening to? They lie. Great example of a good Christian.
So, by the way. Since you are such a devout Christian, what ARE the 10 commandments? Don't look. Just tell me off the top of your head. Where are they in the Christian Bible? Do you know? How many versions are there? What version do you insist we post in the public square? And, if you can't answer these questions, tell me this: why is it so important to you that they be posted on public property, when you take so little time to know them and abide by them yourself? At least in my church, Christianity starts with me living the life, not me imposing it on anyone else.
1. learn history please. what you might be referring to is "One Nation under God", that came from the 50s. but George Washington was the first to say "So Help Me God", and that is why it became a custom.
2. I don't listen to televangelists... wtf is your problem?
3. So, you have a problem with USA Troops putting up a crucifix as a memorial for those who died fighting for their country? see, that's the problem I have with the Secular movement.
4. I'm not a Christian... why make such an idiotic assumption? What, so now anyone who is against extreme secularism is now a Christian... wow.
5. off the top of my head:
I am the one true God and you shall have no God before me.
Don't kill
Don't steal
No adultery.
Don't covet your neighbor's wife
Don't bear false witness
Don't take the lord's name in vain
and some other shit.
7. I'm not imposing shit. Hell, maybe i just don't care if a police station has the 10 commandments outside their station... big fuckin' deal.
I don't think there is any problem putting up something to remember U.S. troops by. If they were Christian, go ahead and put up a cross. What I do have a problem with is the fact that Atheists in the military are discriminated against.
If a police station or court house has the 10 commandments already outside their station, I don't think that's an issue but I don't think one penny of tax payer money should go to either putting one up, or any other expenses like maintenance of it.
My only issue with the 10 commandment thing is that Christians say our laws were based off of them, when actually this is not really all that true. The constitution what based off of enlightenment principles. If you actually look at the 10 commandments, only two (Thou shalt not kill, and thou shalt not steal) have anything to do with our laws, and honestly, non Christian societies were able to figure these laws out too, so it's not like there some huge revelation.
atheists are discriminated how in the military? really, i don't know, and would like to know because i am against true discrimination.
10 commandments is also about morals, and i really don't care. as long as the government is wasting money on shit that's way more expensive, i really don't care if they put up a 100 dollar thing of the 10 commandments.
it's sad that he isn't liked by other troops, but the military hired him a body guard. seriously, boot camp is supposed to get you ready MENTALLY for going "over there". but he if he's gonna whine that the other kids didn't wanna play with him cause he's different... that's on his part. i see that a military hiring a body guard for him being a step higher than what they needed to do.
I general that situation was handled fairly well by superiors but I have heard of other cases of people being passed up for promotion because they were not "religious" enough. I respect the sacrifices they make, but our military needs be much less discriminatory. Their reasons for not allowing homosexuals are flat out ridiculous, thinly veiled homophobia.
4. I'm not a Christian... Obviously, from the tone of your rant.
1. learn history please ... Actually, I've been a historian for about 30 years or more.
5. and some other shit. ... Wow. I don't think my Bible has that in it. Interesting. Actually, the point I was making on the ten commandments is that there are two different versions in the same Bible, written about 850 bce and 594 bce, respectively, and they conflict. It's not exactly like they're printed as bullet points in the front of the Bible. Most people in this country cannot name all ten, and wouldn't have a clue where to even find them in the Bible. Yet so many "Christians" insist that courts, town squares, etc., have them clearly ensconced in granite when they don't even bother to know them themselves, let alone act on them. Sad commentary on being a Christian.
7. There's a reason this matters. Take the Alabama supreme court chief justice that was removed from office by the federal courts after refusing to remove his stone engraving of the ten commandments from the Supreme Court. Consider, for a moment, how equal you'd feel if you were going to that court to plead your case. You could be an atheist. You could be suing for equal rights as a gay man. If that judge refused to recuse himself, would you feel that you were fairly judged by this person? I certainly wouldn't. THAT's why the ten commandment argument is important. It levels the playing field in the public spaces. Allow one religion's icons, allow them all, or allow none. That's simple democracy.
3. To use your own crude language, "wtf is your problem"? Who said I wouldn't allow American troops to put up a memorial for fallen comrades? There's not a cemetery in the country that doesn't sport crosses, even national cemeteries. I don't know of anyone who has ever made that argument and I truly have no idea what you're raving about.
For a guy that isn't Christian, and from the tone of your response I'd certainly agree with you ... you have a real problem it seems with imposing Christianity on everyone else against their will. What exactly is the "Secular movement." Definitely Christo-speak. I've never hear that term once in my church. I have heard it on Christian radio, and only there. Whether you are Christian or not, you certainly do sound like your influenced by the Christian right, whether you realize it or not.
Understand that I've had those freaks as an enemy my entire life. I know first hand just how repressive/oppressive that the Christian right can be. Trust me, I grew up in a Baptist church, and it was that experience that caused me to stay far, far away from any organized religion for decades after. Unfortunately that's the experience of most of my congregation that aren't cradle Episcopalians.
The fastest way to drive people away from a life with God is to impose that in a theocracy, as was attempted by the Bush administration. It is one thing to believe the Bible is the word of God and infallible to the point of believing nonsense like the creation myths. It is quite another to have it forced down your throat by a tiny minority of zealots that don't share your own religion. As some one who is actively involved in my church to bring new people to the congregation, this is what we have to fight against. The effect that kind of horrid theology has had on people drives them as far away from religion as they can possibly get. It's almost impossible to get them into a sane church when that happens.
first of all, i call it the secular movement because that's what it is... i've never listened to Christian radio... hell, i don't even think i get it where i am. it's a pretty liberal city.
2. how is having the ten commandments up changing what happens to me in court? what, does it have majik powers that take over the minds of judges? last i heard, we're individuals and we think for ourselves. if a judge is a radical christian, taking away the ten commandments ain't doing shit. plus, the ten commandments is something that the Jews go by too...
3. "Simple" democracy is everyone voting on a rule. Most people aren't against putting the ten commandments up... i think when it comes to that shit, most people are like me "i've got better shit to worry about than the ten commandments... hell, i didn't even know they were there, some jackass must have had a lot of time on his hands to worry about that shit". Most people are against "gay marriage", democracy suggests that we ban it then... but that's mainly due to religious influence... so, O SHI- PARADOX!!!!!
4. a historian who didn't know about George Washington's influence on this country's history... good call. well, i guess we don't know everything, i learned that out of the blue when doing research for a paper... so you get a pass on that.
5. so you're cool with a cross in the middle of a town square? good, most Seculars have a problem with this.
6. I have a major problem with theocracy, and i used to hate christianity... basically, i used to be a douchebag (and from where i lived, it really wasn't that bad to be so), but when i grew up and learned what real oppression was (like not being able to say "Merry Christmas" or "God Bless You" in fear of being sued), i really didn't care that much about the fact that Christianity is a popular part of our culture. Hell, i'm very openly against a lot of Christianity does, but things like "One Nation Under God" really doesn't bother me. i don't know, i guess i just have real problems to worry about.
7. I consider it a good thing when people decide to disband on any religion. I really would prefer an agnostic nation... but, i do accept reality, and agnosticism is actually even less than atheism... so, people will always be highly influenced by one mean or the other, and instead of bickering on what we should display or what we shouldn't, why can't we all just say "fuck it, i'm gonna watch South Park, get laid, and go to sleep"... Government should be focusing on keeping people safe from criminals and terrorists, or how they're gonna fix some pot hole. not on who gets married (which government should have nothing to do with) or the ratio of religious displays in city hall. leave that one to the people. if the fire department decides to put a nativity scene up during christmas, they can just put that shit up... how exactly are atheists being hurt by this? why must they bitch about it? it's fuckin' christmas for christs sake. why don't they worry about women being forced to wear burkas if they care so much about religious oppression.
why can't people just be laid back and not give a fuck?
Second, that article didn't defend them at all. All they said was that there "is no merry christmas" lawsuit. Spin Doctors would diagnose a statement like that, which wasn't backed up with specific examples of what they're talking about, as spin.
But I don't care about the ACLU. Why bring them up? And why ignore the actual argument?
"i grew up and learned what real oppression was (like not being able to say "Merry Christmas" or "God Bless You" in fear of being sued)"
you did not cite any source and I did not find one case of anyone being sued or threatened with suit for saying Merry Christmas, etc., only employers telling their employees what they can and can't say as representatives of the company. There were however concerted efforts to make it look like the ACLU was involved in such cases to gin up false ire for political purposes - http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/editorials/2005-12-18-gunn_x.htm
I never payed much attention the ACLU. In fact, in many cases I support them due to mostly my Libertarian beliefs. I did find it shameful for them to suggest that government MUST assert itself into making sure that ALL parts of the public sector are not part of a certain holiday unless ALL religions of that time are portrayed a very specific EQUALLY.
And that's just what I got from your article. While I am against money being spent on theocratic bullshit, like building up something new, the intent to have things removed or altered just for political correctness is bullshit. I will admit, my use of the term "oppression" may have been overboard, but even then I was passionate about ending politically correct legislation. If it were up to me, there wouldn't be bullshit money spent on bullshit decorations from the public sector; but if the argument is "there's not enough jewish shit", it really just takes us further into an Authoritarian system and farther from a Libertarian system (which is what I prefer... although, I can't say i'm fully Libertarian).
But as I said, the rest of my argument is still the main point. But I do apologize for using an unnecessary word.