Separation of Church and State

[Dsteenbock]

You would be mistaken.

Umm No I would not be. He believes In seperation of church and state. I heard him say those exact words in an Interview I believe It was the google video.

 

[Matt_R]

I believe Ron Paul has spoken out against using the establishment clause to stop public displays of religion, such as a child praying in school. Although, I don't believe he supports federal funding for any religious institutions.

 

[Dsteenbock]

I believe Ron Paul has spoken out against using the establishment clause to stop public displays of religion, such as a child praying in school. Although, I don't believe he supports federal funding for any religious institutions.

yep

 

[cosmeg]

As a Christian, I firmly believe in seperation of church and state. I don't care if it was taken out of context, it is imperitive. However, in a free society with no Department of Education and more privately owned/funded schools, with absolutely no ties to government at all, the entire idea of "No prayer in schools" would be squashed as the seperation of church and state argument would be void.

Also, it would be more likely for us to seek out schools that fit the atmospheres we would want our children to be educated in. Many schools would, in fact, be non-religious with no tolerance for religous expression to meet the needs of those who desired their children to be educated in such an atmosphere, while some would be, as we have now, Christian/Muslim/Jewish/etc. schools.

Seperation of Church and State should also be applied at the non-educational level. For instance, churches should NOT have to pay STATE taxes, at all, period, end of point. Nor should STATES support churches in any way. But, just as all profitting businesses of all sorts, should be taxed by even the "small" federal government we as RP supporters dream of, and NOT funded. This would be the same on the Hospital level, as profits must be made in order to pay doctors, nurses, energy requirements, as well as the church which is the foundation for which the hospital is run by so they can expand their hospitals so that all reaches of the US have access to medical care.

 

[Kade]

Quick question, do non-Christians have a problem with Christians praying in public schools? Is that seen as an expense by the taxpayer to fund religion?

This isn't a trick question, I'm curious. I've never really given the church and state thing much consideration. Most of my focus, and the cause that brings me to Ron Paul, are family rights or more specifically the LACK of rights for non-custodial parents.

I think you guys have a very thought provoking debate going on here...

A very common misconception again. Of course we don't have a problem nor should we, nor should we be able to stop it...

We have a problem when teachers lead the class in prayer, which either forces non-Christians out of the classroom if they don't want to participate, and or official lead prayer at ceremonies for the same reason.

 

[Kade]

As a Christian, I firmly believe in seperation of church and state. I don't care if it was taken out of context, it is imperitive. However, in a free society with no Department of Education and more privately owned/funded schools, with absolutely no ties to government at all, the entire idea of "No prayer in schools" would be squashed as the seperation of church and state argument would be void.

Also, it would be more likely for us to seek out schools that fit the atmospheres we would want our children to be educated in. Many schools would, in fact, be non-religious with no tolerance for religous expression to meet the needs of those who desired their children to be educated in such an atmosphere, while some would be, as we have now, Christian/Muslim/Jewish/etc. schools.

Seperation of Church and State should also be applied at the non-educational level. For instance, churches should NOT have to pay STATE taxes, at all, period, end of point. Nor should STATES support churches in any way. But, just as all profitting businesses of all sorts, should be taxed by even the "small" federal government we as RP supporters dream of, and NOT funded. This would be the same on the Hospital level, as profits must be made in order to pay doctors, nurses, energy requirements, as well as the church which is the foundation for which the hospital is run by so they can expand their hospitals so that all reaches of the US have access to medical care.

This is my position as well. While tax payer money goes to these programs and schools, they should remain absolutely separate from church. If they want to tangle, then they should also pay taxes. Nothing is more disturbing then the concept of a tax free church receiving money from the government in any form.

 

[user]

A very common misconception again. Of course we don't have a problem nor should we, nor should we be able to stop it...

We have a problem when teachers lead the class in prayer, which either forces non-Christians out of the classroom if they don't want to participate, and or official lead prayer at ceremonies for the same reason.

Speak for yourself Kade.

 

[Kade]

Speak for yourself Kade.

I know of very few non-believers who would disagree with me when it comes to this.

 

[Kade]

Speak for yourself Kade.

And to point out that you think you are extraordinarily clever for making a single sentence that a few morons might agree with, I didn't have to go very far to find where you spoke on behalf of others as well, very recently.


"Please just use the law, we don't need any unnecessary violence attached to this movement."

 

[Kade]

Speak for yourself Kade.

and again "We shouldn't take it upon ourselves to beat these other money bombs on their days. There's an unnecessary risk of "losing". Instead if we focus on our own money bombs, the proper comparison would have to be to our best total, $6 million."

And a few more...

Nice try. I actually represent well over 15,000 non-believers in America. And I could bring most of them in to this forum to agree with me if that is your wish. Try to focus, and perhaps try to answer people in more than one clever sentence.

 

[user]

I know of very few non-believers who would disagree with me when it comes to this.

So you admit you are wrong, then. First you say all non-Christians don't have a problem, then you say you know of a few who disagree. Case closed.

None of the posts of mine that you quoted have me making statements about the beliefs of others, anyway. It is sad that you don't understand the difference. Three straight posts from you and they amount to nothing.

 

[murrayrothbard]

I think RP's position can be summed up pretty sucicntly: It is illegitimate for the FEDERAL government to make ANY laws in regards to religious practices, either for or against. That's it. Whether or not prayer is allowed in schools, or having the 10 commandments posted in pohdunk city halls is a matter that should be left up to the states and their respective constitutions.

That is RP's position is it not?

 

[Kade]

So you admit you are wrong, then. First you say all non-Christians don't have a problem, then you say you know of a few who disagree. Case closed.

None of the posts of mine that you quoted have me making statements about the beliefs of others, anyway. It is sad that you don't understand the difference. Three straight posts from you and they amount to nothing.

Single sentence sagacity.

 

[Mr. Coolidge]

As a Christian, I firmly believe in seperation of church and state. I don't care if it was taken out of context, it is imperitive. However, in a free society with no Department of Education and more privately owned/funded schools, with absolutely no ties to government at all, the entire idea of "No prayer in schools" would be squashed as the seperation of church and state argument would be void.

This is one of many great reasons I support the drive for the privatization of education, starting with the end to the useless U.S. Dept. of Education. The issue becomes near-irrelevant.

 

[Feelgood]

Since Ron Paul is a Constitutionalist, I would think he would agree there is no such thing as "separation of church and state" since that is not mentioned in the Constitution. It was however mentioned in the Federalist Papers, which preceded the Constitution. Since the USA is a Republic with the Constitution is its highest law of the land, my opinion would be, no RP does not believe in the separation of church and state.

 

[hypnagogue]

I suppose Kade turned up the heat a tad too high, but principally I agree with him. It's hard not to be furious living as an Atheist in a country that is currently so entangled with religion. There are several good studies showing that Atheists are in fact the most disdained population in America. No one bats an eyelash when we are publicly chastised by holders of high office.

Seperation of Church and state is the intended consequence of the 1st amendment. Unfortunately for we Atheists, state governments are permitted to do many things that the federal can not. It would be neither useful nor practical to discuss the various stances the individual constitutions of the separate states have taken. I can only speak to how things should be in a society devoted to individual liberty.

We must do our utmost to prevent government from engaging in activities that are not wholly necessary to the orderly process civil life. The greater the scope of the activities of government, the greater the number of people whose sovereignty you will infringe by using their resources in a fashion they oppose.

Is organized prayer time necessary to secular education? No. Are plaques and displays regarding various mythologies necessary to conduct a judicial process? No. Is there any civil function of government that requires any reference to any religion? None that I have ever been presented with nor could imagine.

This very philosophy was put forth on the federal level in the 1st amendment and any state would do well to adopt it as their own.

I do not want the money that I helped pay to print praising any kind of mystical entity.

I do not want the education that I helped to pay for reinforcing any religious practices.

I do not want the social services that I helped to pay for presenting themselves as advocates of any mythology.

 

[davver]

The state should neither promote nor persecute religion.

 

[Flash The Cash]

The state should neither promote nor persecute religion.

That's why the Constitution grants the government no power over religion.

 

[Flash The Cash]

Since Ron Paul is a Constitutionalist, I would think he would agree there is no such thing as "separation of church and state" since that is not mentioned in the Constitution. It was however mentioned in the Federalist Papers, which preceded the Constitution. Since the USA is a Republic with the Constitution is its highest law of the land, my opinion would be, no RP does not believe in the separation of church and state.

The Constitution grants the government no power over. That''s what Separation of Church and State is: No government power over religion.

 

[Flash The Cash]

Since Ron Paul is a Constitutionalist, I would think he would agree there is no such thing as "separation of church and state" since that is not mentioned in the Constitution. It was however mentioned in the Federalist Papers, which preceded the Constitution.

Where did you flunk Constitution 101?