All Else Failed
Well-Known Member
So, how do you define it? Does it simply mean that the government cannot set up one religion? OR does it mean that religion shouldn't have a place in the government?
The separation of church and state.
- Thread starter All Else Failed
- Start date
Users who are viewing this thread
-
107Replies
-
3KViews
-
0Participant count
-
Participants list
memento_mori
Active Member
religion shouldn't have a place in government, and government shouldn't support churches anymore than any other citizen based organization.
Couldn't have said it better myself.
All Else Failed
Well-Known Member
*Devil's advocate*
Should not religious people have a voice in society? If a politician is religious, why not let him be a part of the government, since we clearly have the freedom to worship and free speech?
All Else Failed
Well-Known Member
memento_mori
Active Member
plenty of politicians are religous. bush especially, rode the bible belt of america all the way to almost beat al gore fairly by his openness about his belief in god.
we can't say you can't be president because you believe in god. but i cringe when i think of someone having major sway in the religous community get major sway in politics too.
religion is based on faith, it is designed to help you through the problems you have by releasing the doubts you have of yourself and believing god will help you through whatever.
politics is about having doubts in the world and having politicians listen to your doubts to overcome them and make the country better.
DO NOT MIX FAITH IN GOD WITH FAITH IN GOVERNMENT!
we can't say you can't be president because you believe in god. but i cringe when i think of someone having major sway in the religous community get major sway in politics too.
religion is based on faith, it is designed to help you through the problems you have by releasing the doubts you have of yourself and believing god will help you through whatever.
politics is about having doubts in the world and having politicians listen to your doubts to overcome them and make the country better.
DO NOT MIX FAITH IN GOD WITH FAITH IN GOVERNMENT!
memento_mori
Active Member
it's unfortunate, but people elected him to represent their beliefs and he's saying they believe stem cell research is wrong.
All Else Failed
Well-Known Member
Since government is supposed to carry out laws and the like with the interest of the whole in mind, wouldn't delaying one of the most groundbreaking scientifical fields in our history be corrosive and subversive to mankind, JUST because you think a magical man says its wrong?
I mean, WHEN and WHERE do you draw the line between freedom of speech and tought, and the well being of everyone that do not hold your beliefs?
memento_mori
Active Member
we're not delaying one of the most groundbreaking, mouthsmashing, in-your-face-we're-the-best, scientifical fields in our history because a magical man says so, it's because a bunch of people think its wrong to use aborted fetuses. and a bunch of them believe that b/c a magical man says so.
All Else Failed
Well-Known Member
Annnnnd thats what I'm asking. Most of America disagrees in stem cell research because they think it perverts the sanctity of life by using cells from fetuses, and this is based in religion. Now, if the masses think its wrong, thats what they think and odds are what the majority thinks will become law. BUT, don't you think its regressive that we do not take the opportunity to better research this field? You said yourself that god should not be mixed with government.
See, this is where most of the religous right has it wrong. Science is not interested in the least with using ABORTED FETUSES. They are interested in the thousands of embryos that are thrown in the trash every year. These embryos that were created for the purpose of invitrofertilization are "left overs" once the mother becomes pregnant. They only have a finite shelf life and they are discarded when they are no longer viable or wanted. But Bush would rather they are thrown in the trash then to let science benefit from the stem cells they contain. Tell me how this is a moral issue. The vast majority of the American public support stem cell research.
Using the term Aborted Fetuses is a conservative talking point. Nothing more
June 26 — Americans by a 2-1 margin support stem cell research and say it should be funded by the federal government, despite controversy over its use of human embryos.
Advocates of this research say it can produce new treatments for disease, while critics oppose using embryos in research. After hearing these competing views, 58 percent of Americans support stem cell research, while 30 percent oppose it, according to a new ABCNEWS/Beliefnet poll. Six in 10 also say the federal government should fund it.
All Else Failed
Well-Known Member
And this is where the problem of religion, freedom of speech, and freedom of religion comes into play. People are allowed to worship as they like, they are even allowed to run for political positions. However, what do we do about religious views getting in the way of human progression?
memento_mori
Active Member
well make sure the next president you vote for supports stem cell research.
IntruderLS1
Active Member
I haven't tracked this debate much, as it's not particularly near and dear to me, but I was under the impression that under President Bush, more federal money has been put into stemcell research than under any other president.
Is that incorrect?
Is that incorrect?
memento_mori
Active Member
links would be nice
White2000GT
Active Member
Exactly how does religious views get in the way of human progression? As far as we know religion has been around in one form or another since the dawn of mankind. When I look around it seems as though we have progressed just fine.
My one main problem with the separation of church and state is when it is taken so far out of context that prayers aren't allowed in schools. Reciting the Pledge of Allegiance isn't allowed anymore because the words "Under God" are too "offensive" to some people. I remember when I was in elementary school we said the Pledge every fucking day and not one child or parent EVER complained about it being offensive. That was a different time though. People are too sensitive these days.
All Else Failed
Well-Known Member
Oh yes. Racism, xenophobia, sexism, crusades, ethnic conflicts, thousands of wars, slavery, slaughter, and all other things like those are landmarks on how we as a human race has progressed "Just fine". Now, religion isnt singularly responsible for the aforementioned cruelties, but it is usually the historical base for them, since religion by its nature is divicive among different people.
Yes, we have progressed in leaps and bounds in science and the like, but humans are more or less the same as belief goes today.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but most schools have "Culture" rooms set up off to the side for any religious people who want to pray during the day. At least thats usually enforced in colleges. They "took out" people praying in school because if you have to let one group pray openly, then you must let all religious groups have equal praying time and all of that BS gets in the way of learning. If a person wants to pray in a public school at lunch or in the classroom to themselves quietly, go for it! Just don't expect to have mass-prayer be a part of the school day. Too many problems would come from it. Also, when they put "Under god" illegally in the pledge in 1954 because of the "godless commies", the pledge automatically becomes a prayer, since you are pledging yourself to a deity of some sort. That directly goes against church and state. Its not about being "sensitive", its about doing what is constitutional.
IntruderLS1
Active Member
LOL You guys crack me up. Religion, specifically Christianity, is woven into every fabric of our founding documents. Don't you think?
78,874Threads
2,185,387Messages
4,959Members