Truth About Separation of Church and State (Jesus Christ, ritual, morals)

[true blood]

How many times have you actually read the Bible? A personal, unemotional, non-biased reading and a strong reading comprehension with some knowledge of Hebrew and Greek in an Eastern setting should teach someone what Christianity is about. Then you'll actually know what your talking about.

If you've done this...why wouldn't someone want Christ-like principles to be an influence?

[Ceridwen018]

true blood,

The way I see it, it doesn't matter what Jefferson meant by what he wrote. In our modern society, separation of church and state is absolutely necessary, and we would have eventually reached this same conclusion without him. It was only a matter of time.

[Runt]

Trueblood--

why wouldn't someone want Christ-like principles to be an influence?

Christ-like principles are not the problem. The problem, as I see it, are with some of today's CHRISTIAN principles.

Why wouldn't I want the government to be overly influenced by Christian principles? Let's see...

-At worst there could be flat out discrimination against women, at best there could be seperate spheres (meaning women are "equal" to men but there are things they should do and some things only men should do.)
-Laws making it illegal to practice religions other than Christianity at worst and discrimination against people of non-Christian religions at best.
-Laws making it illegal to express opinions against Christianity.
-Discrimination against homosexuals (like the "no homosexual marriage" ammendment people are trying to get passed)
-Laws preventing 2 people of opposite sexes from living together unless married (there was a law like this in my state until very recently).
-Laws preventing people from working on Sunday.
-The establishment of Christianity as a national religion... even if this is broader than specifying what denomination of Christianity one must belong to.
-Censureship of certain movies/books (like Harry Potter).

[Bright-ness' Shadow]

Originally Posted by true blood

Pah, You told me to start a new thread...so I did. And now you ridicule me?

Sorry! - I was out of line and deleted the post

-pah-

[true blood]

Originally Posted by Runt

Trueblood--

Christ-like principles are not the problem. The problem, as I see it, are with some of today's CHRISTIAN principles.

Why wouldn't I want the government to be overly influenced by Christian principles? Let's see...

-At worst there could be flat out discrimination against women, at best there could be seperate spheres (meaning women are "equal" to men but there are things they should do and some things only men should do.)
-Laws making it illegal to practice religions other than Christianity at worst and discrimination against people of non-Christian religions at best.
-Laws making it illegal to express opinions against Christianity.
-Discrimination against homosexuals (like the "no homosexual marriage" ammendment people are trying to get passed)
-Laws preventing 2 people of opposite sexes from living together unless married (there was a law like this in my state until very recently).
-Laws preventing people from working on Sunday.
-The establishment of Christianity as a national religion... even if this is broader than specifying what denomination of Christianity one must belong to.
-Censureship of certain movies/books (like Harry Potter).

So Runt, You actually think the Lord Jesus Christ would make those laws? Sorry but I can't picture Jesus Christ outlawing a Harry Potter book, let alone any of the things you listed. Your understanding of the man Jesus Christ if kinda vague. Flat out discrimination against women? Your statement is plain wrong and I question your intent. If you're anti-christ just say it. However, there is no one in this world or the world to come with greater principles and/or a greater name then Jesus Christ.

[painted wolf]

True blood the inherant problem is that people manipulate and misuse religion all the time to further thie narrow minded goals... Christlike or not people will do evil things in Christ's name. Thus the need to keep from establishing a religion within the goventment... who better to do evil acts under the guise of Religious mandate?

wa:do

[true blood]

I agree w/ ya painted wolf however Runt's statements was indeed a manipulation in itself. If someone doesn't know what Christ's principles are, shouldn't they just keep quiet? Jesus Christ has never and will never discriminate against women. That statement is nonsense. Jesus Christ has never even discriminated against homos. Laws preventing 2 people living together of opposite sexes? More nonsense. Laws preventing people from working on Sunday? The Sabbath in Israel was on Saturday, not Sunday. Either re-read the Bible a few times and do some research or perhaps keep the anti-christ statements to yourselves unless your mind is reprobate and void of any spiritual understanding. My apologies if I'm being harsh but, look, our words here basicly define who we are and what's in our hearts. If anyone is bashing Jesus Christ I feel you're bashing the wrong man...

[Bright-ness' Shadow]

Originally Posted by true blood

I agree w/ ya painted wolf however Runt's statements was indeed a manipulation in itself. If someone doesn't know what Christ's principles are, shouldn't they just keep quiet? Jesus Christ has never and will never discriminate against women. That statement is nonsense. Jesus Christ has never even discriminated against homos. Laws preventing 2 people living together of opposite sexes? More nonsense. Laws preventing people from working on Sunday? The Sabbath in Israel was on Saturday, not Sunday. Either re-read the Bible a few times and do some research or perhaps keep the anti-christ statements to yourselves unless your mind is reprobate and void of any spiritual understanding. My apologies if I'm being harsh but, look, our words here basicly define who we are and what's in our hearts. If anyone is bashing Jesus Christ I feel you're bashing the wrong man...

Runt specifically said "Christianity" not Christ. Instead of a request to re-read the Bible, I would request you to re-read Runts original post. What she condemns is the actions taken by humans in Christ's name.

-pah-

[Bright-ness' Shadow]

Originally Posted by true blood

]Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court, William Rehnquist said:

“There is simply no historical foundation for the proposition that the framers intended to build a wall of separation”

He also said: “ the greatest injury of the “wall” notion is its mischievous
diversion of judges from the actual intentions of the drafters of the Bill of Rights The “wall of separation between church and State” is a metaphor based on bad history, a metaphor which has proved useless as a guide to judging. It should be frankly and explicitly abandoned.”

The wall may be erected from Rehnquist's words.

...that the Establishment Clause of the First Admendmenthad acquired a well accepted meaning: it forbade establishment of a national religion and forebade preference among religious sects or denominations...

-pah-

[Mister Emu]

The problem with that is, just because they are done in Christ's name does not make them Christian principles, the same way all of the Muslims on this forum I have seen have denounced the terrorists even though they terrorize in the name of Islam.

A nation that lived by Christian principles would be a utopia.