EvC Forum: Separation of Church and State

In the thread {A Test for Intelligent Design Proponents} Faith said some things about the Separation of Curch and State that just are not true, and this quickly derailed the thread from the topic discussion and resulted in the thread being closed for a while.

To recap this is where it started (excerpt):

A Test for Intelligent Design Proponents, msg 3, Faith writes:

About the Separation of Church from State, this is SO misunderstood these days it seems hopeless to rescue it. The idea that religion can't be taught in the public schools on account of this principle is utterly ridiculous. The First Amendment, which supposedly codifies this principle of separation, says in its first clause that CONGRESS may not MAKE A LAW that ESTABLISHES a State Religion, that's all. We have no state religion. Congress has not made a law establishing one. The amendment has not been violated and the public schools cannot violate it because they are not Congress.

Also, a state religion in the time of the Constitution meant a Christian denomination.

Also, some public schools in early America taught their students from the Bible and from various Christian catechisms and confessions. If this were forbidden by the First Amendment it would have been prohibited at the time.

But the second clause of the First Amendment says that CONGRESS may [also] NOT MAKE A LAW THAT PROHIBITS THE FREE EXERCISE OF RELIGION.

Well, an argument could be made that the Supreme Court's interpretation of the First Amendment to prohibit all teaching of religion in the public schools is really a violation of the Amendment, as they are interpreting the law made by Congress in the Amendment itself in such a way as to prohibit the free exercise of religion by ordinary citizens in the public schools. I believe this is in fact what has been happening.

So I believe you have the false revisionist understanding of the idea of separation of church from state that in fact reverses its meaning and produces the very government tyranny against Christians it was intended to prevent.

A Test for Intelligent Design Proponents, msg 6, RAZD writes:

Faith, there is no restriction from teaching courses like comparative religion at any level, nor are there restrictions about teaching about the historical relevance of various religions to the couse of history.

What you cannot teach is that the {precepts\concepts\beliefs} of any religion are necessarily true, what you cannot do is give precedence for any one religion over all the others.

What you cannot do is presume to teach that any religious {precept\concept\belief} has the same value in science class as science theory and the validation process of science, because they are fundamentally different (the main point of your thread I believe?).

As a historical note, although I only have anecdotal evidence of it, the california schools tried to teach comparative religious classes, but christian fundamentalist parents stopped it.

Sorry to see your thread closed, as I had more to say. May have to do that PNT to get there.

That would also allow me to pursue Phats comments further too.

Enjoy.

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand

RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.< !--UE-->

A Test for Intelligent Design Proponents, msg 10, Faith writes:

Obviously I mean TEACHING religion itself, and preaching it, not teaching ABOUT religions. Certainly that was obvious enough.

What you cannot teach is that the {precepts\concepts\beliefs} of any religion are necessarily true, what you cannot do is give precedence for any one religion over all the others.

And this is what I discussed is the totally wrong result of the current misinterpretation of the First Amendment, as religion WAS taught this way in the public schools in early America. As I said.

Parents and a community should certainly determine curriculum it seems to me, but this only works against religion in practice it seems, not for parents who are FOR religious instruction in the schools.

This message has been edited by Faith, 11-27-2005

.
Very obviously you cannot have the teaching and preaching of any one religion in a public school as if that religion were true.

The reason is that once you select one, you place it above all the others. That specifically contravenes the constitution.

(It is also logically false to teach and preach more than one as true.)

... as religion WAS taught this way in the public schools in early America.

Past failures to comply with the intent of the constitution do not make them legal or binding or in any way more valid than now. That this occured in some areas (NOT in all) is neither here nor there on the issue of whether the constitution allows it. Racial discrimination also occurred in many places after it had been specifically excluded by the constitution.

The ONLY way you can teach about religion that I am aware of that is in compliance with the constitution is in a comparative religion class or in historical classes -- social studies on the impacts of various religions on the history and development of culture and knowledge.

Our founding fathers were well aware of the failures of the theocratic colonies to establish any kind of government that allowed for the equal freedom of others. By the time of the constitution each one of these colonies had stopped being a theocratic style government and had converted to a secular govenment.

Faith in message 3 says:

The revisionists are the fundamental christians that keep trying to make America something it was not. It was NOT a "Christian Nation" and it was NOT designed to favor christianity over any other religion.

This "tyranny against Christians" concept is just plain ridiculous and false to anyone that looks at it with open eyes: there is no discrimination against Christians, or the practice of their religion within any corner of the USof(N)A. NONE.

The only "tyranny" is that you are not allowed to impose your faith on others, just as they are EQUALLY prevented from imposing theirs on you.

The only "tyranny" is that you are not allowed to impose a tyranny of christianity on others, either in government, or in schools, or in public places.

That is what freedom is about. That is what America is about.

3 online now:	DrJones*, kjsimons, Tangle
Newest Member:	ChatGPT
Post Volume:	Total: 916,909 Year: 4,166/9,624 Month: 1,037/974 Week: 364/286 Day: 7/13 Hour: 0/2