← Autodidact Archive · Original Dissent · JOEBIALEK
Thread ID: 9610 | Posts: 2 | Started: 2003-09-07
2003-09-07 23:59 | User Profile
The recent events in Alabama concerning the location of the Ten Commandments in a state judicial building once again stirs the debate about the separation of church and state. The First Amendment of the Constitution states:
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
The government of the United States is prohibited from recognizing any particular religion as the official religion of the country. This extends to any land or property owned by the government. Examples range from city hall to the White House, the vast wilderness to public parks, and pre-schools to universities. Therefore, if anyone wanted to erect a symbol of their particular religion on public land or property, provisions would have to be made to accommodate all the other religions as well. Consequently, in respecting the fact that all religions are equally affected by this prohibition, no one religion is recognized with favoritism nor is any religion restricted in its practice. We simply agree as United States citizens that in order for our religious differences to be accommodated, there must be some form of neutrality when it comes to public land and property.
The government is also prohibited from restricting the exercise of an individual's or group's religion. This too extends to any land or property owned by private individuals and groups. Examples include churches, synagogues, and mosques and any schools that are privately owned as well. So too, if anyone wanted to erect a symbol on private property, they would have to seek permission from the owners.
The separation of church and state was established by the founding fathers to prevent any one religion from influencing the state against other religions. It was a compromise of facilitation not a compromise of principle. So too, we must always guard against those who try to influence public morality with their own private beliefs. The problem with society today is that there is no respect for public ethics and morals. The main objective of capitalism has been corrupted into an ethos of materialism. The resulting hedonistic philosophy of "I, my and me" is what is ruining this country not the restriction of religion in public places. We need to bring back the study of philosophy in our schools and begin a new nurturing of spirituality in our religions. Otherwise the seeds of destruction for our social experiment will have finally come to fruition.
2003-09-08 04:14 | User Profile
Let us look at the First Amendment of the US Constitution:
*"Congress shall make no law... "*
This states that the Federal Government canot make a law:
*"respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;..."*
The States were still free to have a State Religion. And many States did have such until around 1850.
When Thomas Jefferson was president the Protestant Episcopal Church used Federal building in Washington D.C. as Houses of Worship and the USMC band came to play the hymns. Every Student in District of Columbia schools was given a Bible. In the past federal appropriation were made for the construction of church buildings on the Indian lands.
Now I am not saying I agree or disagree with any of these things or think any State should start a State Religion. But nothing in the First Amendment said you can not.