Is separation of church and state a denial of freedom of religion?
Posted on November 26th, 2009 by admin
No; it’s just the opposite. Separation of church and state IS freedom of religion. The opposite of separation of church and state would be a theocracy like the Church of England under King Henry VIII (read up on it…it was barbaric). Separation allows you to be free to attend the church of your choice rather than being forced to attend the government’s church.
November 26th, 2009 at 5:57 am
Not in the least bit.
References :
November 26th, 2009 at 6:02 am
No, it guarantees freedom of religion by making sure the state doesn’t interfere with religion. It also ensures that a theocracy doesn’t take over our government.
References :
November 26th, 2009 at 6:32 am
No; it’s just the opposite. Separation of church and state IS freedom of religion. The opposite of separation of church and state would be a theocracy like the Church of England under King Henry VIII (read up on it…it was barbaric). Separation allows you to be free to attend the church of your choice rather than being forced to attend the government’s church.
References :
November 26th, 2009 at 6:55 am
No. just the opposite in fact
References :
November 26th, 2009 at 7:38 am
The United States is not a theocracy. So no.
References :
November 26th, 2009 at 8:27 am
No, it’s the way of keeping that right. Any government run by one religion would certainly rule against other religions, a seperation of church and state allows for all religions to practice freely without the threat of being discriminated against or repressed by the government.
References :
November 26th, 2009 at 9:17 am
Absolutely NOT!
Feel free to practice worshiping whatever "pretend friend" or mythical being you want to – just keep it to yourself and OUT of our government.
References :
November 26th, 2009 at 10:01 am
Absolutely not.
References :
November 26th, 2009 at 10:33 am
This line is not part of the constitution. No matter how many liberals try to say it is. The constitution says that the government may not establish any religion and may not interfere with any religious practices. There is no constitutional separation of church and state.
References :
November 26th, 2009 at 11:15 am
Not at all…there has not been a single law because of seperation of church and state doctrine that has denied a single person the right to worship as they choose
References :
November 26th, 2009 at 11:24 am
clarification:
true–
there shall be no religious institution endorsed or otherwise supported by the federal government.
false–
there shall be no religious ideas, symbols, spokesmen or overt supporters allowed in the political and governmental arenas
conclusion:
dont tell me what to believe, and i wont say a damn thing to you about it.
do whatever the hell you want
References :
November 26th, 2009 at 11:58 am
No, it IS freedom of religion, because it allows individuals to practice their own religion without subjecting others to it.
References :
November 26th, 2009 at 12:14 pm
Neither is denied. The state is attempting to be as neutral as possible. (A debate in itself). The state is not preventing you from practicing religion.
References :
November 26th, 2009 at 12:33 pm
no
References :
November 26th, 2009 at 1:13 pm
No, you still have the right to your religion.
There are to many different religions for the state to celebrate all of them. It would not be fair if they only celebrated one or two. We are a free country with many different religions.
If you want religion in schools there are plenty of religious schools.
References :
November 26th, 2009 at 1:39 pm
Separation of church and state is to guarantee freedom of religion.
References :
November 26th, 2009 at 2:28 pm
Not if it is done the way it is intended. People should look at the consequences of a non seperation. for example: If we were to allow the diplay of the ten commandments in public schools in a particular uncommon place. Could not the argument be made to hang a Koran Verse or a passage from the satanic bible? By keeping the government out of it, doesn’t it allow you to make up your own mind about which religion to follow, if at all.
Also I think it is worth noting, since I brought up schools, there are some that say that the government has taken religion out of schools, well you are still allowed to pray and worship the god of your choice in school so long as it does not interrupt others around you.
This is what democracy is all about, letting people make their own choices, without big brother trying to influence your decision.
References :
November 26th, 2009 at 2:59 pm
Actually it’s is the opposite.
References :
November 26th, 2009 at 3:11 pm
No. But the misinterpretation of the phrase is. If "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof…" then how is it constitutional for religious matters to be brought to court? And why are their decisions made against prayer, navitity scenes etc… made in court?
References :
November 26th, 2009 at 3:21 pm
only if your religion is power, greed and money. because that is what states are. religion is a faith, states are a military, an economy, and a currency, within a land mass.
References :
November 26th, 2009 at 3:48 pm
I have a basic problem with "separation of church and state". I cannot find it in the Constitution. The only thing I’ve seen is that ‘Congress shall make no law …’ in the 1st Amendment. When I read it that says that Congress shall not pass a law making USA a Christian, or Muslim, or Wiken, or Budest, country. But that’s my take. Answering the question… I don’t think that it denies freedom of religion b/c you can be any religion you want and practice it anywhere you want-provided your not endangering others. Sep. of Church and state just doesn’t allow the gvt to be religious. It would be good though if those running the gvt lived by some of the more moral tenants of Christianity, in my opinion.
References :