Do you believe in a separation of church and state?

Question

If not, why not.

Answer 1

Friends, in reality, there's no such thing today! I do not believe in the state-controlled IRS 501(c)3 Circus (Circe;Church) which is so prevalent today (99%), nor do I believe in the "State" except as to rule over those who CHOOSE NOT to be ruled by YHWH directly. Please allow me to show you "Government," all three branches: For YHWH is our Judge (Judicial), YHWH is our Lawgiver (Legislative), YHWH is our Sovereign (Executive), He saves us... - Isaiah 33:22; James 4:12  Hmm....

I would like to present some interesting facts for MeAgain, AR2 and Philip concerning this so-called "separation" where U.S. citizens supposedly believe the United States (their government) does not favor (respect) a particular "religion." But first, can we agree that Roman Universalism (Catholicism) is a "religion?" If so, I think you will find the following information useful.

Few people seem to be aware that the Roman Catholic Church in the United States is also officially recognized as a State (Vatican City Church-State). Early in his administration, President Ronald Reagan invited the Vatican City, whose ruling head is the Pope, to open its first EMBASSY in Washington, D.C. The Pope responded positively, and the embassy, or Apostolic Nunciature of the Holy See, opened officially on January 10, 1984.

Not long thereafter, a complaint was filed against President Reagan at U.S. District Court in Philadelphia by the American Jewish Congress, the Baptist Joint Committee on Public Affairs, Seventh Day Adventists, the National Council of Churches, the National Association of Evangelicals, AND Americans United for Separation of Church and State. The plaintiffs sought to have the Court declare that the Reagan Administration had "unconstitutionally" granted to the Roman Catholic faith privileges that were being denied to other establishments of religion.

On May 7, 1985, the suit was thrown out by the Office of Chief Judge John Fullam. Fullam ruled that district courts do not have jurisdiction to intervene in "foreign policy decisions" of the executive branch. Bishop James W. Malone, president of the U.S. Catholic Conference at the time, praised Fullam's decision, noting that it settled "not a religious issue but a public policy question." (1989 Catholic Almanac, p.175)

Well, the plaintiffs appealed. And the Third Circuit Court denied the appeal, noticing that "the Roman Catholic Church's unique position of control over a sovereign territory gives it advantages that other religious organizations do not enjoy." -U.S. Court of Appeals 3rd Circuit, Case No. 85-1309

Folks, the Apostolic Nunciature located at 3339 Massachusetts Avenue N.W. in Washington, D.C. enables the Vatican to supervise more closely U.S. civil government - "PUBLIC POLICY" - as administered through Roman Catholic laypersons throughout the U.S. Congress, Senate and Judiciary. (One such person was Chief Judge Fullam, whose Roman Catholicism apparently escaped the attention of the plaintiffs.)

Vatican Council II's Constitution on the Church (1964-65) instructs politicians to use their secular offices to advance the cause of Roman Catholicism. Catholic laypersons, "whoever they are, are called upon to expend all their energy for the growth of the Church and its continuous sanctification," and "to make the Church present and operative in those places and circumstances where only through them can it become the salt of the earth" (IV, 33). Vatican II further instructs Catholics "by their competence in secular disciplines and by their activity to vigorously contribute their effort so that ... the goods of this world may be more equitably distributed among all men, and may in their own way be conducive to Catholic progress in human and Christian freedom ... and to remedy the customs and conditions of the world, if they are an inducement to sin, so that they may all be conformed to the norms of Catholic justice and may favor the practice of virtue rather than hinder it" (IV, 36)

Vatican II affirms Catholic doctrine dating back to 1302, when Pope Boniface VIII asserted that "it is absolutely necessary for the salvation of every human creature to be subject to the Roman Pontiff."

How many of you are "Catholic?" Because, if so, I cannot wait to read the lame excuses for the so-called "separation" of which you are speaking  - that persecuting and murdering body of Jesuit priests who teach and deceive the entire globe.

Conclusion: The United States government is Roman Catholic to the core. It is the operating cult of Empire.

The only lawful and legitimate "government" for mankind, folks, is the Kingdom of YHWH:

http://www.embassyofheaven.com

http://www.fossilizedcustoms.com

Yahushua the Messiah brought us a NATIONALITY, not a secular-government "religion."

Shalom

Answer 2

The Constitution BARS the GOVERNMENT from establishing a religion and demanding the citizen follow it.

It in no way interferes with YOUR practice of religion.

Answer 3

Religion should not dictate the way a country is run.  Religion is usually out of touch with current trends in society.

Answer 4

First, young lady, it is important to know exactly what "separation of church and state" even is. It is the First Amendment to the Constitution. It reads

"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."

What it means primarily is that the United States government cannot make or prevent anyone from worshiping (or not worshiping, for that matter). Its roots are in the very reason that people such as the Pilgrims came here in the first place. The Church of England, for one, and the Roman Catholic church, for another, were the official religions back then, and anyone who denied their authority on all manner of things, from religion to morality to science, was subject to punishment. For this reason, among others, it is not supposed to be permitted for the U.S. government to have any say in the religious affairs of its people, unless by exercising their religions beliefs, people endanger or defraud other people. Secondarily, it is improper for the U.S. government to enact any laws or policies that have their basis in religion. Many people in this country have interpreted the First Amendment in many ways, sometimes right, sometimes wrong. But I wholeheartedly believe that the government has no business in religion. In theory, the government should be devoid of religion, as it is supposed to be an unbiased government that seeks to govern a country that has a population with literally thousands of different religious affiliations. The government should be running the infrastructure of the country, its defense, its energy policies, and its borders, not the hearts and minds of its population.

Answer 5

Yes, but like most things the sentiment has gone too far. When we start ripping religious symbols off of government buildings, or banning Christmas functions in public schools, it's gone too far. The Constitution gives us freedom of religion, not freedom FROM religion.

Answer 6

I do believe in the separation of church and state, however I believe there is a huge misconception to what we consider it.  I personally believe that the government shouldn't restrict anyone's beliefs, but look at religion classes in schools.  If a school is lucky enough to have religion classes it seems like they mention everything but Christianity.  I think that it should be an elective and their choosing but you shouldn't restrict their ability to learn about religion regardless if its Christianity, Islam, etc.  

  As for prayer in school why not why should we restrict someone to pray?  By restricting them doesn't that itself violate the separation of church and state since your restricting their religion?

Just my opinion for what its worth

Answer 7

Yes.  Only two of the ten commandments (murder and theft) are always illegal. Only two are sometimes illegal (lying and adultery). The first four are irrelevant to our laws. Honoring your father and mother is nice, if they deserve that honor, but certainly not legally required. And coveting, far from being illegal, is the basis of our whole consumer society.

Plus, it's kind of sickening the way politicians go out of their way to pretend to be moral and religious while they're having all kinds of affairs, stealing, etc.

Answer 8

the 10 commandments is the base of the constitution.

unfortunatley too many dumb americans tried to use mitt romneys religion against him, and he was a great candidate

Answer 9

Yes, but i do not believe in keeping the church out of

America as some would have us do.