Church and state seperation misrepresentation.

The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • whocares

    Shooter
    Rating - 92.9%
    13   1   0
    Nov 9, 2010
    414
    18
    Clarksville, IN.
    I have had this belief for several months now after reading about a piece of KY legislation which was deemed unconstitutional based on the bills use of the word God in the manuscripts closing. Someone sought to have this bill reformed/rejected in accordance with the constitutions seperation clause.

    My point is this. When the founding fathers intuitively added the seperation of church and state it was after hundreds of years of oppressive religious regimes running the show. The only way to ensure freedom of thought and action was to ensure of a non denominational non religous governing body. The word God in no way is the same as church. God is a general term for our creator which crosses religous barriers world wide. All major religions use the term God for their religous ideas. God is an all inclusive never exclusive power. Belief or non belief is optional as God is not religion. Church doctrine and religous ideas are man made therefore subjective.

    The word or reference of God does not impede the seperation of church and state. When a man imposes his will or beliefs with the use of the word God it then becomes in essence religion.
     

    indykid

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    4   0   0
    Jan 27, 2008
    11,879
    113
    Westfield
    There is no separation of church and state, only that congress shall make no laws restricting someone's religious beliefs.

    That said, if you take the argument that states use for "reasonable restrictions" of the second amendment, why not "reasonable restrictions" on the first???









    There is some purple in the above statement. I just left it out to make it interesting! :D
     

    96firephoenix

    Master
    Rating - 100%
    2   0   0
    Apr 15, 2010
    2,700
    38
    Indianapolis, IN
    I think your going to have a tough time selling that one to the christians on here, I think they are pretty sure that God means their God.
    Speak for yourself. I know that my God is the God of Abraham. The Jews and Muslims say that too.

    As for the other gods claimed by the polytheistic religions, I have no idea. So long as a man does right, I don't care what he calls God.
     
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    May 14, 2011
    1,090
    38
    colorado
    Speak for yourself. I know that my God is the God of Abraham. The Jews and Muslims say that too.

    As for the other gods claimed by the polytheistic religions, I have no idea. So long as a man does right, I don't care what he calls God.

    Why do they all kill each other in the name of God if he is the same God??
     

    CarmelHP

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Mar 14, 2008
    7,633
    48
    Carmel
    .... When the founding fathers intuitively added the seperation of church and state it was after hundreds of years of oppressive religious regimes running the show. The only way to ensure freedom of thought and action was to ensure of a non denominational non religous governing body....

    The prohibition was on Congress alone in the 1st Amendment. States had established state churches. The 1st Amendment was meant as much to protect those established state churches as much as anything else that has been grafted onto it.
     

    sbcman

    Master
    Rating - 100%
    18   0   0
    Dec 29, 2010
    3,674
    38
    Southwest Indiana
    I have had this belief for several months now after reading about a piece of KY legislation which was deemed unconstitutional based on the bills use of the word God in the manuscripts closing. Someone sought to have this bill reformed/rejected in accordance with the constitutions seperation clause.

    My point is this. When the founding fathers intuitively added the seperation of church and state it was after hundreds of years of oppressive religious regimes running the show. The only way to ensure freedom of thought and action was to ensure of a non denominational non religous governing body. The word God in no way is the same as church. God is a general term for our creator which crosses religous barriers world wide. All major religions use the term God for their religous ideas. God is an all inclusive never exclusive power. Belief or non belief is optional as God is not religion. Church doctrine and religous ideas are man made therefore subjective.

    The word or reference of God does not impede the seperation of church and state. When a man imposes his will or beliefs with the use of the word God it then becomes in essence religion.

    As mentioned before, the term "separation of church and state" is nowhere found in the constitution or any other government document. The phrase was used by Jefferson in response to a letter from the Danbury Baptists of Connecticut. Baptists hold the hallmark beliefs of religious freedom, freedom of conscience and separation of church and state, which we believe are found in the Bible. Also, we've "been there and done that" when it comes to church and state union and it didn't turn out very well for us at all. You've only got to get drowned, beheaded, jailed or burnt a time or two by the "state church" to decide you want none of it. Jefferson agreed that there should be no national religion, thus the amendment.

    Just as a point of clarity, it was not "hundred of years." Believe it or not, Baptists and others were persecuted right here on American soil. Use your google-fu skills on "virginia religious persecution" and take a read, especially into James Madison's words. You'll also find religious persecution in most all the early colonies and states.

    To your point at hand though, politicians get enraged at the use of the word "God" in order to please a very small minority of voters. With the exception of a few politicians, this trend will not change. Also, in fairness, some politicians barter the name of God for political gain. It's a deplorable practice both ways.
     

    whocares

    Shooter
    Rating - 92.9%
    13   1   0
    Nov 9, 2010
    414
    18
    Clarksville, IN.
    This is my point. If only a small minority find the word God offensive, and the multitude of religous beliefs use it themselves from Hindu to Catholic, Budhist to Baptist, why make such yields to such a minority. I could understand if God were exclusive term to one belief system, but it is not. I am a Christian. Sunday school goin, nursery workin, event helping member of my church. In no way do I expext others to bow down to my imposing beliefs not mutually shared. I am happy with my beliefs and I am happy for your beliefs.

    See how this immediately got turned religous and my point is that the word God does not constitute religion. That is exactly the thought process that is allowing God to get swept under the rug in America
     

    spencer rifle

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    68   0   0
    Apr 15, 2011
    6,604
    149
    Scrounging brass
    Star_Trek_-_In_Before_the_Lock.gif


    Also, in his letter, Jefferson was trying to defend free exercise of religion, not that government should be exclusively in the control of atheists. This quote is often taken out of context, and the whole letter must be read to get the meaning.
     
    Top Bottom