BF2S Forums Separation of Church and State

Nd4Spdr wrote:

This nation was founded by Christians with Christian beliefs. By saying one nation under God in no way hurts anyone anywhere. Christian beliefs are nothing but good. If you are an atheist so be it, but Christian beliefs are mostly common sense morals that everyone should follow. Being one nation under God is a good and moral way to live and has nothing to do with church and state working together. The United States in no wawy forces anyone to worship God (yet).

That would be one massive civil holy war if they pushed any religion on us

Locoloki wrote:

God is a synonym for "Uncle Sam", every dollar you have in your wallet says "In God we trust", i recommend if you want to change the pledge, you have to change everysingle piece of currency we have in existence

Quite ironic that the money isn't offensive, but the pledge is.

Should be one nation, under Canada if you ask me...

Stingray24 wrote:

Mogura wrote:

Nd4Spdr wrote:

This nation was founded by Christians with Christian beliefs. By saying one nation under God in no way hurts anyone anywhere. Christian beliefs are nothing but good. If you are an atheist so be it, but Christian beliefs are mostly common sense morals that everyone should follow. Being one nation under God is a good and moral way to live and has nothing to do with church and state working together. The United States in no wawy forces anyone to worship God (yet).

"Christian beliefs are mostly common sense morals that everyone should follow" ?

tell that to an muslim, you will see what he will tell you ...

Ok, let's.  The muslim will disagree on specific theology, but regarding general morals I'm sure he/she would be quite content to agree on.

religion is flawed, arent priests supposed to be holy and have good morals? than why are so many being charged with having sex with little boys. I am not religious and i think sleeping with boys is very bad for god, and very bad for morals

Mogura wrote:

Nd4Spdr wrote:

This nation was founded by Christians with Christian beliefs. By saying one nation under God in no way hurts anyone anywhere. Christian beliefs are nothing but good. If you are an atheist so be it, but Christian beliefs are mostly common sense morals that everyone should follow. Being one nation under God is a good and moral way to live and has nothing to do with church and state working together. The United States in no wawy forces anyone to worship God (yet).

"Christian beliefs are mostly common sense morals that everyone should follow" ?

tell that to an muslim, you will see what he will tell you ...

Islamic beliefs are mostly common sense morals that everyone should follow (except the jihad part).

Mogura wrote:

deeznutz1245 wrote:

Mogura wrote:

lets say im an civilian, im an atheist or any other religion than christian, i pay taxes, state use those taxes to pay soldiers AND those priests !!! WAIT !? im paying for an priest ! i dont want ! i vote to have an atheist state and give taxes to that atheist state , i dont do it so they can give that money to a church.

/ religions i names are exemple, you can put im catholic and army pay an muslim imam, or other ...


PS religion is a personal thing, state should not have any link with that

I KNOW!!!! OMG!!!! Imagine the thought of your tax dollars paying for soldiers to have priests. These are the guys that die for your right to be Athiest by the way. I'll tell you what, you keep your few cents a year in tax dollars, I'll tell the military to pack it up cuz we are done here, and then in a year you will be forced to worship Buddah. By the way, it is the soldiers right to have that provided for them seeing how there are not very many churches in the middle of the fucking ocean which is where most of them are.

why you always talk about church ? dont build only a church, buil a mosque too and a jewish temple, and the hindu one, and budhist one and shinto, and satanic cult whatever,.... so just throw all aircrafts from the carrier   
and build religius buildings on them.

(priests and other dont fight, they just watch other fighting and dieing )

*sighing* sorry Mr PC. I meant to say place of worship. Dont sick the ACLU on me.

I'd like to see the various Christian churches of America start to pay taxes...then you may have a right to dictate policy on government and politicians...

Stingray24 wrote:

Locoloki wrote:

God is a synonym for "Uncle Sam", every dollar you have in your wallet says "In God we trust", i recommend if you want to change the pledge, you have to change everysingle piece of currency we have in existence

Quite ironic that the money isn't offensive, but the pledge is.

Quite ironic that they added "In God we trust" in 1956, replacing E pluribus unum which was one of the first national mottos of the United States of America. Translated from Latin, it means "From many, one" or "Out of many, one" (e = out of, from; pluribus= many; unum = one).  In 1952 they added "under God" to the pledge and in 1956 they added "In God we Trust".  The founding fathers were smarter than that.

Mogura wrote:

URE_DED wrote:

sergeriver wrote:

The words "under God" were added in 1954.  Despite that, it's a violation to the First Amedment which prohibits the establishment of a national religion by Congress or the preference of one religion over another, or religion over nonreligion.

The founding fathers wanted to protect religion from being affected by an oppressive government - that does not mean at all that religion can't have any affect on government/lawmaking/etc.

thats the problem, it can, and it should not

But the majority of the people are religious. Most of them Christians. This is bound to influence ANY democratic government with such populations. To keep 100% of religion off the government would be undemocratic. For a good example of this, see China.

Last edited by EVieira (2006-12-28 08:14:56)

Locoloki wrote:

religion is flawed, arent priests supposed to be holy and have good morals? than why are so many being charged with having sex with little boys. I am not religious and i think sleeping with boys is very bad for god, and very bad for morals

So religion is flawed because of some priests touching little boys?  Come on.  The religion would be flawed if it promoted touching little boys as part of its value system, but that is not the case.  These priests are being charged because they chose to give in to their human nature instead of following the teaching of their religion.  The reality is that all human beings are capable of failing morally and not all priests/ministers/pastors are touching little boys.  That generalization is a bit much.

If you are an atheist and really don't believe in God then saying "under God" shouldn't hurt in the least. If you think that all men should submit to the idea of a higher power such as Rule of Law then Under God fits fine. "God" is/was the Law Bringer in all previous civilizations and it is Law that defines civilization and separates it from human nature which is the animal instinct that hasn't evolved out of us yet.

If you are an anti-theist then "under God" must really get under your skin because the mere mention of any possible power above man ruins your gig.  To take the opposing view God and Law are constructs of the human mind therefore either idea can be used by anyone without fear or remorse nor pain except to the lawless.

The pledge is not a government telling you how to believe which was the intent of the Separation clause. And the pledge is not forcing religion on anyone. It is an affirmation of loyalty to the USA and acknowledgment that the US hopefully has a moral compass helping it to navigate strange and complex waters.  lol (I know thats a stretch, corrupt politicians and all, but I can hope can't I?)

So if you have a problem using the words "Under God" in your pledge then substitute it for "Under Rule of Law" so we know you are not bent on de-civilizing the US.

There is a higher power over you, get over it.

Last edited by OpsChief (2006-12-28 09:17:08)

Mogura wrote:

URE_DED wrote:

The founding fathers wanted to protect religion from being affected by an oppressive government - that does not mean at all that religion can't have any affect on government/lawmaking/etc.

thats the problem, it can, and it should not

See you're buying the "separation of church and state" bs again.  I've read the Constitution, it's not in there.  The historical fact is that the founders of our country left a country where a state religion was established.  They wanted to express their religion as they chose, not as the state chose for them.  Hence, the 1st amendment - preventing the government from establishing one state religion and excluding all others.  And also to keeping the government from "preventing the free exercise thereof".

This may have already been said but - "Separation of Church and State" means Churches don't run the country.  Pledging allegiance or using cash with in God we trust doesn't mean the Church has been given ANY power to run the country.

Frankly, the whole idea is reaching and is a blunt attempt at political correctness.

Last edited by Pug (2006-12-28 08:40:53)