church and state

[hvac ak47]

Is Ron against the seperation of church and state?http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul148.html

[fletcher]

Ron believes in the 1st amendment: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof. I doubt he believes in the separation of church and state that has been created in the courts.

[hard@work]

Separation of church and state includes having the state stay out of people's religious beliefs.

[hvac ak47]

How do you interpret this?

"The Founding Fathers envisioned a robustly Christian yet religiously tolerant America, with churches serving as vital institutions that would eclipse the state in importance."

[micahnelson]

How do you interpret this?

"The Founding Fathers envisioned a robustly Christian yet religiously tolerant America, with churches serving as vital institutions that would eclipse the state in importance."

The state shouldn't be as important as it is. Private organizations should be more influential in an individual's life.

In that time that was meant the church... but today it could mean any civic organization- regardless of affiliation.

Basically, the government shouldn't be the most important institution in anyone's life.

[OptionsTrader]

How do you interpret this?

"The Founding Fathers envisioned a robustly Christian yet religiously tolerant America, with churches serving as vital institutions that would eclipse the state in importance."


I interpret that the government should be 90% smaller than it is, and is should get the hell out of my business. And if I want to be involved in a community-based group like a church, and build a non-government community group of some kind, I should be allowed to do so with ZERO government intervention.

[Andrew76]

Ron Paul being a strict constitutionalist, I assume would also understand what the founders were trying to avoid, ie: a state sponsored/supported church akin to the Church of England - which still exists. If you're trying to avoid a state church, by nature you're avoiding a state sponsored religion. There is not now, never was, nor shall/should there ever be an official U.S. religion. But all of us as individuals have been set free to practive whatever religion we see fit.
Other telling tidbits of the original intent: "In God We Trust," was not added to our currency until the late 1800's/early 1900's. "One nation under god," wasn't added to the pledge of allegiance until the 1950's. Virtually all the founders were followers of the popular "deism," of the day, and not Christians, ie: they believed in God, a proper enlightenment era belief, but did not declare themselves to be Christian. Thomas Jefferson himself had a hell of a time with criticism from the various christian churches of his day when he ran for president. Ben Franklin refused to recognize any church's authority in his marriage, and therefore had a common law marriage with his wife. And most telling..... zero mention of Jesus, Christianity or the Christian bible in the Bill of Rights or the Constitution. Any reference to "God," or a "Creator," is as much Jewish, Muslim, Hindu, Pagan or Greek Mythologist as it is Christian.
We should be glad our founders had such foresight, as well as firsthand knowledge of how an alignment of church and state serves neither and corrupts both.

[joshdvm]

"The notion of a rigid separation between church and state has no basis in either the text of the Constitution or the writings of our Founding Fathers. On the contrary, our Founders’ political views were strongly informed by their religious beliefs. Certainly the drafters of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, both replete with references to God, would be aghast at the federal government’s hostility to religion. The establishment clause of the First Amendment was simply intended to forbid the creation of an official state church like the Church of England, not to drive religion out of public life."

I'm sorry, but this has to be the weakest thing he's ever written. The founding fathers were deists who were aware of the irreconcilable differences between the main religious groups of the time, how they intensely feared and loathed one another and how the state must be prevented from being used for the purposes of one group trying to dominate another--thereby intending to keep religion OUT of public life.

And this statement is flat out erroneous:

"...the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, both replete with references to God..."

re·plete (r-plt)
adj.
1. Abundantly supplied; abounding: a stream replete with trout; an apartment replete with Empire furniture.
2. Filled to satiation; gorged.

References to God in Declaration of Independence:
"God": 1 (and this in the context of "Nature's God" which I assume to be not even a reference to the Judeo/Christian God, but rather to Natural Law, or reason itself);

"Creator": 1 (in the context of "...they are endowed by their creator..." which I see merely as a more literary way of saying "...they are born with..." )

References to God in the United States Constitution:

"God": 0

"Lord": 1 (context: "...Done in Convention by the Unanimous Consent of the States present ... in the Year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and Eighty seven..."

"Religious": 1 Article VI: "...no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States..."

"Religion": 1 "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion..."

So exactly one (1) reference to god--which isn't even really a reference to the Christian God--in the texts of BOTH these documents makes them "replete" with such references?

I find this impossible to defend if a critic cites it--I wish Paul could somehow retract this.

[Kregener]

If we can name state-sponsored space modules, nuclear submarines and warships after Greek and Roman mythological "gods", we can have a picture of Jesus or a prayer group on a campus.

[Richandler]

You cannot require a kid to go to school and then be taught the bible. You cannot require currency that says in god we trust and force it to be used. So really if religion gets into any part of the government you immediately have the right not to follow that government since there are so many laws that say you have to pay taxes or go to school or use only "legal tender." All of those laws end up supporting the goverment with religious connection. Therefore if there is no separation of church and state, all laws violate the first line of the first amendment because they are laws respecting particular religion.