Separation of Church and State

Is this actually completely possible? Because it doesn't seem like it, people still vote for stuff influenced by religion all of the time. If religion and the state were completely separate what would the justification be against things like gay marriage or abortion? You could even argue that generalized ideological viewpoints or templates constitute religion, and those are basically the foundation of politics.

Other urls found in this thread:

brookings.edu/research/an-analysis-of-out-of-wedlock-births-in-the-united-states/
ncjrs.gov/App/publications/Abstract.aspx?id=167327
scienceblogs.com/gregladen/2012/11/27/correlation-and-causation-single-mothers-and-violent-crime/
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

>Is this actually completely possible?
Only by force just like the commies, other than that no

>russian orthordoxy
>literally the worst kind of christendom
Nope.

the bible would be law if it wasn't

>God is everywhere
>even in the toilet
>He can se your cunny
>is your cunny clean for God?
>your cunny does not belong to you
>it belongs to God - the ultimate man
>but in His mercy, other men may borrow your cunny
>worshipping your cunny is worshipping God
>therefore CP with your cunny are icons

Why is there not a christian country influenced by biblical law? There are few Muslim countries which use Islamic law and Israel is a Jewish country, why no christian country?

The government needs biblical principles enforced.

America must become a theocracy free of sin.

problem isnt the mixing of religion and state but the mixing of bad religions with state, resulting in bad states.

no one is free of sin, even jesus admitted that. the point is sin is forgiven, supposedly, which is absolutely corrupt. thank god i don't give a shit about dunecoon religions.

Separation of Church anr State is anti-Christian in nature. It only separates Christian Churches (especially the Catholic Church) and the state. It doesnt apply with Islam and other religions at least in the case of my country. Pic related is an "islamic city" on my country where Sharia law is enforced

Because the west experienced a political culture that rejects itself. Also left wingers refuse to understand that monarchy and Christian monarchy had given people the very first liberal rights, literally our political ability to attack christian nationhood ultimately was made possible by christian kings and nations.

Well your statement dosn't apply with Christianity wholly beacsue even christain monarchs understoud that they were not makers of church doctrine or the canon laws of the faith. Now in the islamic world that depends on the monarch

The better question is, is it desirable?

Yes, it is because it is not just necessarily it is true that faith must play a role in politics because people no matter what are religious animals just as political animals.

Bible should be law.

Dude, i agree the problem with paganism and wicca is that they see everything as sprit. All matter is spirt. Total nonsense since a PC is not a spirt.

But there is seperation between church and state its where the usa is founded on , there are religious ideas but you can also have those ideas when you are a atheist . I have and will always hate fags

The argument against gay marriage is along the lines of marriage is an institutional tax incentive to encourage family growth and fertility, and homosexuals have no reason for it.
The argument against abortion, and contraception, is that it quantifiably increases births out of wedlock and single parenthood, despite the myth that it would decrease them - resulting in more poverty and violent crime.
I hope you don't think the Bible's version of social polity is arbitrary...

How was separation of church and state going when the Inquisition was having their human bonfires in your country? Or when the Muslims with no concept of separation of church and state invaded the fuck out of Anatolia? Oh that's right, only your religion is the right one and thus infallible, not the other couple thousand :^)

>what would the justification be against things like gay marriage
I'm not against gay marriage, but I do think that gay people who want to get married are retarded, since the very concept of marriage is religious in the first place. It's like gay people wanting to become priests. Why would you? Your religion literally thinks you should be killed.

>or abortion?
That one is harder to argue against. I am for abortion, but obviously the unborn fetus becomes something that could be considered a child at some point. Abortion is obviously fine, it's just a matter of where on the timeline you place it.
>Is cumming in a paper towel and throwing it out child murder?
Obviously not
>Is abortion as soon as the woman is actually pregnant child murder?
Obviously not, there's barely even anything there
>Is abortion the day before birth child murder?
Yes, clearly, and it should not be allowed
>Is abortion the day after birth child murder?
Well, you're murdering a literal child, so yes

The answer lies somewhere inbetween the day of conception and the day of birth, where exactly is indeed a difficult question to answer, but I don't think that the opinion of God should be involved, since he most likely doesn't exist. If he wants a word in the decision, I think he should come down here and make his case, loud and clear.

So jewish law? LOL kill yourself christcuck.

thats fucking stupid.

Thank you, I don't have to make the argument myself now. Glad to see the rest of us non-secular statists flooded into the thread

>I need kings to tell me that I need kings because kings made the idea there shouldn't be kings

Retard

>bible should be law
>posts an image
Meme flags were a mistake.

> The argument against abortion, and contraception, is that it quantifiably increases births out of wedlock and single parenthood, despite the myth that it would decrease them - resulting in more poverty and violent crime.
Do you have any proof at all to back that up?

No it is not. The founders were clear for the idea that an established church is not possible because the king George the III kept all the others brands of chirstanity together and supported catholics and others. Then the presdient George Washingtonian was the most angican president who existed to hold offioce. Those ideas would ultiamly prove athiesm as a state policy to no be possiable. An atheistc state is impossible it needs an animating idea, which comes form religion. I would aruge that makes atheism false.

>No one got married before taxes or away from government ever
>contraception is bad because it increases births but homosexuality is bad

Use the state to enforce your religion elsewhere bootlicker.

>Separation of Church anr State is anti-Christian in nature.

>And Jesus answering said unto them, Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's. And they marvelled at him.

Friend just give me 1 verse where jesus went all political

>Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence.

Saying it stupid without a valid reason! That's on you

That is not how monarchy or stronarmg rule works. Kings never made the idea that rhere shouldn't be kings nor did all the liberals.

Is there a famine up in Chicago? Stop eating letters.

Great, thank you for commenting. I would also aruge that it matters on what we find to be the ulitmalty truth which should rule are cultral viewpoint, which is inertly religious as it is gniostic

Hopefully for the niggers! I'm good

>stop killing based black men

This does not mean they wanted the church to rule

In france the separation of church and state historically comes from the 1905 law whcih says that
1° Frances ensures religious freedom
2° Tax musn't fund religions, and the state doesn't recognizes them.

Alsace/Lorraine is an exception for this because they didn't belong to France in 1905.

This law was the perfect thing to do imho, it is very well balanced and has accurate meaning, because yes, indeed, religious voters will still take decision according to their religious beliefs, as well as public servants.
As a taxpayer, I don't have to pay for wizardry and France do no longer call itself "christian country" and label me as a "christian" against my will.

Friendly reminder that Separation of Church and State is the White Man's institution.

Dear Retard,

The Separation of Church and State was to stop the STATE from interfering with the CHURCH. Now it has been perverted to mean the state can interfere with the church at will, and the church must not speak its mind.

It sure is reddit here.

brookings.edu/research/an-analysis-of-out-of-wedlock-births-in-the-united-states/
>Since 1970, out-of-wedlock birth rates have soared. In 1965, 24 percent of black infants and 3.1 percent of white infants were born to single mothers. By 1990 the rates had risen to 64 percent for black infants, 18 percent for whites. Every year about one million more children are born into fatherless families.
>Since 1969, however, shotgun marriage has gradually disappeared (see table 1). For whites, in particular, the shotgun marriage rate began its decline at almost the same time as the reproductive technology shock. And the disappearance of shotgun marriages has contributed heavily to the rise in the out-of-wedlock birth rate for both white and black women. In fact, about 75 percent of the increase in the white out-of-wedlock first-birth rate, and about 60 percent of the black increase, between 1965 and 1990 is directly attributable to the decline in shotgun marriages. If the shotgun marriage rate had remained steady from 1965 to 1990, white out-of-wedlock births would have risen only 25 percent as much as they have. Black out-of-wedlock births would have increased only 40 percent as much.

As for the correlation between single parenthood and crime/poverty, a quick google search is also all you need, it is EXTREMELY well documented and known for decades now.
ncjrs.gov/App/publications/Abstract.aspx?id=167327
>correlation is not causation
Doesn't matter.
scienceblogs.com/gregladen/2012/11/27/correlation-and-causation-single-mothers-and-violent-crime/

No this is not true expect for Thomas Paine. that john Adams quote would also be contratced. Also common law did affect the thinking in the cukltrural sense of law. There were more pro relgion founders than these founders you wrote back. Check out Charles Carrol of carolington a catholic. In rregards to the church they meant protecting it.

or I mean to say, the church must refrain from politics, which is absurd and definitely not the Founder's intention. Not by a mile.

This is why organized religion (i.e. christianity) needs to be banned from having public influence. It serves as the foundation for a lot of right wing ideals that are commonly extreme. You cannot have a separation of church and state whilst people are under the influence of religious institutions which disallow for the individual to think freely (free from subjective moral codes, indoctrination, etc.).

Compared to communism which is even wrose since it has the same ideal that marxits lennism is a religious truth. All marxists calim they have the truth so if they do ultimaly they must force it in the public. Also the greatest pro religionist and monarchits have been revolutionaries.

Nice try shlomo. In a time where pope licks feet and churches hide illegals and "refugees" church is leftiest than soviets ever could.

We must strive for perfection.

Jesus set the example and we are to follow it as closely as possible, people in the Goverment aren't doing that right now.

One thing that's great about the internet is that everything everyone does is logged on a NSA database. That means when we take over, we will be able to hunt you cretins down and mete justice.

>Many of the citizens of the original thirteen colonies, or their pioneering forebears, fled religious persecution in Europe. As a consequence, America’s Founding Fathers believed strongly in a separation of church and state. But what did this mean for early Americans insofar as the government and Christian worship were concerned? More precisely for judging the accuracy of this meme, what did the Framers say in this regard?

>The Founding Fathers were mostly concerned with preventing any one Christian sect from dominating another. They wished to avoid the centuries of religious warfare that wracked mainland Europe, pitting Protestants against Catholics, or Baptists against Quakers. University of Delaware professor Christine Leigh Heyrman explains this history:

Objective truths are what brought me to God after realizing that the bible has all the answers already, it just doesn't explain them with scientific research papers from the modern era, which I can't really blame considering it's dated literature.
In this case, I am more religious than spiritual in my faith in the Bible, however I have found spiritual faith by initially suspending disbelief during prayer and ceremony, I can't say it compares to someone dogmatically raised in the theology

This will happen soon beacsue the silence of the tradional based americans won't stay silent forever, and when they do wake up, boy will the left winger be destroyed by right wing death squads.

Who is Mete Justice and why does he work for the NSA?

You are incorrect and do not comprehend communism. Scientific inquiry is based on data, we do not claim anything is the truth based on subjective values, we base our conclusions off of data and science. Whereas religious christian zealots base it off of an ancient book that is filled with ethos.

all i could say is you can't say that your mstyical without a theolgical basis and the same vice versa.

ITT: crusader larpers, nazi larpers and commie larpers

I personally do not mind the free movement of humans, although I'm not bounded by societal norms built off of fairy tales like some. Although christianity is usually associated with extreme right wing idealogies, such as the Kul Klux Klan, Westboro Baptist Church, Crusaders, Irish Republican Army, Church of England (unjustified colonialism), etc.

That is not what Mao Zedong say or Enver Hoxha in there works. Scifitnc inquriy is based on turth the data reflects that. If you don't calim a turth then the ideas are not viable.

And what comment do you have on this then?
And what is your justification for gay marriage when there is no benefit to providing them with a tax incentive like there is for heterosexuals (eg. Ease burden of child rearing)

Here is another example of extremism from the religious right.

Just like you subjectively believe that Marx was part of the proletariat but in reality was objectively a bourgeoisie authoritarian.

I'm not even religious. I just know what you are.

I cannot comprehend your spelling.

Why would we want a law that is filled with numerous internal contradictions?

1. The king kept the churches together.
2. The source please?
3. No they didn't there were more rleigiopus founders. people skip them.
4. they kept the plociy of the monarch and religious warfare name the cenrutires. I count two

Also
>we don't claim truth based on subjective values, we use science and data
>believe that the state will naturally dissolve

The secular law is just as flawed.

>with the seperation of church and state we achieve total peace guys
>only religious nuts innvade countries and do mass killings!

that's because you don't comprehend anything.

>4. they kept the plociy of the monarch and religious warfare name the cenrutires. I count two
I have no idea what that means. Is it some lovecraftian spell or something?

Religion isn't really right wing per se, but I get why people get things confused, considering how complicated the political compass is. There are several different spectrums that can be either left or right.

>Collectivism vs individualism
The left believes in prioritizing the group over the individual, and that anyone that has wealth should give a portion of it to the poor, regardless of how he obtained that wealth. That is the basis of communism and socialism. The right believes in the individual's right to privately own property and wealth, which goes hand in hand with capitalism

>Authoritarianism vs liberalism
The right is generally considered authoritarian and the left liberal, but I honestly don't think it makes much sense. Having a collectivist society that redistributes wealth and prioritizes the well-being of the group over the freedom of the individual requires a powerful authority. Liberalism and capitalism go hand in hand, see anarcho-capitalism for example.

>Progressive vs conservative
These are a little bit harder to fit on the spectrum but I personally feel like conservation goes hand in hand with authority, whereas progress goes hand in hand with liberty, but the simple way to describe them would be like this
Progressive: Freedom to change and openness to new ideas is very important. Without chaos, society will stagnate.
Conservative: Abiding by the tradition is important and new ideas are likely to be bad. Without order, society will degenerate.

Okay, so let's see where the abrahamic religions (Christianity, Judaism and Islam) and their ideals belong on these spectrums.
Collectivism vs individualism: They're very collectivist (in other words, left wing), help the poor, treat others like you want to be treated etc.

Authoritarianism vs liberalism: They're very authoritarian. The rules in all these religions are very strict and if you do not follow them, consequences are dire. The idea of God is basically the idea of the state. He is omnipotent and knows better than you, and you need not worry about why he does what he does. God works in mysterious ways, if god wills it etc.

Progressive vs conservative: They're very conservative. The traditions are strict and should be followed, and you should not change things, the texts are the divine word of God. Christianity is the most progressive of the three, but that's mostly because they had their modernizations along the way. If you read the old testament, it is extremely conservative. The new testament is more on the progressive side of course, but still very collectivist.

Thank you for proving you know nothing of communism. Communism can only exist in a global state, in which all countries are communist, no crime/poverty/hunger/etc. can exist, etc. Those were socialist states, which socialism is a stepping stone to communism, although it is frequently met with resistance from religious zealots. Hence why Karl Marx emphasized on religion being a barrier to socialism, and thus communism. It is also normal for death to occur under socialism, as there is fighting between the classes, usually the working class v. the upper classes, although the wealthy have shown how powerful they are in manipulating the working class as many revolutions have failed.

I meant to say that the monarch of britian kept the policy of toleration to all Christian churches until the american revolution. I can only think of two centuries of religious warfare in europe.

Do you understand that societal norms are exactly the same as organized religion. It's all made up.

So then class warfare is all made up? Or is it that it's moral to be spreading the revuoltion world wide?
Is it made up that socialism is sacredness to them?

Not an argument. Justify your claim that you are a scientific and data based ideology that believes in a plethora of theories that have literally no scientific data to back them up.
Also address this
Since you seem to believe your sexually liberal values are not subjective and in fact, factually supported by data...
What's that? You can't? Why not?
>flag
Oh right.

Are you a fucking idiot? Christians have spurred a lot of extreme-right wing ideologies and groups throughout history. Christianity is usually responsible for right wing extremism throughout multiple countries. I do not care what their fairy books say, as they are BS, but you are trying to tell me Christianity is actually left-wing? They've killed people for disagreeing with them such as the crusades, Spanish inquisition, etc. Christianity is a fascist religion fucking idiot.

>left wingers have never killed anyone for disagreeing with them

>Is this actually completely possible?
As a legal concept, yes. It probably doesn't mean what you think it means.
>Because it doesn't seem like it, people still vote for stuff influenced by religion all of the time.
As separation of church and state allows. Voters aren't the state.
>If religion and the state were completely separate what would the justification be against things like gay marriage or abortion?
>gay marriage
fuck all
>abortion
Morality does not flow inherently from religion and various moral systems account for dealing with life of different states.
>You could even argue that generalized ideological viewpoints or templates constitute religion,
You could. You couldn't argue it well, mind you.
>and those are basically the foundation of politics.
Actually the foundation of politics is the development of security as a service to be provided to a community in exchange for compensation by those who would seek to maintain it leading to communal power imbalances whereby security was recognized as more vital to the collective than any other one good or service which led to the never ending debate of how that power invested in those who provide the security should be managed and maintained. Albeit religion stuck its fat nose in not fucking long after the foundation was laid.

>>Read a book on the subject before you talk totally a historical facts. Communism did the same in killing those who disagreed with them like Buddhist and taoists

>policy of toleration
I'm not even a native speaker and i can see how badly worded it is. Go back to school. Also 2 centuries of wars of religion is 2 centuries too many. This shit almost tore Europe apart.
But i'm pretty sure you forgot shit like husite wars and shit like 4'th crusade anyway.

It's like you deliberately don't study history cause you're scared of it

You do realize I despise liberals, they are moderate and do not comprehend that by being pacifist, extremists will murder them. Also, I will not deny some leftist people have killed others but it isn't as gruesome as what extreme right wingers have murdered through systematic oppression (commonly slavery, colonialism, genocide, etc.)

the 4th crusade was excommunicated and became e a band of mercs. The treaty of Westphalia solved the issue. No i blame the protestants because they splited at a time when the Turks where attacking. Hustie wars and the alabganisan crusade was frist negotiated and failed war became the only answer left. Not catholic by the way

No one cares retard, come back with arguments and stop pretending you're not advocating a genocidal ideology of hardcore authoritarianism, or else at least fucking own it. Pussy.

Communism has not existed yet, look at Warfare between different classes is normal under socialism, as the working class has to break free from the various societal institutions that disallow them to gain control of the system.

Stop larping faggot. Deus gevalters are annoying enough by themselves.

It is like you have not bothered studying communism, a lot of you do not know what communism is.

No. It's also unnatural. It goes against our instincts and nature as a whole. Democracy and secularism are failures. I would rather live under sharia.

>communism has not existed
>we base our conclusions off data and science
>no crime/poverty can exist
Wew lad

>i blame protestants
>not catholic
Let me guess! Ortodox larper?

>Christianity is a fascist religion fucking idiot
Yes it is, and fascism is an AUTHORITARIAN concept. Read my posts, dude. Abrahamic religion is inherently AGAINST freedom, which is why I personally despise them. What does extreme right wing mean to you, exactly? Let's take an example, the KKK
>Conservative
Our rules and values are essential, they should not be broken
>Authoritarian
If you don't behave like we say you should, we will kill you
>Collectivist
Our group is all, you as an individual do not exist

Right wing extremism, if such a thing exists, would be something like saying "Freedom is everything, laws are oppression, survival of the fittest". I don't know who decided that conservativeness is a right wing concept, but quite frankly, it makes no sense at all.

Well apparently you're not a very good student of it (like every communist) or the material is shit, otherwise it would actually gain traction now and then.

But they don't get that control that is why Mussolini and the nationalist spited form the socialist. They the socialists couldn't form social institution because they wanted to destroy them and then reuse them. This is what the fascist and former left wingers saw. If you want to see toaly social ideas in action you have to organized around right wing ideals. I suggest leaving communism those study it and go into fascism.

What's with facists and not understanding their ideology? Do you people just like to have a faggot on your flag?

The intention behind separation of church and state was to prevent clergy from being politicians and politicians from being clergy.
It was NOT intended to do away with a universal, public morality

Did you ignore that socialism leads to communism, and based on what we have seen, socialism results in death because of the controlling classes? It is not difficult to read.

To clarify, the KKK are left wing extremists. There's nothing about them or their values that is non-Christian.

Bandwagon fallacy.

"Common law", "Government", "The united states." are all inferior to the laws of our creator, nature and nature's god, as defined by the christian theologian, John Locke. Natural law and the intentions of God, are not a religion, as catholic or baptist are religions. And common law, government, united states cannot be repugnant to the laws, and intentions of Nature and nature's god. Church and state may or may not be separate, but Law and God are not separate. Thou shalt not murder, thou shalt not steal, no government or vote can change the law. We only vote who will and how to up hold the law.

Yes i'm orthodox, nor i'am i attacking Catholics. I'am saying a historical truth found in the book Concise histroy of the crusades by thomas f madden