Should there be a seperation of church and state Sup Forums?

Should there be a seperation of church and state Sup Forums?

Other urls found in this thread:

madmonarchist.blogspot.ca/2017/11/christianity-and-migrant-crisis.html
amazon.com/Benedicts-Rule-Rise-Ethnicity-Fall-ebook/dp/B009JW0GUE
vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p3s1c1a3.htm
biblehub.com/matthew/5-30.htm
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

Absolutely

t. Roman Catholic

Absolutely not

t. Roman Catholic

Absolutely

t. Atheist

No, It just leads to room for multiculturalism. Its the first step.
If church and state were one, you wouldnt have a govnt run by kikes. There woul be no room for mudshits to bully their way into the legal system. and the church itslef would be less likely to go soften on its values, since it currently bends to the popular political beliefs that are influenced by kikes.

No
t. Greek Orthodox

Absolutely not, but ban Islam

t. Russian Orthodox Christian

The church is often a huge proponent of multiculturalism.

"We're all Gods children--- We're all equal in the eyes of God."

>world problems 5000 years later

jesus christ you are so fucking dumb... of course it should be, religion is only act of belief and should not interrupt official institutions...

madmonarchist.blogspot.ca/2017/11/christianity-and-migrant-crisis.html

YES
> MUH FREEDOM OF CULT FALLOWING
but
> no kikes no muslims

A government always has an official religion. In the West it is atheistic neoliberal multiculturalism. You're lucky yours is Catholicism.

I doubt it. North America was founded by protestants and they specifically stated it was for white men. Men back then did not even see blacks as people.
Either way is it better to have a christian country or an athiest communist country run by kikes that gives room for muzzies to pray in the street?

sorry kitty to rush ahead of my times, excuse me, my time vehicle is awaiting for me

>North America was founded by protestants

Catholics set foot in North America way before Protestants. In fact, Protestantism didn't even exist when North America was discovered

muslims and christians are retarded so yes

Of course. What's the one day preachers love the separation of church and state? Hint: it's in April.

The separation of church and state was meant to keep the state from using the church. But really we should have the church use the state.

Church should just be deleted, fairy tale cultists belongnin mental asylum.

No, I'd love to live in a Christian State. Too bad there aren't any.

The state religion should be Baptist. All else is rank degeneracy.

Christianity HOLDS BACK racially progressive ideologies.
Is it any wonder that while the rest of Germany voted for a more progressive (separate to how we tend to observe progressivism today) and forward-thinking state for the volk, largely Catholic Bavaria was the region to vote most against?
Racial identity and in-group preference is and has never truly been a piece of religiousness. Racial identity has stood DESPITE the church.

you can move to vatican.

I said Christian.

No

t. Greek Orthodox

SeeOr read amazon.com/Benedicts-Rule-Rise-Ethnicity-Fall-ebook/dp/B009JW0GUE

Or read anything, really. Better than mindlessly parroting misconceptions

Except the advent of multiculturalism correlates with the decline of the importance of Christianity.

Absolutely not
t.Greek Catholic and Roman Orthodox

Nope. That is the foundation of liberalism

And? What's so good about liberalism?

Yes, it's very important. There are some very obvious benefits to theocracies, but they are more than cancelled out by side effects.

I don’t mind official religions but I don’t agree with compulsory religion.

You can't have a compulsory religion. It's an impossible concept

I'm out and about right now so I haven't the time. However, ironic to say that I am parroting while linking others arguments. Make your own argument.

Christianty from the very beginning served as a tool to bond the multicultural Roman provinces. Ever since, it's been one of the few glues that has unified European peoples in their differences.

Not to mention, the POINT of Christianity is Christ and the New Testament. If you argue that he did not hold a Socially and culturally inclusive outlook on the world, you'd only be lying to yourself.

No. If you don't have an interlocked church and state what is to stop degeneracy like sex, drinking, and sexual deficiency.

I don't want to waste my time explaining that a circle doesn't have corners. Do it yourself, that's why I provided links

You can try.

Absolutly not.
t. roman catholic
also remove heretic pope

It's not possible to force somebody to believe something, and it's against Christian teaching

>says he believes something completely contrary to catholic doctrine
>says he's catholic

Only because Christianity often ties itself with traditionalism. It develops the traditionalist mindset, even if its outlook is progressive and inclusive.
In the absence of a state which guides moral authority, religion takes its place.
However, in the West we do not have a state which morally and/or socially guides us. Keep in mind this correlation needs to also take into account other correlations, like immigration which is happening simultaneously.

I understand that. What I mean by compulsory is if you leave the religion you are persecuted. Like Islam. You’re either in or dead.

Because you can't.

...

Are you me?

you're very stupid

actually the church can and did do it.

That's also against Christian teaching. It's why the church never speaks harshly against atheism, since it's possible for atheists to willingly return to the church later in their lives

There shouldn't be a state. Goons extorting you and threatening violence against you for not obeying them does not help you.

nothing.

yes

t. Deist

I presume you have an example? It is against the Church's teaching after all:

> 1743 "God willed that man should be left in the hand of his own counsel (cf. Sir 15:14), so that he might of his own accord seek his creator and freely attain his full and blessed perfection by cleaving to him" (GS 17 § 1).

vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p3s1c1a3.htm

Except God sort of forces you to considering if you don't believe you go to hell.

They should be, if only to give room to jail degenerates who push Islam and other foreign religions. It would mostly be an unenforceable law as anyone who is asked can simply claim they are Christians. However there are certain degenerate and openly hostile elements to traditionalism and Christianity that could be silenced by such laws.

Ill-founded question. No such thing can exist. All liberalism did in the long run was to implement Progressivism as the state religion instead.

No

t. Roman Catholic

That being said it shouldn't be necessarily compulsory. Other believes only in private. Only state sponsored religion can have temples and so on
>imperial Br constitution of 1824

Also:
REMOVE HERETIC POPE

Hell is just absolute separation from God. You are perfectly free to choose that

Yes, the state plays in the role in ensuring the protection of the rights of it's people. It serves the people, not the church.

Isn't that where you're burning and everything, and if so can you ever go back to choosing God. I'd choose God if I believed he existed

Go back to the way it was. No FEDERAL religions, but a state may have a state religion. Many did well into the 20th century. You couldn't run for office in a state if you weren't a member of the state's official church.

It benefits them both so yes.

it harms them both.

That’s a lie. Not in the bible

Hell is just separation from God in an absolute sense, I can't say what it would be like. And once you die, your choice is set in stone. So I would suggest you reconsider.

>Should there be a seperation of church and state Sup Forums?

Where is this "seperation" referenced in the Constitution? Certainly not in the First Amendment, user.

biblehub.com/matthew/5-30.htm

The solution is to ban all Muslims, Arabs, Blacks, Latinos, Commies, Socialists, Swedes, Gays, Trannies, Feminists, Sjws, and Cucks from participating in government. I suggest the rope.

fun fact: antidisestablishmentarianism (meaning to be opposed to the separation of church and state) is the longest non scientific word in the english language.

impress your friends with facts!

>Where is this "seperation" referenced in the Constitution? Certainly not in the First Amendment, user.
True as fuck.

History proves you wrong. Clericalism fucked up European Churches and the separation made American Christians so strong. People literally hated Church here way befor commies.

No, this is one of the things that destroyed France.

>can and did do it.
Righteously.
The natives were insane bastards, same with pretty much everywhere.
Plus killing joos is never a bad thing

No.
A unified Europe/Anglo colonies separated into sub-states along ethnic lines led by a traditional Catholic theocracy would be the undisputed head of the world and would have colonized Mars by 2050 at the latest.
Prove me wrong

Yes. Definitely.

You are a true American.
Freedom OF religion, not freedom FROM religion.
Most of the Midwest was colonies of German Separatists that lived SEPARATE from the rest of society, and sometimes still do.
>Amish

America never had true seperation from church and state. It's been a theocracy until the 1950s.

no. you just wind up then with edgelord atheists and Jews bitching over petty shit like a politician having a cross on a desk. it's the dumbest argument anyway. even if you don't believe, it's only in the West where people have to be such hardcore edgelord faggots about this kinda thing. how about just let your religion and gov mesh and fucking get over it and live your life.

The original Greek is hades, which is entirely different than Disney hell, and much closer to Jewish shoel. With more context, hades refers to an entity like death, as in revelations this happens:
>And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death.
Considering most Disney Christians believe the lake of fire IS hell, this verse causes a lot of trouble.

Most people don't realize that this was originally so the government would not interfere with anything the church was doing. Funny it's turned around

Only a theocratic Washington DC. There are regional cultures and Religions.

Yes.
Separation of Church and State.
Separation of Business and State.
Separation of Church and Business.

None of those three should be allowed near or around each other.

10th Amendment and States Rights.
If a Mormon in Utah wants to have a business geared toward Mormons, that's not the concern of anyone living in another state.
We are a Republic not a Democracy.

>America never had true seperation from church and state.
What Church was official state Church in USA?

Read a book:
>On my arrival in the United States the religious aspect of the country was the first thing that struck my attention; and the longer I stayed there, the more I perceived the great political consequences resulting from this new state of things. In France I had almost always seen the spirit of religion and the spirit of freedom marching in opposite directions. But in America I found they were intimately united and that they reigned in common over the same country. My desire to discover the causes of this phenomenon increased from day to day. In order to satisfy it I questioned the members of all the different sects; I sought especially the society of the clergy, who are the depositaries of the different creeds and are especially interested in their duration. As a member of the Roman Catholic Church, I was more particularly brought into contact with several of its priests, with whom I became intimately acquainted. To each of these men I expressed my astonishment and explained my doubts. I found that they differed upon matters of detail alone, and that they all attributed the peaceful dominion of religion in their country mainly to the separation of church and state. I do not hesitate to affirm that during my stay in America I did not meet a single individual, of the clergy or the laity, who was not of the same opinion on this point.

this. read unam sanctam and educate yoselves on catholic social teaching

Render unto Cesar what is Cesar's.
Religion is not a business and if you treat it that way, you are not acting religiously.

>Render unto Cesar what is Cesar's
*And unto God's what is God's*.
What is NOT GOD'S in Christianity you dipshit?

ayy lmao

Maybe you can just read that part you quoted in its context for your answer?

>15 Then the Pharisees went and took counsel how to entangle him in his talk. 16 And they sent their disciples to him, along with the Herodi-ans, saying, “Teacher, we know that you are true, and teach the way of God truthfully, and care for no man; for you do not regard the position of men. 17 Tell us, then, what you think. Is it lawful to pay taxes to Caesar, or not?” 18 But Jesus, aware of their malice, said, “Why put me to the test, you hypocrites? 19 Show me the money for the tax.” And they brought him a coin.[b] 20 And Jesus said to them, “Whose likeness and inscription is this?” 21 They said, “Caesar’s.” Then he said to them, “Render therefore to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s.” 22 When they heard it, they marveled; and they left him and went away.

You also wouldn't have any room for disagreement with the state. When the state becomes a representative of God, all it's actions and laws become God's actions and laws, meaning any disapproval of anything the state does is heresy. Christ said "render unto Cesar what is Cesars, and unto God what is Gods" for a reason

YES!
oh wait.... no Muslims, no Jews, no degenerates...
Really Makes You Think

I'm not missing any context - I've read and re-read that verse literally hundreds of times. What is *NOT GOD'S* in Christianity? Why do you think they marveled - do you think the equivalent of Christ saying "well um ya know just pay your taxes but don't forget to leave some for your God xD" would impress ANYONE?

The state has always been the church you tard
Humans are just more and more in denial about it because they invented the word "secular" to perform mental gymnastics

Because he was literally the first person to ever think about separating political and ecclesiastical authority.

The money is not God's.
The money is a product of the physical earth and a tool of Satan, and therefore belongs to the state.

Look up the name of the guy who wanted this bill. I can't remember what it is but it was super Jewish sounding

Well my argument against theocracy that i know you didn't ask for is that political power works best when limited in competition with the other powers. The people, the oligarchs and autocrats all competeing as all 3 get corrupted with too much power.
Giving the church a large amount of political power would simply be too much power in anyone's hands.
It's also generally a bad thing as the church too would become corrupted by the people who would join the church for the sake of power, instead of Jesus, which is of course terrible.

As for state religions, it's a bit complex. First of all subscription to a religion should be voluntery, i mean God never forced us to love him so why so should we force others? It's only natural churches would have to compete for followers if it's voluntery.

That being said, no one can deny the potentially subversive nature of other religions destroying the native culture and creating a sense of disunity, as there would no longer be a unified religious culture. So states do have an incentive to enforce their religious views even if this does actually hurt the main religion, and ultimately then persuit of truth.

Either way, not having state religions is the more classically liberal view, so naturally it's the rout taken.
T. Christian

>Because he was literally the first person to ever think about separating political and ecclesiastical authority
No one is this fucking stupid.
WHO WERE THE GREEKS? Jesus fuck I can't stand you ignorant shitheads who think they know anything about someone else's religion.

So which Greek thinker was in favour of separating political and ecclesiastical authority? The Greek pagan clerics were part of the Greek government

Also keep in mind the entire fucking context of those verses is the Pharisees trying to hoist a catch 22 on Christ, either getting him to say that the Jews shouldn't pay taxes to the Romans who were occupying them, and thus have an excuse to run to the Romans and have Christ murdered, or else have Christ say that they should and condone foreign subjugation of God's people and have Him hated by the Jews He was preaching amongst.

Agnostic here. I believe there should be a separation. Most religions hold similar values to one another, like murder and stealing are bad.

The moment you take one religion's value, that doesnt line up with others, and make it a law there's controversy and it gets messy... Well messier than all governments are to behind with.

TL;DR- If you're on a country with a population that has many religions, keep em separate to make things smoother running.

Depends on what you mean. Government officials should have the right to express their religions freely as they run the country; However, at the same time they should not allow their religions to influence political decisions.