Separation of Church and State

[judechild]

The skirmish that's been going on here could very naturally be a part of the debate I've proposed; it might be interesting.

 

[MarkRohfrietsch]

The skirmish that's been going on here could very naturally be a part of the debate I've proposed; it might be interesting.

Ringo, judechild; do you want me to set something up? (I've been considering moving this to GT, but would prefer to have a Formal Debate.)

 

[Ringo84]

<Staff Edit>

Ringo, judechild; do you want me to set something up? (I've been considering moving this to GT, but would prefer to have a Formal Debate.)

Sure; that'd be great! Let me know if you do, and I'll participate.
Ringo

 

[judechild]

Okay, the first thing we need is a prompt. Did you like either of the two I proposed in post 4?

 

[MarkRohfrietsch]

Quoted and bolded for reference.

Okay, the first thing we need is a prompt. Did you like either of the two I proposed in post 4?

Hm, it's too broad for my taste right now; would you, then, consider this as the debating-question:

"Christianity is a foundational element of the establishment of the United States."

Or, would you maybe prefer:

"'Separation of Church and State,' understood as 'Christianity is not a part of the foundation of the United States, and hence has no unique public role' is a principle of American law."

I think that it is inevitable that a debate on the role of religion in the public square will come out of any discussion on the separation of Church and State - since the Separation of Church and State is a question that deals with that theme.

 

[MarkRohfrietsch]

Mod Hat...


This is a debate proposal thread, not a debate thread. I have therefore done a cleanup.

We have a proposal in process; Ringo and Judechild; from this point on, it is reserved for them to discuss the stipulations and parameters of their discussion. Once they have agreed on these, I will set up a formal debate thread and a peanut gallery thread.

Mark
Staff Supervisor

 

[MarkRohfrietsch]

<Staff Edit>


Sure; that'd be great! Let me know if you do, and I'll participate.
Ringo

Okay, the first thing we need is a prompt. Did you like either of the two I proposed in post 4?

<snip>
"Christianity is a foundational element of the establishment of the United States."

Or, would you maybe prefer:

"'Separation of Church and State,' understood as 'Christianity is not a part of the foundation of the United States, and hence has no unique public role' is a principle of American law."

I think that it is inevitable that a debate on the role of religion in the public square will come out of any discussion on the separation of Church and State - since the Separation of Church and State is a question that deals with that theme.

Bumping this.

 

[MarkRohfrietsch]

One more bump...

 

[mark kennedy]

I'd love to have a formal debate with someone on First Amendment religious freedom issues - specifically, the separation of church and state. Let's see if those who say there is no separation can support that assertion with historical fact and legal precedent. Let's also see whether my suspicion that I could take on anyone about church and state separation and win is correct.

Bonus points if someone comes up with a unique arguments beyond the same tired old cliches: "it's not in the Constitution", "it doesn't stop states from establishing religion", etc etc.
Ringo

I'm not entirely sure what your proposing here but I would love to debate the first amendment and the separation of church and state. Just to let you know, the expression 'wall of separation' was a theological idea, it was the garden wall of the ancient Hebrews.

Any hoot, if you have already started the debate disregard but if your still looking for a formal debate, drop me a PM and we can work out the details.

 

[theophilus777]

Who has supported that interpretation? Several Christian religious figures, like Pat Robertson and Mike Huckabee, have run for the presidency of the US. Has anyone attempted to use the courts and the separation of church and state to prevent this? I don't think so. That would be amiss, I agree, but I think you're complaining about an imaginary bugaboo.

No, what he said is exactly the sort of arguments we have to suffer constantly. Which is why Judechild proposed the debate topics she did.

ETA: did not see this is no longer an open thread. Sorry

 

[theophilus777]

If you are able to worship the God of your choosing, freely, why would religion need to be in the public arena, where it impacts people who may not share a certain faith?

Need? Impact? Can you demonstrate either of these things?

What is demonstrable is the existence of religious things in the public sphere, from the founding era, unapologetically. So current restrictions on this is modern invention.

Why the need for that? And what is the impact?

ETA: did not see this is no longer an open thread. Sorry

 

[MarkRohfrietsch]

Actually, this thread is open. If you are interested in a debate on this subject; pleas make your proposal.

If anyone wishes to debate another topic; please feel free to open another thread here!

 

[Ringo84]

My apologies for not responding right away. I get burned out with online discussion and just have to stay away for a while.

My proposal is -
Resolved: Separation of Church and State exists, it was the intent of the founding fathers responsible for the Bill of Rights, and it is in the Constitution.

Would anyone care to take the opposite side and debate the issue?
Ringo

 

[KrisCritical]

How can I create a new thread?

 

[MarkRohfrietsch]

Here is some interest: #25

He is just looking for more clarification.

 

[MarkRohfrietsch]

How can I create a new thread?

Just above and to the left of the thread titles on the main page of each forum you will see a button that says "New Thread", hit it and post away!

 

[mark kennedy]

My apologies for not responding right away. I get burned out with online discussion and just have to stay away for a while.

My proposal is -
Resolved: Separation of Church and State exists, it was the intent of the founding fathers responsible for the Bill of Rights, and it is in the Constitution.

Would anyone care to take the opposite side and debate the issue?
Ringo

I would be interested providing we are discussion something a bit more specific.

 

[MarkRohfrietsch]

One more bump. I'll leave this open for a while, and if there are no takers, then we'll close this one up.

 

[JesusMartyr]

The bottom line fact is, Christians have no need for concern of political issues, regardless of what country they live in. We aren't of this world. USA, UK, China... it doesn't matter. We are of a different country now, a heavenly country, one that is eons beyond this world's petty political arguments and declarations. They mean nothing. We are free of those things that impress the carnal minds.
Instead, we see the Heavens opened and the Son of Man sitting on the Throne of Glory and as for me, I just can't take my eyes off of Him. Nor will any pseudo-Christian political statements contain any value for me, such as sponsored on this thread.
Peace

 

[Ringo84]

I apologize for the silence; I've been quite busy this summer.

Not sure how much time I'll have for a formal debate, but I'll be glad if someone begins one on church and state issues.

If you're looking for a more specific issue, perhaps we can limit the topic to the proper role of religion in public school or in government. Would that help?
Ringo