Well those stats must not match for everyone, because I live in Arizona, it is almost at "Mormon State" just as much as Utah, and my class read Huck Fin and it's on the English Final. The Giver is read by many Middle schools, I knew a grade that all english classes read it and that was when I lived in San Diego, California. I don't think they are banned, they just need parental consent.

As for the Christian Churches whining about Homosexuality and such. It's just the people that are selfish within the churches that really whine and do something about it. I'm christian myself and I don't mind on who people love and whatever, or what they believe. If people want to hear what I have to say on the subject then yes they will probably get the same answer that Christianity is pushes for in society, but I'm not hear to go around forcing people and a lot of religious people are the same.

You just hear about Church taking over and such because...you hear it. People like me, there are just as much of Christians like me that don't say anything its just that....you don't hear about it. It's just that this country was built on religious people, so that's how it's been for a long time. It's hard to change something that was done first. But slowly but surely things are changing, there is actual places in America where gay marriage is ok! That's a big step. It is just turning into a tug-o-war. I think it's starting to go more of the way of the gay people because people aren't being as closed minded as before. So..yeah...that's what I think.

Yeah, more states are starting to legalize gay marriage.

Originally posted by ziggy

---

Yeah, more states are starting to legalize gay marriage.

---

Which should've been legal in the first place :/ I personally think this is ridiculous to not be able to marry another human being because of gender.

I am not bashing Christianity at all, but the logic of it is sometimes twisted; as I've said before, a mass murderer could confess to God and be forgiven, but a gay person is beyond forgiving because of the type of person they love? So much for a forgiving God. I would go to church, but I am now not welcome ever since I told my friends and family the *thing*.

Let's hope by 2050 all states have gay marriage, because it's a right we should've had since the dawn of time.

And, in all honesty, it's great to have faith in a God, it's great to rely on a higher power and to worship a God... But to be truthful to you, Religion is an invisible force that just drives so much hatred and prejudice that it unfortunately outweighs the faith in this country and in others.

This is EXACTLY like the the era where people thought one another were witches, but had no proof and just hated and killed someone because of lies and an invisible belief. Using faith to try to take over our own laws can turn this world to ruin, and if that's definitely not what your God wants. By following your own religion in an extreme way, you are doing what God tried so hard to prevent; Catholic extremists have made living everyday hell for some people.

These invisible rules are not laws; they're opinions. And, everyone has a different lifestyle, and it's their business, not yours. If you apply church to state, all hell will break loose again, because they're two completely different things. It's ridiculous, and now I know this is going to sound like bashing Christianity...

But here's the thing... the Dark Ages was the time when Christianity was at its strongest. Why? Because it inhaled the most money, and it produced the most ridiculous lies.

99% of priests back then said, "I can make a book for you to give to God when you die so you don't go to hell." and it would be a personalized book of lies that the unwary person would pay a ton of money for. It also fueled more wars than peace, because this 'religion' was the wool put over everyone's eyes to mindlessly do things without questioning.

Christianity even contradicts its own rules:

Criminals were used in 'holy wars' to kill countless women and children of a different religion: Muslim.

Basically, a 'priest' would go into jails and look at all the criminals sentenced to die. He would then say, "If you join my holy war, then you will be forgiven and go to heaven if you die in the war. You will also be forgiven by killing at least one Muslim in this war."


Right there is a hypocritical statement; if you kill someone, then you broke a commandment which automatically means God will send you to this 'hell' of which is so frequently threatened.

And, as quoted from Baba from 'The Kite Runner',
"Stealing is the worst sin of all; if you kill a man, you steal a child of his father. If you lie to someone, you steal their right for the truth. If you are unfaithful to your spouse, you steal away the sacred bond. So stealing is the universal sin."

Church is a faith, law is an existing set of rules run by a fellow human being of a higher authorial power. Such people govern our lives and yes, we do question our laws which is perfectly normal; in fact, it's healthy to question the rules in which we must follow. Most of the time, Christianity, although a great way to invest faith, is often followed by people with no questions asked.... Which is very unhealthy.


This is exactly why Church is and always be in a far different category than state.

I never said I was against it. I disagree with a lot of "Christianity"-based laws

I don't agree that a mass murderer can be forgiven and a gay person can not be forgiven. That is not a Biblical concept and those who buy into it are not representing Christ.

Also IBOCK, you mentioned many examples of so called Christians doing evil things. I don't even know where to begin. Christians are imperfect just like everyone else. We are in now way above others, and everyone is capable of evil.

Also, true Christianity is not about following any set of rules; it's about a relationship with Christ. Christ came and confronted the religious leaders of his day about their laws. They felt so threatened by Jesus, that they had him killed (and broke several of their own laws in doing so).

I agree that Christians have done horrible things, and that devoting one's life to following rules doesn't make sense. However, I feel you are misinformed about the heart of Christianity.

Now, if we don't forget, this is a thread about the SEPARATION of Church and State. Since the thread has already been bumped, if you all wish to continue discussion go ahead but stay on topic.

Oh....

Originally posted by Cookieman003

---

. The pledge is "Under God" because the people that founded this country and organized it were religious and people fought for these freedoms because they believed that it was God that set this land apart for people to live their lives the way they wanted.

---

That is actually not why "Under God" is in the pledge or why "In God We Trust" is on our money. Both were added in 1954 as a result of the Cold War. The Soviet Union outlawed the practice of religion and was thus seen as an athiest nation, so our government sought to promote the idea that "God is on our side" to give a psychological boost to our side. It was a direct result of the Red Scare and the McCarthy Era, if you didn't say the pledge you were a Communist, even if you were not Christian or Jewish you had to say it or be thought a Communist. Whoever told you that it was there because of the pilgrims either lied to you or was lied to themselves.

SOURCE!!!!!

just kdding

That is interesting though.... while at first glance it makes sense.... it sounds more like just another witch hunt to me. Say you believe in God or you're a witch!!!!! and we'll burn you!!!!

I guess I just don't understand why people can't just believe what they want to. That's why this is a free country right? Majority rules and if the majority became communist then the US would be a communist country. Although I guess it probably wouldn't remain free for very long but you get my point.

As for separating of church and state, I don't see how you could claim to be a free and democratic nation yet hold 1 reilgion above all else. Not that that doesn't already happen to a degree but if a single religion was actually given official power then it wouldn't be all that different from living in Iran or Saudi Arabia. Spiritual law would become civil/criminal law as well and I don't think many of us would look at that and see it as a good thing. I don't particularly want Islamic or Jewish law to dominate the laws of any country I live in.

Well, I'll put a source for those that want it. Religioustolerance.org has a pretty good bit of info on it. Also, my mother was in high school then (yes, she's that old) and she remembers the change.

But yeah, it pretty much was a witch hunt. In fact, if you've ever read the play The Crucible it is actually about the McCarthy era, but since he couldn't come out and openly say it he used the allegory of the Salem Witch Trials instead. Still got him black listed.

Honestly, I would not want any religion's laws governing my country. And I am not talking about universal mores like not killing, because that is not limited to one religion or society... I mean things that are specific to a religion. I don't want to be forced to obey some obscure law because the Bible or the Torah, or the Qu'ran/Koran, or any other religious text says so.

Random fact: Did you know that the original pledge of allegiance was written by a socialist? I'm sure McCarthy loved that.

Originally posted by Elara

---

Random fact: Did you know that the original pledge of allegiance was written by a socialist? I'm sure McCarthy loved that.

---

who and when was that?

Francis Bellamy in 1892

The original line was: "I pledge allegiance to my Flag and the Republic for which it stands, one nation, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all."

The link has the history of the changes to the pledge up to present day.

Well that sure is interesting. It shouldn't have changed though, I liked it before the McCarthy era

Me too, I thought there was nothing wrong with it at all, just like there was nothing wrong with our money before we put "in God we trust" on it. I got so pissed off the other day when I was looking at the latest $1 coins. The last batch had E Pluribus Unum and In God We Trust on the sides of the coin for space reasons. People b****ed, now the God part in on the front of the coin. E Pluribus Unum is the REAL MOTTO OF OUR NATION! If either should be on the front of the coin, it should be that saying! It's been on our seal since the beginning and on our currency since 1786. But no, f***ing McCarthy pushed Congress to make "In God we trust" the motto in 1956. Which represents our nation better? One that caters to communist-fearing Christians in the 1950s or a phrase that the Founding Father's placed on our seal to represent not only the joining of many states but many people into one nation?

Sorry for the rant, it's just something I am really passionate about.

In my opinion if you really think about it, the church and state aren't separate at all. The country was founded on christian values, the way the country sees the world is extremely christian. Most of the big ceremonies like the inauguration are extremely christian. Now there is a degree of separation, yet it is definitely not enough to say that church and state are separated, if it were there wouldn't be as much hate in America for people that have non christian opinions, America as a whole says it accepts people from all countries and it does, yet have we ever made a law that were the teachings of a religion other than christianity? There is a large facade on America and what we see is damn well not what we get.
Personally I think it is time for the church and state to be fully separated, that way we get a lot more variety of opinions and laws passed that might idk not screw America over more than it is? like Elara said E Pluribus Unum is what our motto is, yet there is a mask over that and only those who care to look for it will find it. Religion is as big a problem as racism and causes separation between people as a whole, we need to stop thinking about "Oh your Islamic?" or "Oh hes a non believer" humans are humans and no matter what their belief they are still human.

Actually the country was founded on Lockean philosophy. While a lot of "Christian" values are in place in this country those same values exist in most other religions of the world as well so you can't really call them that.

I know this seems rather blunt, but I think that religion and government should have as much to do with each other as, say, a Mac user and Windows Vista. In other words: "Keep your hands to yourselves, separate entities of society!"
I'm glad I live in what used to be a country where logic had a hold over the rule of law. One where people used to be free to practice whatever religion they wanted without enitiy, be it the government or the media or the general public stepping in to criticize. I also remember a time when politicians didn't have to stand up and loudly declare their faith to get votes.
Not anymore, though. I'm sure we all remember the 2008 United States Presidential election. The entire primary season seemed dominated by discussion of how religious the various candidates are, both on the left and right ends of the spectrum. Candidates were being attacked based on rumors, basically because of some people's fear of a religion different than their own, even though those fears were not only pointless, but unfounded. More debate was focused on then-Senator Obama's "controversial" minister than on his stance on some of the issues, something that a self-proclaimed "fan" of the electoral process kind of wanted to see.
It also really gets to me when radical elements of any religion try to intimidate others, through violence, or through social pressure. Sure, when you look at all groups, there are a few bad apples, but it seems that religion has more bad apples than good ones sometimes. Maybe not that, so much as the bad apples are made more visible by the media (which should merely report, and not have a bias on either side!).
So, when we have crazies from all directions, trying to push their will on the public, it gets rather crowded in the policy kitchen, and the patient diner that is the American people ends up getting warm gazpacho. If we let religion play too heavy a role in government, we'll end up in a rather nasty place.

wow, I'm glad someone else noticed all that. It was ridiculous how much emphasis was put on religion during the primaries and then how much it was ignored afterwards.

I agree that religion has influence over a president, senator, congress(wo)man.... but it's not the driving factor in all decisions. And even if it were there are hundreds of other people in government that can overrule the president if he oversteps his bounds in a religious context.... that's what the checks and balances are for....

it's all really silly how scared people are of a certain religion though. I laughed at the Obama picture in the turban as if that was supposed to mean he was an islamic suicide bomber or something.... so silly.

The saddest thing about that, is that turbans are mostly a Sikh thing...

actually turbans are a fairly universal religious thing. There are people in many different religions that have or do wear turbans (or something similar to turbans). Jews used to, some indians used to and I'm sure there are others that have. Just because someone has a turban on is pretty meaningless.... and I seem to recall the context of that photo not being known....

but yeah... I honestly think religion should not be talked about during the primaries. I just don't think there is any need for it. Votes should not be cast based on religion... candidates should not run on religion.... people should vote based on policy of the candidate and nothing more.

Well, turbans are typically used to contain really long hair (which Sikh males aren't allowed to cut). Anyway, that one of the things that upsets me about one argument against gay marriage.