?

Log in

Writer's Block

Church & State

Should church and state always be separate? Why or why not? What should the nature of their relationship be?

Answers (253)

  • I'll keep my poisons separate, please. If you want to see how well church and state work together, go to Afghanistan and look at the Taliban's handiwork. Or, check out our allies the Saudis. Or the violent and bloody history of the LDS church. Or the Westboro Baptists. The American Right-Wing Christers are closing in on these groups' actions.
  • Come on over to , the new archive community for old Writer's Block questions!
  • YES! Asking why not is like asking why a human being should never drink a gallon of mercury mixed with cyanide! I think science and state should be separate, too. I mean, science should not be allowed to make policy any more than religion should be. Sure, fund science, but don't let science dictate policy. Science is a belief system and, as such, institutionalized science bears much in common with institutionalized religion. The main difference being that funding science won't get to their heads as much as funding gets to the heads of religions. But science has proven itself over the decades to be as capable of dogmatism and injustice as religion; scientists like Timothy Leary have been arrested, driven from the country, and worse all because they are heretical. Look up the story of Wilhelm Reich sometime, too. tl;dr Look up Wilhelm Reich's and Timothy Leary's stories for why science and state should be kept at a distance. Come on over to , the new archive community for old Writer's Block questions!
  • Church and state.
    Yeah, bad idea to have them together, really.
    Seeing as the state is corrupt and you don't really want the church to become corrupt, even though it's a bit late for that if you ask me.

    My biggest problem with the church and state being intertwined is probably the ideas the church seem to have on homosexuality.
    Namely in California with Prop 8 right now.  The church says that same-sex marriage will do all these bad things, but they've had it already for a little while now and the world hasn't ended yet.
    You've just had a buncha queers gettin' hitched and being happy.
    I don't see what the big deal is.

    As a pretty smart dude once said "The question is not on who you love, it's on whether or not you love."

    Not forgetting, of course, that some people aren't even christians and I don't believe their lives should have to be controlled by a church run state.
    It's a bit nuts, really.

    On that note, I get to see my fiancee this week!
    It's sucks when she isn't here.
  • Always, always separate.
    Why?
    Because everyone's beliefs are different and always will be. I refuse to bow to your gawd, and will never force you to bow to mine. Morality is subjective; rarely objective.

    Besides, I am an anti-theist and think all your primitive religions are holding back humanity.
    YMMV;)

  • I'm bored, my alarm is gonna go off in about four hours, and I am not getting sleep tonight. Instead, I'm gonna eat these ramen noodles and write about...Church and State relationships. As an American citizen, I think that church and state should always be separated. Otherwise, how could we be America? As for the whole "under God" and "In God We Trust" statements, I think that they should just be accepted. They were the original thing, they should stay, plain and simple. Our founding fathers decided what to put there, and at the time, Christianity was a dominant part of being an American. Most Americans were Christian and therefore went to Church and accepted these statements. Even if Christianity is not as widely accepted now as it was then, it really isn't right to have change anything. Don't like it? Don't say the pledge. That's your right. And the money? Don't spend any, crybaby. If you don't believe in God, what's it to you, besides a bunch of words? Exactly. Get over it. Then again, that argument can go both ways. If it's separated, then why even have it in the first place? But that just goes back to the fact that when it was made, that's what was accepted. I don't feel like talking about this anymore. :D
  • Yes, because religious tolerence means a more stable society.  A person's faith is a source of personal comfort.
  • maybe it depends on what your talking about.....If they are going to be together then they should both agree on a central person to do the agreeing with....? Maybe?
  • Answer: NO.

    It'll only cause confusion and large amounts of money to be lost because so many people are suing. We already have a fucked up economy right now owing trillions to China. And, it's not right to people of other religious practices.

  • No, not with all things. Churchs at least have some good ideas some of the time. Like "Thou shalt not kill" and whatnot. Good stuff.
Previous
← Ctrl ← Alt
Next
Ctrl → Alt →