Church and State
How  Do  They Relate?

The goal is  protect everyone’s religious rights.   The goal is not to exclude "God" from the government.   That is literally impossible because humans cannot separate their divine nature from the governments they create.  

 The  goal is to make sure everyone has the right to  relate to "The Source of All"  in any fashion he/she chooses,  including the right to deny that such a source even exists.   And the best way to do that appeared to be, and still appears to be:

To acknowledge the universal spiritual nature of man, and at the same time, keep the activities of church and state as distinct and separate as possible.

.

u   Can We Separate Church from State

u   Why Are These Restrictions Necessary

u   How Do We Avoid Religious Tyranny

u   The First Amendment of the United States Constitution

u   Public Prayers 

u   Displaying the Ten Commandments on Public Property

u   Links & References for the Printed Version of this Page° 

 Printed copies of this document are now available.° 

.

The answer is      "No, we  can't."

.

Why not?

Because we are, by our nature, spiritual beings.   Our spiritual nature. is a fundamental aspect of everything we do, including  forming governments.

.

Then why are so many people concerned 
about the separation of church and state?

Because they are focused on the wrong issue and are asking the wrong question.

.

What the question isn't:

u   It's  not about the separation of church and state,

u   It's  not about detaching our collective selves from God,

u   It's  not about having a government that denies its connection 
               to the Divine.

To hear those proposing that Christianity dominate our government, you'd think, the rest of us were attempting to create  an atheist-controlled government.  That is not the case.   To completely separate church from state is quite literally impossible.   Humans cannot separate their divine nature from the governments they create.

However, if we are to live free:

1)   We must prohibit any religious factions from using the powers of
       government in their own behalf and/or at the expense of others.

2)   We must prohibit any religious factions from using  government
       property to promote their specific religious beliefs.

3)   We must prohibit any religious factions from using  government laws 
        to force their religious practices onto  someone else.

When church and state combine religious tyranny rules.   One has but to look at the history of the Roman Catholic Church to clearly see how criminal activity destroys freedom when a church controls the government.  The hierarchy of that organization has given us a 2000-year-long, bloody legacy of intolerance, intimidation and harassment, intentional deception,  lies of omission,  political and sexual repression,  heterosexual and homosexual hypocrisy,  religious and racial bigotry,  egocentric chauvinism, oppression of women, political tyranny and subjugation,  violence, vandalism, arson, and murder.

One has but to look to the present political structures of the Middle Eastern countries and their political unions with the Moslem religion to know why politics and religion need to be kept apart.   The September 11, 2001 World Trade Center terrorist attack also answers that question.

And also, one has but to look at the activities of those presently opposing abortion rights to find examples of unethical, immoral and criminal behavior justified by religious beliefs.  The anti-abortion leaders engage in, support, and/or condone:

.

By answering this question:  

"How do we blend church with state justly, peacefully, and harmoniously and still honor everybody's religious freedoms, including the rights of those who believe God is just another fairytale?"

.

Some specific questions include:

u   How do we create a government that does not favor one set of beliefs over another?

u   How do we create a government that acknowledges that no one knows with provable certainty which religious beliefs are correct and which beliefs are not.

u   How do we create a government that acknowledges, respects and honors every one of the thousands of ways there are to connect with and to honor the nature of Divinity?

u   How do we create a government that does not impose any specific religious beliefs on its citizens?

u   How do we create a government that does not prohibit its citizens from holding any specific religious beliefs?

u   How do we create a government that does not prohibit citizens from engaging in their own, chosen, specific, religious practices?

u   How do we create a government that honors freedom of religion?

u   How do we create a government that honors freedom from religion?

u   How do we create a government that protects every person’s right to connect to God any way they choose, including the right not to connect at all?

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."

.

The symbolic interpretation --   How the courts over the past two-hundred years, how have the courts interpreted this amendment.

We'll answer that question based upon:  1) examining the records of the men involved. creating this document, 2)  looking at the context and the times in which the American Constitution was written, and 3)  reviewing the judicial interpretations made over the ensuing years.

The intention of its authors appears to have been to prohibit any religious faction from dominating secular law -- to prohibit any specific religion from becoming the government-sanctioned religion.   The courts' rulings are in essence saying:

1)  Religious factions are prohibited from using  government property
       to promote their specific religious beliefs.

2)   Religious factions are prohibited from using  government laws 
        to force their religious practices onto  someone else.

.

The literal interpretation:

The literal interpretation is:
    "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion."

The fundamentalist Christians are looking only at the strict literal interpretation of the First Amendment and are ignoring its intention and the judicial interpretations.   According to them, anything they choose to do is okay as long as Congress doesn't pass a law.   Under that interpretation, they could have George Bush issue an executive order declaring Christianity as the official religion of the United States and still be in compliance with the literal interpretation of the Constitution.

"...or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..."

Have you noticed how this phrase in the First Amendment is ignored by our anti-abortion friends.  Another way of saying this is that the Constitution guarantees  us protection from religion -- freedom from being indirectly forced to practice someone else's religion by having our own religious practices denied by government law.    It clearly says that every person has a right to practice his/her own religion and everyone gets to decide for themselves  what religious tenants they will practice. 

.

For more information on the constitution 
and how it related to the abortion controversy:
http://www.pro-truth.net/98-glossary.html#TheUnitedStatesConstitution.

The battle over prayers in public schools is not about prayers.   It's about publicity, and it's about promoting the hidden agenda. of the anti-choice promoters.   If they were really interested in prayers, they'd be teaching what their own Bible says on this issue:

.

We wonder how setting aside a specific time in  public schools for everyone to pray in each others' presence can be considered as private prayer?   How can these people believe the Bible, claim to support the Constitution,. and at the same time claim that their religious freedom is being denied because the government does not have specific time set aside for open-for-everyone-to-see, Christian prayers in public schools?   Do they really believe the Bible is the word of God?   We also wonder if they have ever looked up the word 'hypocrite' in the dictionary."  

If we allowed Christian prayers in public schools, does it seem appropriate that in order to have balanced views and to honor the First Amendment to the United States Constitution that  prayers of other religions should also be spoken in our public schools?   (Please see the next section below.)

We frequently hear the fundamentalist Christians challenge those of us who resist their demands for conspicuous, public displays of Christian religious symbols on public property.   The essence of their message is:

You are heathens if you don’t allow Christians to post 
their religious symbols on public property.

Let’s solve the public display controversy by providing a religious balancing  act.     Let's solve it by allowing Christians to display any sacred symbols that they like anywhere they choose  on public property.   

We'll just allow every other religion to display their symbols there also.   It seem appropriate that sacred symbols of other religions should also be placed on public display wherever the Christian symbols are displayed.

The Constitution requires giving every other religion equal time and space.   Our country includes people of every imaginable religious persuasion, and they, too, have a right to publicly speak to the world about their spiritual values.

Let's gather together a collection of symbols from every religion that is presently practiced in the United States and post all of these symbols together on public property.   Let's for example, place statues of Buddha  and Moroni there, as well as the Jewish Star of David.   And how about also displaying the Islamic message,  "There is only one God and Mohammed is his messenger,"  and the Communist, Karl Marx, atheistic maxim:  "Religion is the opiate of the masses." 

And while we are at it, how about erecting a two-and-one-half-ton,  carved-in-granite, Hindu phallic symbol?  Or better yet, let's put up an eight-foot-high, Hindu yoni. symbol.  That should inspire our Christian-preaching, atheist-acting legislators to want to know God.

But we probably shouldn't add a Nazi swastika representing what Adolph Hitler claimed to be "God-inspired, Arian supremacy."   But then, as long as we are representing all God-inspired beliefs on public property, the Nazi believers have an equal right to publicly display the symbol of their faith.

OK, have we solved the problem?    Yes . . .?    No . . .?    Hmm . . .?  
Maybe not.   Perhaps this public display thing is not such a good idea, after all.

Perhaps it's time for the fundamentalist Christians to actually practice what they so adamantly preach.   And that is to  “Follow the words in the Christian Bible.”

"And when thou prayest, thou shalt not be as the hypocrites [are]: for they love to pray standing in the synagogues  [and in churches, in schools, and on television]  and in the corners of the streets, that they may be seen of men.   Verily I say unto you, They have their reward.   But thou, when thou prayest, enter into thy closet, and when thou hast shut thy door, pray to thy Father which is in secret; and thy Father which seeth in secret shall reward thee openly."   Matt 6:6

Continuing discussion of  “The Relationship Between Church and State” 
can be found  in, An Interview with the Devil.^®  at:

Ref-24   The Universal Law of Allowing

.