Myth Busted: 'Separation of Church and State'

Townhall.com ^ | January 31, 2016 | Matt Barber

[D Rider]

Secularism is the established religion of the United States. A clear violation of the First Amendment. But what the heck, the rest of the Constitution isn’t followed either.

[sparklite2]

tl;dr

If he’s advocating for the church to pay taxes like any other business, then sure, do it. Anyone that’s old enough to vote already can, so their input into political discourse is and has been there all along. And Lord knows black churches don’t abstain from pulpit politicizing, anyway.

[The Cuban]

Yup

[nathanbedford]

This article drags those of us of a certain age through a time warp that puts us back into the 1960s and the Warren court. At that time I was writing college seminar papers on prayer in the public schools and the other radical opinions then being written by the Warren court separating church from state and, in effect, eventually requiring the secularization of virtually every public institution.

We no longer live in the 1960s and the threat to Christians (and even to those Jews who are not secular and anti-Christian) comes not from the Supreme Court or the ACLU but from the Muslim incursion. The fastidiousness of the Warren court in erecting walls between church and state can only be seen as quaint anachronisms when juxtaposed against the onrushing wave of sharia.

What this article does not understand is that Christians must now make a choice. Either we accept the Warren court view and demand that it be applied equally against Muslims, or we look to impose a Christian sharia on Muslims-but there is no third way. We cannot have a quasi-separation of church and state which favors Christians in a world containing a determined minority of Muslims. It must be all one or all the other.

This is the great decision which God-fearing Christians must face.

[dhs12345]

Does that mean that churches can start influencing elections once they lose tax exempt status?

[mtrott]

There is no “separation of church and state” in the Constitution. The question is, what activities or policies taken by the federal, state, or local governments actually constitute “establishment of religion”. Merely praying by officials or talking about our Judeo-Christian heritage and values does not force anyone to believe or accept religion. IMO, the right to free exercise of religion, as long as no person is thereby excluded from participating fully in civic or political affairs, outweighs the possibility that non Christians become “offended”. The problem today is that we have a religion, Islam, becoming more prevalent, but which is antithetical to the tenets of Western civilization and our Judeo-Christian based mores and laws.

[sparklite2]

Of course. Just like black churches already do.

[Tucker39]

I think President Donald John Trump is just the man to blow the whistle, throw a brown flag and call BS once and for all on this Separation malarkey. It’s a cinch, nobody else, clergy or legislator has had the spine to do it all these years.

OTOH, he might merely provide the legal backing and let Dr. Jeffress, or one of the Falwells proclaim it; Let the House knock that whole business into the round file along with the rest of the PC baloney, and give us back our preeminent right. Bill of Rights Item 1.

Of course, that will be after all the jihadists, shariah pushers and sundry other non-assimilators are sent back to where they can have as much of that sort of misery as they desire.

Trump has already said, repeatedly, that restoring Bill of Rights Item 2 to its rightful exalted position will take place early-on, as well.

[Kaslin]

Very well said.

[conservatism_IS_compassion]

Does that mean that churches can start influencing elections once they lose tax exempt status?

Nothing else justifies examining a church’s politics - or absence thereof.

[Wpin]

Great article! Thank you for posting Kaslin!!!

[Axenolith]

Did you parse that article? Churches can’t “lose” tax exemption, they’ve never been liable in the first place.

[dhs12345]

It was rhetorical threat. The gloves come off if a legitimate church is threatened. For example Catholic Church is huge and we probably don’t want them actively involved in government. RE the first amendment. How about if churches continue with tax exemption?

[snooter55]

Yep . . . .

[Albion Wilde]

bump

[Axenolith]

Churches are exempt. The don’t need to file anything. Any church that files for some type of tax status is getting in bed contractually with the government and agreeing to their terms and conditions.

[dhs12345]

Yes I know. But there is always complaints from the left and even atheists and they need to be reminded why.

[daniel1212]

What this article does not understand is that Christians must now make a choice. Either we accept the Warren court view and demand that it be applied equally against Muslims, or we look to impose a Christian sharia on Muslims-but there is no third way.

Their is indeed a third way, which is not that of Christian sharia, as the gov. cannot punish which faith one simply professes, only its actions, nor and teach formal religious education, but there is that which was the Constitutional way for about 150 years, which is to recognize that the state cannot be separate from religion the ACLU way, as its moral laws flowed from religion, and reflected the beliefs of the Founders overall and the general Christian faith of those who choose them, and indirectly those who elect the early interpreters of the Constitution. The latter electorate is what has changed, often with a form of "secular sharia law' reflecting the secularization of society.

But if the Constitution was truly interpreted the way the Founders manifested they intended, many of whom said and did things that the ACLU type would object to, then there could not be Islamic sharia law, nor the secular sharia that is hostile to any official proclamation expressive of Christian (vs. Muslim) faith, but our laws would reflect the general Christian faith under which the Constitution was written and reflects.

[Georgia Girl 2]

There is a third way. We put cotton in our ears so we can’t hear the shrieks of the MSM and the progressives and we kick the Muslims out. :-)