Friday, October 15, 2010
Separation of Church & State
During this week's class, we discussed the emergence of the idea of separation of church & state. When the Cluny monks developed this idea, they believed that it was the state that should stay out of church affairs. Today, people view this concept entirely different. Many people erroneously believe that the concept originated in the US Constitution, rather it is part of a document that Thomas Jefferson wrote to the Danbury Baptist Association in 1802. What are your thoughts on the concept of separation of church & state? How does it fit into your America?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I think that the separation of church and state is a good idea because each one should stay out of each others business. That way there won't be any unnecessary problems. This fits into my America in that if the one would get into the others business then there would be problems. They are both very different and should not join.
ReplyDeletePersonally, I think that the separation of church and state has it's positives and negatives. I think that they are completely different groups of people so they shouldn't get involved with each other, however, I think that both state and church should have respect and compromise in decisions. I think that if church and state could see eye to eye, public places, like schools, could compromise on how to balance religion and education. This fits into my America because I remember when the Pledge of Allegiance was pledged everyday before school and now because church and state are more strictly set separate, a simple pledge can't be spoken anymore. To me, this is a little extreme.
ReplyDeleteThe separation of church and state can be considered a good idea. When this hadn't been set, the church and state would clash together and just give more problems to the ones each had within. This doesn't change the fact that each should respect each other's decisions. If the church tries to get involved in state affairs, then it will seem like just one religion is trying to take over which would not make places a democracy. If state tried to get involved with church affairs, then people would feel like they could not practice their religion freely. The monks had a reason of why they wanted the state to stay away from the church, but in my America it seems like the church has to stay out of state. For example, in school the administration is not allowed to enforce their religion in students. Just so there is no problems, I think it is a good idea to keep the separation of church and state.
ReplyDeleteDuring the cluny reform the cluny monks came up with the idea of the separation of church and state. This meant that they believed that the government should stay of of the church and not have the power to influence them. Although they wanted the state away from their affairs they still wanted to be able to influence the government. I think that the separation of church and state is a good idea because it avoids conflict. During this time period the government had the power to choose some of the church officials. This meant that the government had more power than the church. Just imagine if the government was still able appoint the clergy, the church would definitely not approve of a lot of their decisions. In America today church and state are still separated such as in education. During biology we only studied the theory of evolution, where in contrast the church teaches that God created the world and all of its inhabitants.
ReplyDeleteI think that there are many ways you can look at this. I think that the church thought that they were getting unfair treatment, such as when the King appointed a Pope that the church didn't want. From then on, I think that churches didn't want anything to do with the government because they didn't want to be played like that again. I mean I can't really say that it effects me in a huge way that we can't include church in our school just because that's the way it has always been. If St. Ann's High was still up and running, I know that I would probably be attending it. I guess the reason that church beliefs have to stay out of school doesn't bother me because I am such a strong believer, and if someone offends my religion or I hear someone bashing on someone other person's religion, it would really bother me. That is why we have church class and stuff. I think its great to learn about other religions, but I also think that it is a better idea to keep the church stuff and school stuff separate for the most part.
ReplyDeleteSydney-- I remember in elementary and middle school we would say the pledge everyday right at the beginning of the school day, I agree and think it is a little extreme to not be able to say the pledge in school now because of the separation of church and state.
ReplyDeleteTeresita-- I agree and think that if the church and state would be able to influence each other and get into each others affairs it would just create unnecessary conflict. I think that the separation of church and state is for the better.
I guess I'm sort of in-between on the separation of church and state. I do believe that the state should not be able to regulate church affairs because obviously there would be problems. However, I think the state should be at least slightly influenced by the church's moral values so that they can make good decisions involving their people. It fits into my America to a certain point, but I think I would prefer if many government officials would take a more humane view on certain subjects, like the church teaches. However, at the same time, I believe that religion should not be a factor in school systems, simply because the many types of beliefs don't mix well very often.
ReplyDeleteZulema,
ReplyDeleteI liked reading your input on things the church and state separation. I agree also that they should be separate, just because there are so many opinions about things. I also remember talking about evolution in Biology class last year. Its sometimes difficult to learn something new if it is totally against what you believe.
Syd,
I think you made a good point; if the government and the churches do work together, maybe they could come up with a new program which lets both groups have what they want in schools and in politics. I remember always saying the pledge before class too. I wonder if anyone has ever refused saying it because it talks about God, which might not be someone elses God. Ya know?
Madi - I agree with you about how people bashing on each others religion is a good reason for keeping church and state separated. I would also get very angry if people started bashing on my religion, so I think it's better to keep them separated in that aspect.
ReplyDeleteZulema - I agree with you that it would be a bad idea to let the state interfere with the church's affairs. It wouldn't lead to making the decisions that advocate the church's beliefs.
I think that separation of state and church is a good thing, but it has kind of gone to a whole new level that is unnecessary. Within the state, their are several different religions. People could get offensive if someone doesn't believe the same thing they do and that could just cause conflicts. People in churches might not like someone just because they have a different religion which, again, would cause more conflicts. I understand why they don't let people preach about their religion in school because not everybody believes in that particular faith or its values. I think that the whole idea of separation of church and state is a good idea because it helps keep things more peaceful and from getting out of hand. I don't really think that it's bad to keep faith out of school because I know my religion and what my beliefs are. I view it like this, I keep God in my life all the time. There are others who do not and school is a good place to just keep it like that instead of trying to convert people into something and making them uncomfortable in certain situations.
ReplyDeleteThe Cluny monks were under the oppression of the Kings and wanted to operate in freedom and I respect that. In my opinion America is the place of freedom of speech and also of religion. There are people that are very adamant in wanting to share their religion with others. That is perfectly acceptable. Yet, when it comes to politics and education, I do not believe that religion should come into it. It is too messy to involve political issues, such as abortion or gay marriage with religious morals. Law is about facts not about whether you are a Catholic or an Atheist.
ReplyDeleteSydney,
ReplyDeleteI liked what you said about how its a little extreme that we can not longer say the Pledge of Allegiance. My mom said something about how we can't say it anymore because it says "...Under God..." and i think thats just kind of ridiculous.
Kelli,
I agree with you that the government should respect church's morals to make good decisions. I also agree that teaching religion in school would be hard because so many religions don't, like you said, mix well. That's why I think that there are schools like Catholic schools where Catholics can attend and just focus on their religion.
I think that there is also a good way to view the separation and a negative way to view it as well. I think it is for the best to have them separated, so that kids or students may fell comfortable and not fell uneasy about their faiths. That the teachings of their God and believes should be when their with the same followers on certain days. On the other hand, others could view it as yes, that it would be the better for both the church and the state that getting an education and a stronger education in God. I guess this situation can go on forever, with different arguments and ideas to this concept. I do feel that my things are just right and feel that it should stay the same with the church and state separated.
ReplyDeleteKatherine,
ReplyDeleteHow do you keep religion out of politics when my political views are shaped by my faith?
I personally think there is both positives and negatives about having them separated. First off they are two different groups each with their own beliefs and values. Joining them they would have to share those beliefs and values and come up with a way that suits them both, in other words they would have to compromise. I can see why they wouldn't want religion to be taught in school because of everyone having their own religion or none at all. This fits into my America because there are things like the pledge of allegiance that have been removed from my everyday school life. When I was younger it was an everyday thing we would all say it, well the ones who wanted to say it. Also, its kind of ridiculous how some teachers say it is completely against the "rules" to talk about any type of religion in the classroom and when a student asks a question they can't answer it.
ReplyDeleteIn my opinion there are two sides to having the church and state separated. A negative if the church and state were not separated is that their would be two groups of people that have different religions and putting them in the same learning environment would be extremely difficult because they would have to come up with an agreement on their religion in order to be educated. A positive about having the church and state separated is that when they get educated or when they go to church, they will be focusing on one topic and not having to multitask which would allow education to be taught at school and education about their religion to be taught at church. America is a great example of how the separation of church and state takes place. For example, at my job we do not have Christmas parties because of the fact that we cannot have religion to get in the way of doing our jobs.
ReplyDeleteTo be 100% honest, I think the concept of the separation of church and state is a great concept. I mainly think this because I am not a religious person by any means and believe both groups should be separated. If I was more religiously inclined then my opinions would be different, but for now this is my personal opinion. In theory, the concept of separation of church and state is a promising one. The government and the church are two totally different groups. One group shouldn't influence the other in what they do. However, this isn't always the case. One example in which this can greatly be seen is in what stance some politicians take on a topic such as abortion. Because of their faith and morals, politicians opt to choose one side or the other on the issue. I also think this is a great concept because, seeing as how public schools are run by the government, prayer, or other closely related religious education, should not be taught in school. This fits into my America because I feel that by having prayer in school, the school would try to create a constant image of religious faith throughout the school. This can be a conflict because not all people follow the same faith or religion, some don't have follow one at all.
ReplyDeleteI think that the concept of the church and the state being different is very good. I don't think that if the church influenced the state then all the people would get a long. For one they would all have to be the same religion, people have different views. If the state went into the church affair they would decide who to rule the church. This in a religious stand point would not work very well just because if the people do not believe in what the preacher is preaching then there will be conflicts.In America the separation of state and religion works very well in most instances. People have a freedom of religion and do not have to follow people that are not qualified to teach religion. People are allowed to have their own type of religion. There is a threshold to which the state can not deny the church. I believe that people should be able to spread there religion where ever they go. I think that if one person wants to go to school with religion enforced I suggest going to a school such in which the practice is allowed in schools. If you want to stay away from religion then you can go to public school and you will not be forced to say or agree with anything based on religion. In general keeping the state and religion is mainly good.
ReplyDeletePersonally, I am a huge supporter of the separation of church and state. School is mandatory, church is optional. I don't go to other people's churches asking for their religion to pressed upon me. There are such things as Christian schools, or other religious PRIVATE schools, and I think that if you want to bring your religion in to your classroom, go to a private school. I'm pretty sure there are a lot of people who wouldn't really appreciate it if we practiced the Islam religion in class, so how would Muslims feel if we brought Catholicism or any other Christian religion into the school? The Separation of Church and State is a fundamental concept that our country was built upon. So many people came to this country, hundreds of years ago, to escape religious prosecution, and so they could practice their own religion freely. It would oppose everything this country was built upon to enforce religion in public schools.
ReplyDeleteI think that separation of church and state is a very good idea because this way there are less problems. For example, there might be varied religions in a class room and the teacher is teaching about a specific religion, the students may take that teaching as "oh so you're trying to get us to convert," or something like that, so then the kids go home and tell their parents and all this creates a big problem.
ReplyDeleteTo every person that put something about the pledge of allegiance,
ReplyDeleteThe original pledge of allegiance didn't even mention "God," so maybe we should revert back to the original pledge? The original pledge read, "I pledge allegiance to my Flag and the Republic for which it stands, one nation, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all." It was the revised in 1923 to read "I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all." It wasn't until 1954 that Eisenhower added the words "under God." So if we're really so persistent in wanting to recite the pledge in the mornings, we shouldn't accuse today's "extreme" society as our excuse (in other words, the liberals) for not saying the pledge in the morning. Blame Eisenhower.
Katherine,
If only it were so simple to not include religion in politics... The problem is that religion shapes the way you view things and your opinions about those things. Not that I don't agree, because it would make things so much simpler. But what you may argue to be fact, might be a lie to someone else. For example, pro-lifers would claim that life begins as a fetus and abortion is murder, while pro-choicers would argue that that is not when life starts. I like that you express your opinions in your blog, though. Nice job. :)
Kelli,
Politicians' opinions are largely based on religion, as are all people's. And to suggest that they don't have morals if they don't base decisions on religion, is to suggest that someone who doesn't have a religion, doesn't have morals. Some of the government's "corrupt" decisions have more to do with their own power-hungry egos than their religion's view on that subject. Politicians, especially conservatives, impress their religion largely on the decisions that they make, which is way we have contreversial issues such as gay marriage and abortion. Nice blog. :)
I think that the separation of the state and the church was a good thing. It is a good thing because no one can control each others freedom or stop them from doing anything because of religious stuff. The concepts of the separation fits in my America because some schools are church connected schools and others not.
ReplyDeleteKelli,
ReplyDeleteI agree with you that mixing religions in a learning environment is not the best idea due to religious conflicts. Also you have a point that the government should allow the church to have good ideas and not try to tell them that it is a horrible idea.
Diana,
I agree that they have more freedom from each other and that they don't interfere with one another.
Mr. Bell,
ReplyDeleteA good politician has to be able to remain objective in his decisions and see the big picture. They shouldn’t make decisions based solely on their beliefs. It’s imperative that they think about what others may believe. The problem occurring with big issues today is that many politicians see how their religion feels about the issue, and then refuse to see anything else but that. They remain pertinacious in their decision; nonetheless not everyone has the same beliefs. Politicians have many tools in their arsenal: their education, their experience and also their religious morals. If they reveal that make their decisions using only one of their tools then they are exposing their Achilles heel. Others then know where their weakness lies. If you are a person whose religion shapes your decisions in life, then to be a politician you must put your religion on the sidelines and focus on the agenda put in front of you. Your religion might say one thing, but something different might be a better choice for the people. If you in fact are not willing to change your views, then maybe politics is not for you.
I personally like the idea on the separation of church and state. I believe that the state should not interfere with the church. Like going to school, schools are part of the government so teaching students a religion is not a good idea. This is because many students in schools have different beliefs. Of course this is not always the case. If a student wanted to, he/she could go to a school that is on his religion. But this is only possible if the government allows other religions to be taught. But usually what will happen is that one side will eventually try and take over the other, which will cause many problems.
ReplyDeleteKathrine- Kathrine that is a very true. Many politicians always try and make decisions solely on their beliefs. When this happens, it may seem like it's helping, which actually is for his/her people with the same religion, but does not help other people who have different beliefs. So yes, a good politician should be people who can make decisions without their religion interfering.
ReplyDeleteAlex- I agree, there are many students or kids that feel uneasy because they have a different religion from everyone else. So in this case the separation of church and state is good, but of course there are good things from this.
I feel that it is a good idea that church and state aren't together. Then now the President/King won't need to listen to the Pope or Bishops on how to rule their country. Instead they decided upon themselves. I also feel that for the United States it is better that church and state are apart because this country has various religions. Like Judaism and Islam. This country is not just only Christianity.
ReplyDeleteFranklin - I also like the idea of Separation of Church and State. Public schools are run by the government and therefore shouldn't interfere with the church and vise versa; that's what religious schools are for. I agree with you that students in a school may have different beliefs. Good post :).
ReplyDeleteSydney - You stated your opinions well, but there were some things that I agreed with you, as well as things with which I disagreed with you (if that makes sense). I do agree that both the church and state are different groups and shouldn't be involved with each other. However, I disagree with you that both groups should compromise on issues because then this defeats the whole idea of separation of church and state. As for the fact that we don't say the Pledge of Allegiance I'm pretty sure it has nothing to do with the fact that the oath has the words "under God" in it and that the church and the state are far more strictly set separate today as you said. If this were the case then our whole school district would not recite the Pledge (my younger brother who is in Middle School tells me they recite it every morning. Also, my younger cousin who is in Elementary School also tells me they recite it every morning). We just don't say say it every morning like we used it in Middle and Elementary schools because we don't want to.
P.S. Sorry for the long comment. Good post though. :)
The separation of church and state is a great one. People in government should not use their religious beliefs to guide them in their decision making. When politicians do this, they use only one group's way of reasoning, fully knowing the United States is compromised of many different religious groups. When the government brings in religion to their system, they take a step further into people's lives, almost invading them. Recently, church and state have been mixed by laws concerning controversial topics. Some of our government officials have prevented anything from taking form because of their own religious beliefs, further proving that the government is becoming too involved in the lives of Americans. Religion is too personal to us for the government to start involving it in their affairs.
ReplyDeleteMy thoughts on the concept of separation of church and state are supportive. When the idea was initialized, however, I see it as a completely different conflict than what is viewed as today. Back then, it was considered a struggle for power in Germany, France, and England; the strong majority of people in these countries followed the Roman Catholic Church. There were few to no other religions influencing any problems. The dispute was simply between the Kings and the clergy because they both wanted to be the prime authority. It didn't appear as though the citizens were strongly influenced by the situation. Today in America, the reason why religious beliefs must be held unrelated to State businesses, including education, is because there are so many religions and beliefs that it disagreements about faith could cause many problems. Not solely in education, but politics, and daily affairs as well.
ReplyDeleteOlivia, I agree with you and your thoughts about separation and state. I think that their are too many different kinds of religions for the government to satisfy them all so it is better if the church and state are divided.
ReplyDeleteStefani, I understand your opinions and I think you did a good job voices what you think is right about the separation of state and church. However, I clearly said in my blog that the separation of state and church was a good thing and just listed a reason how they could compromise on something and how the separation has positives and negatives. Furthermore, I understand why you think the separation is a good thing, I was just voices my opinion like you do yours.
Syd,
ReplyDeleteIn your blog, you stated that you think that the church and state should reach a "compromise" in order to balance religion and education. This would contradict the whole "separation of church and state" thing. There is no compromise, Syd. I think that's what my cuz, Stefani, meant in her reflection on your comment.
Sydney...
ReplyDeleteLike Jessica said, what I was trying to say was that if the Church and the State were to reach a compromise on certain issues then the purpose of the separation of Church and State would be defeated because both groups would be involved with each other in some way or another now. Thus no more separation. I'm sure there are people who would like it if they could reach an agreement on issues, but it all comes back to the Separation of Church and State (there would be no purpose of it anymore). In theory, it might sound like a good idea to some people but in reality it would create more conflicts and problems because there are bound to be people on both side who would be unhappy with both groups involvement with each other.
I think that the concept of separation of church and state is good, but only to a point. When I think about this topic, what comes to mind is the origin of this statement by the Cluny monks. They wanted the state to stay out of their church affairs, because it had no business intervening in the first place. Throughout history we see examples of church and state clashing. Why did the pilgrims come to America? Because they couldn't worship the way they wanted to. This example doesn't exactly reflect the problems the RCC had with the Kings of England, France, and Germany and their struggle for who had what power, but it shows that there has always been opposition between religion and government. But, as soon as one side starts gaining more power, the other has to continually find new ways to get back on top, or at least level out. If this doesn't happen and a certain side eventually gains complete control, then what's left? A place where the people have no influence in one or the other. If there was no church, then what would stop the Kings from doing whatever they wanted, because there was no higher authority for them to bow down to? If there was no government, who would make sure that the Church didn't get out of hand? It's nice to think that either one would be fine standing on it's own, but we constantly see corruption when there is no series of checks and balances. It's kind of like an office setting. There's the boss who keeps everyone in line, but when the boss starts acting up he answers to a higher power, sometimes it's known as a CEO. CEO's aren't all powerful though, they have restrictions placed upon them by outside powers. I guess what I'm trying to say is that whether we like it or not, the church and state tend to keep each other in line. In America, it's a little bit different because of all the religions that we have, and the way our government is set up. Still, I think that seeing as our Constitution was based on the religious beliefs of it's founders,that it's evident that church and state have to remain together to a point.
ReplyDeleteKelli,
ReplyDeleteI am also sort of in-between on the separation. I agree with what you have to say and your thoughts on the separation of church and state. The state being able to regulate church affairs would cause problems.
Irma,
I wouldn't say I agree with you but I also don't disagree, I am in-between. I do agree with your statement about a class with varied religions and the teacher teaching about a specific one.
Isabel--- Yes government officials shouldn't mix their religious beliefs with politics, but don't we elect those officials based on their personal views of topics? And aren't their personal views based off of what they believe? Often through their religion? Each person interprets their faith in their own way, making it a part of themselves so that it does become personal to them. I think that it's practically impossible for officials, or for anyone, to take a stand on an issue that they themselves don't believe in. How would they be able to respect themselves and still support an ideal they don't approve of?
ReplyDeleteSally--- I keep God in my life all the time as well, and I agree that religious belief and school shouldn't be combined in a public setting. Everyone has their personal beliefs, and they shouldn't be forced to have to listen to other beliefs in a school setting.
Teresita- I also think that the separation of church and state is a good idea because they both would stay out of each others business. I wouldn't say any unnecessary problems there still might be some. I don't think it would cause the much problems. I agree they are very different.
ReplyDeleteJessica- I am a supporter of the separation of the state and church also. Yes, School is mandatory and Church is optional. I am a Hindu and I would not like any other religion forced upon me. It would infuriate me! I agree if someone wants to have Religion enforced in school they should go to the school of their religious background such as a Private school. I believe that Muslims would not appreciate if Christianity or Catholicism was forced upon them. Yes our country was based on the freedom of religion. If it weren't I believe over half the people in this country would not be here. I do
Sydney-
ReplyDeleteI appreciate you expressing your opinion in this post. Yet, I cannot agree with everything you said. People are not different because they are religious. That just means that they have a different set of morals than those who don’t. People are people. I think that the whole idea of compromise is a good one yet; it is very difficult to go through with. Yes, there might be a few things that two religions might have in common but it doesn’t happen very often. The great part of freedom is that you can do whatever you want …just like everyone else. Which sadly makes it very very hard for people to compromise.
Kelli- I completely agree with you that many types of beliefs don’t mix well very often when it comes to school. Yet, I think that the same should be said about politics. The government is made up of people just like everybody else the difference is that they were elected to lead. I think that everyone can make good decisions, not just the ones that are religious.
ReplyDeleteEstefania- I agree with your post. Your opinion was well stated and you used correct grammar.Though I didn't say I also believe that about religion getting in the way when it comes to the state and laws. Great job!
ReplyDeleteSydney- I liked your opinion but I do not agree with it. If the state and the Church were to come to an agreement then what would be the point of them having a separation? Also just so you know the middle school and the elementary schools still say the pledge of allegiance. Its only the High School that doesn't say. Plus if you wanted to say you could in school, but you would probably be the only one. Good job though!
Franklin,
ReplyDeleteI like your post and agree with you. Good job.
Estefania, I also agree with your post, and i think that for some politicians it must be hard to ignore their religion, to make decisions. I like your thoughts, and opinions.
ReplyDeleteThis can take on my shapes and ideas. Personally i dont know, i seriously dont. My faith sometimes helps me think about political things in a different view. Now-a-days it would be so hard to have one with out the other. For example the whole discussion about abortion. From a political stand point, i can see why some politicians are for it. But from my religious view, i say no to abortion. Like i said, its hard to have one with out the other. I am soooo undecided.
ReplyDeleteSydney,
I se your point of view, but coming to a compromise would not be the solution. If church and state were gonna separate, theyd have to do it completely.
Kevin,
I liked your whole idea that if one was not there, how would the other be the same? It would be real hard.
Sergio- Yes you have a point there I can sometimes use religion to think politically, but for the majority religion and politics shouldn't mix because then that messes up the way politics and the church work.
ReplyDeleteOlivia- the problem was because one of them wanted more power the King and the church wanted more power than the other. Now they kinda sort of have equal share but still the government has more power than the church
Sergio
ReplyDelete- Ha yea some things are quite confusing, but it all really depends on your view of things. Like how some politicians are for it, with the state and the church working together. Then others believe it can cause havoc, it really matters on your standpoint I guess.
Franklin
- I do agree with your comment, that the state and the church should stay apart. That it would only cause problems with students that have different faiths and ideas towards God. And I also do agree on the idea that one would also try to take over the other, that it would be difficult to have them both balanced.
Madi
ReplyDelete-I agree that it is definitely necessary to keep church views and education views as separate as possible. As Mr. Bell said, teachers do not want to influence their beliefs upon students because that's not what public education is for.
Mr. Bell
I think what I'm receiving from your message is the fact that although politics does involve religion at times, it can not be a prime focus for one to succeed. I'm not exactly sure how I feel about this because I don't believe I'm educated enough to form a solid opinion, but the whole idea seems sort of "sketchy" to me. Politicians who use their religious beliefs to gain votes isn't exactly keeping the church and the government entirely away from one another. It appears as though it's even affecting it. I understand that nothing can be done about how Politicians campaign, but its definitely an instance that the church and the government are still somewhat connected.
Jessica
ReplyDelete-I think you definitely had a good point when you talked about public and private schools. If you want to really practice your religion during school, you can go to a private school. But if we were to say that, there would be a lot other problems that would come up as well.
Sergio
-I think it was good that you brought up the thing about abortion. I totally agree with you on that.