Separation of Church and State – Answering Critics

[Fervent]

The biggest issue with "separation of church and state" is that it's impossible to not enshrine a religious perspective into the governing philosophy, since the philosophy that the government is the authority over the church and sets its dominion is just as much based on religious views as the philosophy that God is the ultimate authority even over political matters. The atheistic secularist philosophy that demands that public spaces be stripped of any and all religious demonstration is just as much of a violation of the separation of church and state as a religious organization demanding that it be given exclusive privilege in public spaces.

 

[Merrill]

There was no suspension of the Constitution. The SCOTUS ruled that a vaccine mandate is constitutional.

So the argument fails from a false premise.


(someone disagrees with the SCOTUS on constitutionality)

Yes, that happens.


Which the argument was, went beyond the mandate of the OSHAct.


As you might have realized by now, there's a balance between individual rights and public safety. That people have sometimes erred in one or the other direction is not an argument against it.

I also disagreed with SCOTUS on the Constitutionality of the Roe v Wade decision

and I was right, as it was overturned

any decision/precedent that allows for forced sterilization of autistic people should meet the same fate

you are free to disagree

you keep using this phrase "there's a balance between individual rights and public safety" but your argument says something different. You are saying that the Bill of Rights can, and should, be suspended, or rendered powerless, in the effort to enhance the powers and reach of the state

every authoritarian dresses his language up in such a way as to appear benevolent and reasonable

 

[lifepsyop]

As James Madison observed, societies lacking that value tend to be degenerate and not very good places.

Compared to this...

... I'll take America, thank you. I understand that North Korea is accepting immigrants. Don't let the door hit you.

What's really interesting is that the thing you really don't like about this image is the image itself. This could be a Christian monarch standing before an audience of loyal subjects and you'd hate the scene just as much and opt for "tranq valley" USA. It's not the dictatorship you dislike per se... instead it's the lack of a state-enforced secular individuality that really bothers you.

More evidence of this is that you have zero problem with the new dictatorship of Zelensky in Ukraine, because he is ultimately a pawn in the advancement of the liberal democratic order. You are fine with dictatorship as long as you're getting what you want. Nothing unusual about that, really. It's how the world works. Likewise you don't have a problem with neo-nazis, as long as they are fighting for a liberalized Ukraine. (e.g. Azov Battalion)

By the way, in North Korea's constitution they specifically state that they are based on a modern "revolutionary ideology". Perhaps you have more in common with them than you think.

But it is true that liberty and the pursuit of happiness is an integral part of American values. Which you choose to ignore because reality apparently makes you uncomfortable.

You just did the classic "It's not happening..." transition to "And it's a good thing it is."

After denying that LGBT was state-sponsored and widespread, you now suddenly claim that it's perfectly fine that it is because it's part of American values.

That one kinda backfired, didn't it? It began as a way of reducing freedom and ends up as a means of guaranteeing freedom.

That makes no sense... there is probably no greater earthly freedom than the freedom to commune with the people you want to. Of course, this freedom has always been limited to various degrees throughout history, but postwar Liberal America actually celebrates the loss of it, as it celebrates the atomization and flattening of any ethnic cohesion unless it can be used to advance power.

 

[The Barbarian]

What's really interesting is that the thing you really don't like about this image is the image itself.

What's really interesting is that you think you can read minds. "Dear Leader" in a staged extravaganza with tens of thousands of extras to preen his ego. This is why Trump wanted such a parade.

The 2nd-highest-ranking US general told Trump his idea for a big military parade in DC was 'what dictators do,' book says​

The second-highest-ranking US general at the time told then-President Donald Trump that his idea for a big military parade in Washington, DC, was "what dictators do," a new book says.

Trump, as has been previously reported, crafted the idea for a military parade after witnessing a lavish Bastille Day celebration in Paris in 2017. He wanted to top it with one of his own during the Fourth of July holiday.

Top US generals and officials were less thrilled about the idea, according to an excerpt from a forthcoming book by journalists Susan Glasser and Peter Baker that was published Monday by The New Yorker.

James Mattis, Trump's defense secretary at the time, said he would "rather swallow acid," and other officials said it would cost millions and damage the roads.

At one White House meeting, when Trump addressed his idea with Air Force Gen. Paul Selva, then the second-highest-ranking general as vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Selva suggested the idea was reminiscent of something often seen in dictatorships.

According to the book, when Trump asked Selva what he thought of the parade, Selva said he grew up in Portugal, which "was a dictatorship — and parades were about showing the people who had the guns."

"And in this country, we don't do that," Selva said. "It's not who we are."

Trump then asked Selva whether or not he liked the idea, to which he responded: "No." He added, "It's what dictators do."

The 2nd-highest-ranking US general told Trump his idea for a big military parade in DC was 'what dictators do,' book says

"In this country, we don't do that," the vice chair for the Joint Chiefs of Staff at the time said. "It's not who we are."

www.businessinsider.com

A shocked John Kelly told Trump 'those are the heroes' after the president said having wounded veterans in a military parade 'doesn't look good,' book reveals​

A shocked John Kelly — one of Donald Trump's former White House chiefs of staff — once had to tell Trump that wounded veterans "are the heroes" after the former president said he didn't want them featured in a military parade because he feared they'd make him look bad.
...
"Look, I don't want any wounded guys in the parade," Trump said, according to the book. "This doesn't look good for me."

A shocked John Kelly told Trump 'those are the heroes' after the president said having wounded veterans in a military parade 'doesn't look good,' book reveals

"I don't want them. It doesn't look good for me," Trump said of including wounded veterans in a military parade, according to an upcoming book.

www.businessinsider.com

"It's not who we are." Just that simple. I'm sure that countries that do this would welcome immigrants. They don't get very many of them, for some reason. Cuba is just a short flight away. Consider it. Assuming you actually live here.

 

[FireDragon76]

Establishment of a church: A certain church, e.g. the Church of England, is declared the official Church of the land. It is supported not only through the donations of its members but also by the government i.e. taxes of the people regardless of Church affiliation.
Clearly, that was NOT an issue. The decision of the Earl Warren court was flawed.

It was a problem. But the voices of religious minorities, and their rights, were ignored. The Warren court remedied that.

 

[The Barbarian]

More evidence of this is that you have zero problem with the new dictatorship of Zelensky in Ukraine,

Hmm.. you think he wasn't freely elected? (Barbarian checks)

Ukrainian comedian Volodymyr Zelensky has scored a landslide victory in the country's presidential election.
With nearly all ballots counted in the run-off vote, Mr Zelensky had taken more than 73% with incumbent Petro Poroshenko trailing far behind on 24%.
Ukraine election: Comedian Zelensky wins presidency by landslide

You are fine with dictatorship as long as you're getting what you want.

See above. Nice try, though. Maybe in your country elections don't mean much. But it is true that liberty and the pursuit of happiness is an integral part of American values. Which you choose to ignore because reality apparently makes you uncomfortable.

You just did the classic "It's not happening..." transition to "And it's a good thing it is."

Nope. You conflated freedom to do as you like (as long as you don't oppress others doing it) with "state-sponsored and widespread," While I believe homosexual acts are sinful, I recognize that the state is not to make us good. So if some people want to sin without imposing on others, it's between them and God. If you want to worship Kim Jong Un, it's your perfect right, as long as you don't try to force others into it.

That makes no sense...

It does to Americans. A basic constitutional right is the freedom to commune with the people you want to. Do they not teach American history in your country?

Of course, this freedom has always been limited to various degrees throughout history, but postwar Liberal America actually celebrates the loss of it

You were just coming unglued because in America one has the freedom to be LGBT or whatever, so long as one doesn't oppress others. Find one story and stick to it.

as it celebrates the atomization and flattening of any ethnic cohesion unless it can be used to advance power.

I guess that's what you guys are calling "ethnic cleaning" these days, um?

 

[The Barbarian]

any decision/precedent that allows for forced sterilization of autistic people should meet the same fate

Conservatives were convinced that would "purify the race." But in the 1930s, biologists like Morgan and Punnett showed that it was not only "overwhelming evil" but scientifically pointless. It wouldn't work, even with extreme government oppression.

 

[Merrill]

Conservatives were convinced that would "purify the race." But in the 1930s, biologists like Morgan and Punnett showed that it was not only "overwhelming evil" but scientifically pointless. It wouldn't work, even with extreme government oppression.

Conservatives had very little to do with the Eugenics movement and sterilization laws

It was forwarded by the Progressive Movement, and individuals like J.H. Kellogg, Henry Goddard, and Harry Laughlan. The idea that society could be modified and improved through eugenics, sterilization, etc. came out of the academic left, and was later embraced by the Nazis

 

[Yarddog]

What does our association with certain people, have to do with how we treat others out side of that association? What does Association mean to you.

My reply was based on how the person that I was writing to was interpreting the Civil Rights laws.

 

[The Barbarian]

Conservatives had very little to do with the Eugenics movement and sterilization laws

No, that's wrong.

Dr. West, meet Dr. Tinkle, Creationist eugenicist

pandasthumb.org

Bull. Hist Med
White Coats, White Hoods: The Medical Politics of the Ku Klux Klan in 1920s America

White Coats, White Hoods: The Medical Politics of the Ku Klux Klan in 1920s America - PubMed

This article explores the medical politics of the second iteration of the Ku Klux Klan in the United States. As eugenics gained a foothold in America at the turn of the twentieth century, the Klan embraced the latest in scientific racism to lend legitimacy to their cultural, political, and...

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

 

[Merrill]

No, that's wrong.

Dr. West, meet Dr. Tinkle, Creationist eugenicist

pandasthumb.org

Bull. Hist Med
White Coats, White Hoods: The Medical Politics of the Ku Klux Klan in 1920s America

White Coats, White Hoods: The Medical Politics of the Ku Klux Klan in 1920s America - PubMed

This article explores the medical politics of the second iteration of the Ku Klux Klan in the United States. As eugenics gained a foothold in America at the turn of the twentieth century, the Klan embraced the latest in scientific racism to lend legitimacy to their cultural, political, and...

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

My point was that the 1905 law allowed for the widespread abuse of people through sterilization laws

not interested in getting in a discussion about the history of Eugenics --that is off-topic

 

[ralliann]

My reply was based on how the person that I was writing to was interpreting the Civil Rights laws.

And? Freedom of association has nothing to do with how we treat those who we choose not to associate with.

 

[lifepsyop]

Hmm.. you think he wasn't freely elected? (Barbarian checks)

lol, yes... Zelensky was elected after an extremely violent insurrection that ousted the previous freely elected president of Ukraine. I'm well aware of how your version of liberal democracy works.

Ukrainian comedian Volodymyr Zelensky has scored a landslide victory in the country's presidential election.
With nearly all ballots counted in the run-off vote, Mr Zelensky had taken more than 73% with incumbent Petro Poroshenko trailing far behind on 24%.
Ukraine election: Comedian Zelensky wins presidency by landslide

Let's check in on Barbarian's example of liberal democracy in action:

Zelenskyy has consolidated Ukraine's TV outlets and dissolved rival political parties​

President Zelenskyy has consolidated all TV platforms in Ukraine into one state broadcast and restricted political rivals. Political opposition fears such civil liberty constraints could continue.

https://www.npr.org/2022/07/08/1110577439/zelenskyy-has-consolidated-ukraines-tv-outlets-and-dissolved-rival-political-par

Ukrainian president signs controversial law to boost conscription to fend off Russia’s aggression​

The mobilization law, published on Ukraine’s Parliamentary website, is expected to take effect in a month and make it easier to identify every draft-eligible man in the country. Many have dodged conscription by avoiding contact with authorities.

Ukrainian president signs controversial law to boost conscription to fend off Russia's aggression

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has signed a controversial law, days after it was passed by parliament, potentially helping Kyiv to boost conscription to replenish depleted forces to fend off Russia’s continued aggression.

apnews.com

‘People Snatchers’: Ukraine’s Recruiters Use Harsh Tactics to Fill Ranks​

Ukrainian men are reporting incidents of wrongful draft notices, unprofessional medical commissions and coercive mobilization tactics.

‘People Snatchers’: Ukraine’s Recruiters Use Harsh Tactics to Fill Ranks (Published 2023)

Ukrainian men are reporting incidents of wrongful draft notices, unprofessional medical commissions and coercive mobilization tactics.

www.nytimes.com

 

[The Barbarian]

lol, yes... Zelensky was elected after an extremely violent insurrection

Tens of thousands killed? No? Thousands? No? Hundreds?

In reality, over a hundred protestors and over a dozen police.

A large, barricaded protest camp occupied Independence Square in central Kyiv throughout the 'Maidan Uprising'. In January and February 2014, clashes between protesters and Berkut special riot police resulted in the deaths of 108 protesters and 13 police officers,[20] and the wounding of many others. The first protesters were killed in fierce clashes with police on Hrushevsky Street on 19–22 January. Following this, protesters occupied government buildings throughout the country, and the Azarov government resigned. The deadliest clashes were on 18–20 February, which saw the most severe violence in Ukraine since it regained independence.[31] Thousands of protesters advanced towards parliament, led by activists with shields and helmets, who were fired on by police snipers.[20]

Revolution of Dignity - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Don't be so gullible. Zelensky didn't lead the revolt; he just ran for office the next election. Even Putin admitted he won by a landslide. Government by the consent of the governed.

I'm well aware of how your version of liberal democracy works.

A lack of liberal democracy is why nations like North Korea and Venezuela can't even feed their own people, and are cesspools of oppression and corruption. It's why life expectancy and standard of living in Russia has declined precipitously since democracy ended there.

Let's check in on Barbarian's example of liberal democracy in action:

You think Ukraine has a liberal democracy? Better than Russia, but hardly an epitome of democracy. Notice you're outraged at Zelensky for some of the milder authoritarian things Putin has done. Clean your house before peeking in the neighbor's windows.

 

[The Barbarian]

not interested in getting in a discussion about the history of Eugenics

Probably a bad idea to bring it up, then.

 

[Yarddog]

And? Freedom of association has nothing to do with how we treat those who we choose not to associate with.

And? It does have to do with who can hire to work for you. That is a form of association.

 

[Dale]

We see that when the First Amendment was crafted, the framers clearly had in mind Christianity, and to a lesser degree, Judaism and Islam. We don't need to go into reductio ad absurdum to make the case that because human sacrifice might be a part of some religion, and killing people is immoral, we should declare the free-exercise clause invalid

in many cases, we need to consider framer's intent as best we can

In the example of states shuttering churches, there was no act of violence by members of these churches against the public. Churches were not engaged in some criminal conspiracy against the state. No one was punching you in the nose.

In the example of the Catholic Church, its parishioners and votaries firmly maintain that one must have access to the sacraments (Communion, Confession, Baptism, Last Rites, etc.) --these things cannot be done over Zoom calls, and the physical presence of worshippers is necessary for Mass, etc. By shuttering these churches and denying Catholics the ability to worship and gain access to these sacraments, the state was demonstrably, and clearly, violating the free-exercise clause of the First Amendment

and in the case of laws applying equally and generally to everyone, that wasn't even the case, as casinos and pot dispensaries were permitted to stay open while churches were shuttered

Franklin and Madison did not intend for the First Amendment to protect Satan-worshippers practicing human-sacrifice --that was my point

we can argue all day about the Deist tendencies, secular impulses, etc. of the framers --but that is going down another rabbit-hole and is off topic. The First Amendment's free-exercise clause is clear

Let me amplify what I said about Benjamin Franklin in #64.

Not only was Franklin familiar with Iroquois ways, their language, and their religion he participated in making treaties with them.

“On the English colonial side of the table (or the council fire) sat such notables as Benjamin Franklin, his son William, William Johnson, Conrad Weiser and Colden. The Iroquois’ most eloquent sachems often spoke for the Six Nations, men such as Canasstego, Hendrick, and Shickallenny.”

“Franklin was also fond of calling on the Great Spirit when he could do so in appreciative company.”

Source:
Bruce E. Johansen, Forgotten Founders, How the American Indian Helped Shape Democracy
Boston, MA: Harvard Common Press
p. 47-8 and 89.

 

[Dale]

Franklin and Madison did not intend for the First Amendment to protect Satan-worshippers practicing human-sacrifice --that was my point

we can argue all day about the Deist tendencies, secular impulses, etc. of the framers --but that is going down another rabbit-hole and is off topic. The First Amendment's free-exercise clause is clear

You complain about “secular authority.” Let me give you a different view.

A man with leprosy came
and knelt before him and said, “Lord, if you are willing, you
can make me clean.”
Jesus reached out his hand and touched the man. “I am
willing,” he said. “Be clean!” Immediately he was cured
of his leprosy.
Then Jesus said to him, “See that you don’t tell anyone. But
go, show yourself to the priest and offer the gift Moses
commanded, as a testimony to them.”
Matthew 8:2-4 NIV


In New Testament times, the Jewish priests were also what we would call the Health Department, they had various functions. Jesus didn’t say, “I don’t care what the priest thinks …” Instead, He told the ex-leper, “Show yourself to the priest.” In other words, in matters of public health, cooperate with the recognized authority.

Quarantining lepers in leper colonies meant that they were not allowed to attend a synagogue or sacrifice at the Temple. Jesus did not object to this. It was a necessary public health measure.

 

[Dale]

We see that when the First Amendment was crafted, the framers clearly had in mind Christianity, and to a lesser degree, Judaism and Islam. We don't need to go into reductio ad absurdum to make the case that because human sacrifice might be a part of some religion, and killing people is immoral, we should declare the free-exercise clause invalid

in many cases, we need to consider framer's intent as best we can

The Founding Fathers and other patriots of the American Revolution were certainly aware of religions and attitudes toward religion other than Christianity and Judaism. For one thing, a substantial number of people in Massachusetts at that time were Unitarians.

Thomas Paine’s pamphlet Common Sense helped pave the way for the American Revolution. Thomas Paine is sometimes called a Deist but many have thought that he was more like an atheist.

Paine opposed all forms of organized religion and had no respect for the Bible. He did not believe in an afterlife and had no use for prayer. In this light, the “God” of Thomas Paine seems to be a meaningless abstraction. A couple of quotes:

“That God cannot lie, is no advantage to your argument, because it is no proof that priests can not, or that the Bible does not.[The Life and Works of Thomas Paine, Vol. 9 p. 134]”

“Take away from Genesis the belief that Moses was the author, on which only the strange believe that it is the word of God has stood, and there remains nothing of Genesis but an anonymous book of stories, fables, and traditionary or invented absurdities, or of downright lies. [ The Age of Reason] ”


The Founding Fathers probably read Thomas Paine, so they must have known that some of the people involved in the American Revolution were hostile to Christianity.

I am not advocating this point of view. I am glad that I was baptized in a Baptist church when I was nine and have continued in the faith.

Source
Insightful Thomas Paine Quotes on Religion

 

[Merrill]

You complain about “secular authority.” Let me give you a different view.

A man with leprosy came
and knelt before him and said, “Lord, if you are willing, you
can make me clean.”
Jesus reached out his hand and touched the man. “I am
willing,” he said. “Be clean!” Immediately he was cured
of his leprosy.
Then Jesus said to him, “See that you don’t tell anyone. But
go, show yourself to the priest and offer the gift Moses
commanded, as a testimony to them.”
Matthew 8:2-4 NIV


In New Testament times, the Jewish priests were also what we would call the Health Department, they had various functions. Jesus didn’t say, “I don’t care what the priest thinks …” Instead, He told the ex-leper, “Show yourself to the priest.” In other words, in matters of public health, cooperate with the recognized authority.

Quarantining lepers in leper colonies meant that they were not allowed to attend a synagogue or sacrifice at the Temple. Jesus did not object to this. It was a necessary public health measure.

Jesus chose to touch this man --the Messiah didn't hide in the basement of a cottage out of fear of contracting a disease

Both He and His Disciples ministered to the sick (Luke 17:12, etc.), blessed them, etc. They didn't hide from the world because some health official told them to "socially distance"

Jesus never once put himself below the authority of Rabbis, and we are made clean through Him, not by following some arbitrary edict handed down by unbelievers. Jesus established the Law of Christ (Galatians 6:2, 1 Corinthians 9:21, Matthew 22:37-40, Mark 12:28-34, etc.) and established "The new and everlasting covenant". Christ demanded we love our neighbors as ourselves, and did not banish the sick from the presence of believers

And in the history of the Christian faith are countless examples where churches, priests, popes, etc. resisted the capricious and arbitrary commands and edicts from tyrants and atheists. The Soviet period is a good example of this.