In America, we have noticed that over the past 60 years or so, the Supreme Court has made many rulings to try to eliminate all religion from the government and also from public places. But what were these rulings based on is my question? The idea of there being a wall between Church and State is not found in the Constitution. But religion is found in the Constitution.
"unalienable rights endowed upon them by their Creator"
The constitution does say that the Government can't force people to follow a specific religion, but by having prayer in schools and saying "under God" in the pledge of allegiance, is that forcing people to follow a religion? It's not. The constitution says that all people have the freedom of expressing their religion, yet teachers are required in some places to even keep it entirely secret. By saying you are a Christian or even wearing a cross, you are not forcing anyone to follow a certain religion. I thought that freedom of speech applied to everyone.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Seperation of Church and State was based on a Supreme Court ruling. Anything the Supreme Court rules goes but doesn't have to be found in the constitution.
Seperation of Church and State was originally to keep the State out of the Church's business. Unlike in England where the Church was the government.
Then over protective, easily offended and totally retarded athiests decided "I don't want God in my schools because I'm a total jerkhead."
If anything I think that Athiests use the words "Jesus Christ" and "God" a lot more than Christians do in arguing about it and when they stub their toes.
So basically the Supreme Court can rule whatever way they want no matter what the people really want. Sounds to me like the Supreme Court has too much power in a "Democracy".
Post a Comment