Is that your answer to PP's question? Because it's not responsive. |
Actually, as a historical matter this is not accurate. It had little to do with keeping religion out of politics…many states had official religions at the time and that was fine with the Framers. No one likes remembering these inconvenient little truths that serve neither political party. |
Think a little, maybe you will figure it out! |
I am okay if we make the Church of England the official religion as I tend to agree with the COE. [Not always of course.] I certainly know that the founders did not intend for Catholicism or evangelicalism to be the official religion. Original intent. History and tradition. |
Sounds like a slippery slope to me … As an Episcopalian/ Anglican I strongly support separation of church and state in order to protect the integrity of both. Further, we live in a multi cultural society with many different religions - people should be free to choose their own beliefs or lack thereof. "But it does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods, or no god" Thomas Jefferson "Strongly guarded…is the separation between religion and government in the Constitution of the United States" James Madison |
Nobody wants to make the COE the official church of the US. In fact, they didn’t even want that at the founding. The northeast state church was typically Calvinism/Puritanism (“Congregationalism”). It’s not far off from evangelicalism….more inconvenient facts from actual history. COE was southern (though Maryland was originally a Catholic settlement in the 1600s). Toss in some Dutch reform in NY. It was messy, and nothing about it lends itself to arguing that the founders intended a strong separation of church and state at the state level, or that they intended the COE to be “the one.” |
| the Episcopalian church's liberal beliefs are not widely accepted by the majority of Christians, they are a cult sect |
The original colonists of course disliked the Catholic Church and the religious wars in Europe. Many even disliked the COE because it was too Catholic. Not sufficiently reformed. |
I believe they were in the room. Not us, or the MAGA Justices. |
We are heading to a country where a Jewish child growing up in a small town may be forced to attend a Christian school because that is the only school available. There are small towns in every state where the student population does not justify more than a single school. If that school were run by a religious organization, children will have no choice. Latter will happen as I fully expect the MAGA Catholic Justices to permit religious charter schools. |
No one is asking you to accept any particular church's beliefs, whether liberal or not. But you should not seek to impose your views on others, which is what the pseudo Christians on the right do. |
+1 |
Oh please The Episcopal Church is a well-established, mainstream Christian denomination with a long history, a large membership, and a recognized hierarchy, unlike a cult which typically involves a charismatic leader, strict control over members' lives, and isolation from outside society; the Episcopal Church is part of the wider Anglican Communion, further demonstrating its legitimacy within Christianity. It has democratic governing structure and all major policy shifts are voted on. Children have been protected for decades through rigorous policies for priests and volunteers who work with Episcopalian minors It is the opposite of a sect. |
NP: This is true, and because they all had different religions, the provision was that no one religion should become a national religion. It was never that religion was 'bad" and shouldn't exist or that a person could not vote based on their personal religious views or that laws could nave no corresponding religious basis (most do, in fact); rather that the free exercise of religion should not be impinged by the federal government and that a national religion could not be established (like the British Crown being head of the official Church of England). An individual imposing religious views on others is not a part of this at all. The government cannot adopt a religion, but "Thou shalt not steal" is a religious view, it is also a law, it is also a secularly held good rule for a civilized society -- and it is imposed on all of us. If there were no such law, one could lobby to have it even if your effort was based on your religious view that stealing is wrong, and that effort would be your right, and it would be OK, whether the law were ultimately adopted or not. Sharing of religious opinions is allowed. A Bishop sharing her faith based appeal to the government is allowed. And I do think most people, religious or not, agree with her appeal to mercy. You'd have to be a pretty awful person not to - who is against mercy? |
of course, LGBTQ people are sinful people. just as budde is. just as you are. just as i am. |