Close Topic Options

Separation Between Church & State

I wondered if I shouldn't put this in the Religious Beliefs and Traditions Board, but after thinking about it I thought it would be best to post it here since the government is the rule of law and must first act to decide if the church gets involved, not the other way around. Therefore I am looking at this for a political angle and not religious. See this:

Madhulika Sikka and the Nightline Staff
ABCNEWS Washington bureau

France has the largest Muslim population in Europe, 5 million strong. And there is a feeling among some that the population has failed to assimilate into mainstream French culture and society. So the French government decided that the banning of headscarves in public schools would help that process. Of course the backlash was immediate, it was a move seen as discriminatory and anti-Islam. The ban was broadened to include religious symbols--crosses and yarmulkes--to make it an issue about secularism not Islam. But it hasn't been seen that way. Many Muslims see it as an assault on their faith and it has emboldened many who might not be inclined to display their faith publicly. You know how it goes. When you are 15 years old and your mother doesn't want you to wear that short skirt or revealing top, that is exactly what you want to wear. It is the only thing that you will wear. The best way to get young people to do something is to ban them from doing it.

The furor in France raises issues that are important for a country like the United States. In a secular society that prides itself on the separation between church and state, what is an appropriate public display of religion that doesn't interfere with the notion of secularism? It is a tough issue made more emotional by the visceral reaction that people have towards headscarves. For some it is a symbol of oppression, for others it is a symbol of women's strength and it mutes the objectification of women. In a free society, shouldn't we be free to demonstrate our faith? And with the U.S. at war with terrorism, how does this country balance the instinct to brand many of the Islamic faith as suspicious people and the need to see people of faith as individuals, allowing them to practice their faith without interfering for political or security reasons?

State and Church Separation

And the French talked such smack about OUR stances on Arabs. At least we didn't try to ban their religion. In fact, back home in Cali, the liberaltards running our skools and unis would make Islam the national religion if they could!

- Car Key Boi


https://www.americandaily.com/item/3703

At Royal Oak Intermediate School in Covina, California, students in Len Cesene's seventh grade history class fasted last week to celebrate the Muslim holy month of Ramadan. Mr. Cesene's 12 and 13-year old students are the latest to become part of a growing Islamic indoctrination sweeping through America's schools.

Mr. Cesene's letter to parents explained that, "in an attempt to promote a greater understanding and empathy towards the Muslim religion and toward other culture, I am encouraging students to participate in an extra credit assignment. Students may choose to fast for one, two or three days. During this time, students may only drink water during daylight hours."

Outraged by the assignment of religious fasting in a public school, the American Middle-East Christian Association (AMECA) exercised its First Amendment right to organize a protest outside of Royal Oak Intermediate School. In a press release, AMECA spokesman Steve Klein emphasized that no Islamic country in the world has the right of free speech.

But when it comes to religious expression in the public square, there is an evident double standard. As Klein noted, "America's Christian children had better not even utter the name Jesus Christ in public schools without persecution and prosecution by the 'separation of church and state' zealots."

Christian author and radio talk show host Bob Morey organized several hundred people to participate in the protest. "What would Muslim parents feel if their students came home with a letter from their public school teacher [saying] that next Thursday they're bringing in a priest to baptize all the Muslim children?" Morey asked in the Los Angeles Times.

In the months after September 11, Islamic education became a popular trend in schools. But today, in many classrooms, students are not merely being taught about Islam; they are required to become practicing Muslims for days and even weeks.

In many California schools, middle school students are required to take a three-week course in which students adopt a Muslim name, wear a robe, learn the fundamental tenets of Islam, and stage their own Jihad. According to ASSIST News Service, students must learn to pray "in the name of Allah, the Compassionate, the Merciful," and they must chant, "Praise to Allah, Lord of Creation." For nearly a month, young and vulnerable minds are saturated with a curriculum of Arabic phrases, Koran verses, and proverbs.

Students cannot say "one nation under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance, but they can shout prayers and praises to Allah. The name of Jesus in a public school - spoken reverently - is thought of with greater disdain by politically correct educators than is the name of Jesus taken in vain. But the name and life of Mohammed is thoroughly drilled into students' minds.
And teachers are being trained to teach - and preach - Islam.

For the past two years in Connecticut, public school teachers have attended the Teachers' Institute on Middle Eastern Studies, a weeklong conference about Islamic religious beliefs and culture sponsored in part by the U.S. Department of Education. Two members of Congress from Connecticut deplored the irresponsible use of federal funds for the conference. The Middle East Forum calls the institute "one-sided and extremist" and notes one seminar that focuses on "Israel's state-sponsored terrorism." A professor at Central Connecticut State University calls the presentation "more inflammatory than informative."

Since September 11, the National Education Association has drenched teachers with a flow of pro-Islamic propaganda. The NEA website includes recommendations that schools and teachers "invite speakers and show videos on the Arab world and Islam." In 2002, the NEA released a curriculum guide called "Tolerance in Times of Trial," encouraging teachers to deliberately disassociate Islam with terrorism.

America is not an Islamic nation, nor should it be. None of the world's Islamic countries are particularly free or prosperous, and America is.

That doesn't mean that schools should avoid the subject of Islam. It should be an important part of classes in world history. But Ramadan fasts, robes, prayers to Allah, and radical conferences for teachers are dangerously unjust.

Our public schools have assaulted the Christian faith time and again, and the present hyper-glorification of Islam only exacerbates the confusion to which young students are now subjected. We must decide, with finality, whether we will be a people reflective of our Christian heritage in ordered liberty, or whether we will deepen our wounds already inflicted by the poisonous doctrines of multiculturalism and moral relativism.

While America decides, parents must be vigilant. They must beware of the radical Islamization of their children's schools.

Separation Between Church & State History & Civil Business Politics

I cannot believe that a country that is supposed to be "free" is going to force people to choose between their religious beliefs and school. This headdress is religious, so is the yarmulke for a male conservative jew. It is not optional at least I know the yarmulke isn't optional for conservative Jews.

So, what the French government is saying is you are not free to practice your religion in France. We are a secular society and so you must be secular too. This is oppressive in my opinion. It may not impact me directly at the moment, because I don't wear any religious symbols that can be seen on the outside of my clothing, but it is still wrong. I don't care what the excuse, when you tell people they are not free to practice their religion you have crossed a line. Very dangerous line, and very sad. How is this different from communist countries in this regard?

I think there is a big difference from saying we won't have prayers offered in our public places, we won't hold religious services, etc., but to say you can't wear a religious symbol in public, that is an entirely different situation. How can any civilized person not be outraged by this?

State and Church Separation

While this topic wasn't focused on the United States, I would like to use it to discuss this concern in the US.

Here is a quote from the 1st Amendment:

To me, this makes it perfectly clear that there is no foundation to deny religion, or religious bodies, the right to participate fully in the political process. True political liberty demands that ALL viewpoints be allowed to participate.

Yet we have lots of people, and lots of organizations, that demand that if someone has a political opinion based on religious beliefs, that that opinion must NOT be aired in the public square.

I think it is very important that people of ALL religious beliefs, including agnosticism and atheism be urged to participate in public discourse concerning politics.

State and Church Separation

I think the French are crazy if they believe preventing children from practising their religous beliefs will help them assimilate better. That is a very divisive way of dealing with a social problem.

I don't believe religious bodies should directly be involved in politics. If you allow that to happen then you run the risk of one day creating a religious state. And we all know how well those things work. Look at all the countries around the world that are run by the rule of religion. However to suggest that people with strong religious beliefs can't participate in public discourse is not right. It's also not true. Didn't Bush win the last US election because of the evangelist vote? He certainly made biblical references in many speeches.

There is no doubt religion has an influence in poilitics, three of Australia's top politicians including PM John Howard are very religious. I'm certain their morals influence what they believe is good for society. There is nothing wrong with that, as you said everyone is entitled to their beliefs. It's just when religion is used as a vehicle to politically manipulate the masses or mould public policy. That, I believe, is a recipe for disaster.

Separation Between Church & State

If there is true religious pluralism in the country, with all religions being protected from the government, then there is enough protection to keep the government from being overrun by one particular religion.

However, what I am speaking of is the fact that the US government (and now there is evidence that the Australian and Canadian governments have gone further) attempts to stifle the speech of the religious bodies. I don't expect religious organizations to be directly involved in the government, as in the Cardinal in Boston becoming a direct advisor to the President. But people now throw a fit when a conservative preacher discusses a single political idea that he feels is a moral subject as well. (However, there is NEVER a problem when a "liberal" preacher does the same.)

Just this weekend, at church, one man objected to the idea that we, within a church class, might discuss political subjects. He is extremely "liberal" to the point where his family frequently claim that the only problem with communism is that the Russians tried it, otherwise it would have worked. He brought up the idea of "separation of church and state" to justify the idea that we shouldn't even discuss political subjects that are clearly moral subjects (to us) within a church.

I guess that is what really got me thinking about this subject this week.

Separation Church & State

Well that guy has obviously got his head screwed on wrongly. Why shouldn't people with religious beliefs discuss politics, they have just as much right to cast their opinion.

The Australian Government hasn't stiffled religious speech. Where did you hear that from?

Separation Church & State Politics Business Civil & History

Aren't there some Christian ministers in jail because they expressed their opinions of Islam? I read several news reports about that a while back. Isn't it illegal to criticize Islam?

How about homosexuality. Does a person risk going to jail, or receiving a hefty fine for expressing their religious beliefs about this subject, if it is critical, that is?

I know that these things are happening, for certain, in Canada. I was under the impression that they were happening in Australia as well.

Update:
Here is a link to the basic information from Australia.
https://www.heraldsun.news.com.au/common/st...5E25717,00.html

Sure looks like restrictions placed on speech based on religious content to me.

Edited: Nighthawk on 6th Jul, 2005 - 8:35pm