Because of my strong beliefs, I have been called the Antichrist, a witch, an atheist, and a Satanist. Fervent Christians have told me that my “kind” is solely responsible for the downfall of American morals.
Actually, none of these labels fits me. I am not a witch because the only modern religion to practice witchcraft is Wicca (American Heritage 1381), and I am not a Wiccan. I am not a Satanist because modern Satanists do not believe in Satan as an actual entity; instead, they follow a "religion of the self," as the founder of the Church of Satan, Anton LaVey, put it. (LaVey 1) Satanists also belong to an organization such as the Church of Satan or the Temple of Set, and I do not belong to any such organization. I do not
…show more content…
In practice, however, this is not the case. Many laws and governmental practices impose the morality of a group of people on the people in general. For instance, "blue laws," which are slowly disappearing from the law books of cities and counties across the United States, are passed to keep people from doing business on Sunday, in order to preserve the observance of the Sabbath. (Blue Laws 13-5) Until it is proven that young children or other members of society are harmed by what consenting adults do behind closed doors, any law prohibiting sexual acts between those consenting adults can only have a religious motivation. Similarly, tax breaks for married couples that are not given to non-married couples living together are religiously motivated, and the tax-exempt status of churches also blurs the line between Church and State. If churches are tax exempt because they provide guidance and spirituality in people's lives, then 1-900 psychic lines should also be tax exempt businesses; if churches are exempt only because they provide people with something to do on Sundays, then movie theaters should be tax exempt also.
One common justification that people, such as Pat Buchanan, who attempt to legislate Christianity use is that the founding fathers of our country were Christian, so the Declaration of Independence and
“A belief that Satan recruits witches and wizards to work for him” (couldn’t find author). This is true because many people saw people have convulsions and new it was from the devil. “Consequently, madness, eccentricity, and strange, out-of-place behavior was said to be brought on by the Devil, a belief that the puritans of New England held with a fierce conviction” (Havock). The Puritans knew that the devil was deluge of these actions and that was their belief. “Salem authorities arrested her, and she was beaten until she confessed to complying with the Devil” (Havock). This quote is talking about Tituba and how she was making plan with the devil, she was accused of being a witch because of it. People thought this was so bad because they knew Satan was a Apparition, and this is scary because if you were Apparition you were definitely a
On January 1, 1802, Thomas Jefferson wrote a letter to the Committee of the Danbury Baptist Association in Connecticut in which he stated:
History shows a pattern of change in relation to religious involvement of governmental affairs. As religion becomes less a part of American life, the court develops new laws to accommodate our new society. Look to the communities we live in presently and ask yourself if the American people are facing oppression of religious freedom, a freedom listed in our Constitution under the First Amendment. This spirals into an abyss of politics. Is same-sex marriage a personal matter or a public one? Is the Republican Party fair in opting to end abortion? Should a woman have contraceptive included in her health insurance plan despite the religious views of her employer? This is one of the areas in which
The fight for religious freedom in America is tough for people who do not participate in the religion known as Christianity. Since America is a large and culturally diverse land, the United States of America’s government has to be religiously tolerant to every belief system. Throughout America's lifespan, the subject matter “Freedom of Religion” has increasingly gained attention from the American Act. Thecitizens. In order to protect the religious liberties of American citizens the government has put into place a free exercise clause in the year of 1878, this allowed American citizens to practice religion freely in America. However, many issues have risen and promoted the creation of America's Religious Freedom Act.The largest issue surrounding religious freedom in
Although “God” is mentioned in the Constitution, this country was built upon the principle of separation of church and state. Despite this ideal, those elected into office: propose, pass, and deny laws based on their religious beliefs, completely disregarding the previously mentioned principle. The problem with that is that the country is so ethnically and culturally diverse that one religion representing an entire nation of hundreds of religions is selfish and unfair, not to mention un-American.
The myth of the United States of America, having been founded as a Christian nation has long been circulated throughout our country’s history. Christian historians were the first to put forth this narrative and in today’s world, website writers and editors have taken up the cause. On the website, WhatChristiansWanttoKnow.com, Robert Driskell peddles the myth in an article entitled, “Was the United States of America Founded As A Christian Nation? A Look at the Facts.” Driskell quotes a number of Founding Fathers out of context and uses them as evidence for a Christian nation as well as uses the first amendment to claim that the Constitution did not intend for a strict separation between Church and State.
The defendant anxiously waits for the jury to come to a conclusion whether polygamy is constitutional or not. He hears the gavel slam like the thunder to order peace on the court. He is hoping that the First Amendment will be used in his favor. Separation of church and state is the understanding of the function of the Establishment Clause. Pilgrims were able to escape England's strict religious laws by coming to the Americas. Separation of church and state has negatively affected the United States by causing conflicts during religious court cases, causing controversies over the amendment, and removing religion from school. Reynolds versus the United States Court case polygamy is discussed.
The separation of the state and church refers to the distinct distance in the relationship that exists between the national state and the organized church. Although the aspect of separation between the state and the church has worked in a number of nations, the degree of separation varies depending on the valid legal policies and laws in relationship with the prevalence views on the religious aspect of the society. In most of the nations that practice such separation, there exists distinct rules and regulation between church and state. However, between the two entities, there will always exists a way through which the two entities will interact and consult each other as individual entities (Hamburger 67). People should not push Christian
Separation of church and state is a defined as, the understanding of the intent, and function of the Establishment Clause, and Free Exercise Clause. The Combination of church and state has been a topic that, many generations have struggled with for centuries. The first amendment of the constitution states that “Congress shall make no law about our religious beliefs, or prohibiting our free exercise of religion” If we put our faith in the constitution to define the founding father’s standpoint of separation of church and state, then we have definitely misinterpreted their stance on religion. Many people believe the reference to separation of church and state is in the original constitution, but the truth is, the references, often conceptualized and misinterpreted as intertwining with our religious freedom, but that is not the truth.
There has been much debate on whether or not the United States has been doing the right thing by keeping church and state as separate entities rather than keeping them entwined as had been the standard for centuries prior to the country’s founding. The list of influences this law could affect is substantial, ranging from the workplace to school functions. Even the way people decorate their offices and houses has come into question from time to time. However, remarkably, every person has a different style of argument and a different way of looking at the available facts. I intend to compare two very different argument styles on both sides of this issue, and how two capable writers use completely different methods of research,
Supposedly our country is split between church and state, but examples in our government show otherwise.
Morals are norms of behaviour that the society acknowledges. Religion sets rules and customs for its followers. These religious rules influence the legislative system. If religion plays a role in government policies, it would also influence laws. For example, religious beliefs and morals influence abortion laws in many parts of the world. It is still looked upon as morally wrong on the basis of religious ideas to undergo an abortion procedure. Phillip Montague points that “legal and political debate and decision making should be governed by standard criteria for assessing reasons and reasoning, and when religious considerations fail to satisfy such criteria, they should not be allowed to influence matters of law and public policy” (Montague 17). He further states that these matters consist of abortion, capital punishment, and euthanasia along with numerous subjects of social justice such as welfare policies. Montague claims that in comparison with secular reasons, “religious reasons fail by a wide margin to deal adequately with the complexity of such issues” (Montague 17). For instance, a person who argues that homosexuality is morally wrong for the reason that it opposes the divine law would be referring to religious grounds to support his argument and not secular. Individuals should not be arguing for restrictive laws or policies if they do not have secular grounds to support them. They should only put across views that are
The fusion or separation of church (or in greater sense, religion) from the affairs of the state (nation) is an issue whose relative importance in any society cannot be overemphasized. This stems from the impact of having state affairs directly influenced by religious beliefs and practices in the case of the fusion of the state and religion. Better still the separation of the state from the clutches of religious beliefs has the propensity to significantly affect way of life as well as the rate of development in a society.
If you woke up tomorrow and found yourself part of a minority group that was treated like a second class citizens and denied civil rights how would you feel? Every day in the United States minority groups are denied basic rights that ever other U.S. citizen is grated. These rights are determined by the United States government that is influenced by religious beliefs, even though our country was founded with the belief of separation of church and state.
Without a God how do we know what is right from wrong. What is good or bad? The Ten Commandments tell us what is right or wrong and good or bad, but the constitution says the church has to be separate. If there is no God in our government we cannot have our Ten Commandments, how do we know what is right or wrong? The current opinion of courts is that the First Amendment bans religion in our government to protect the right to freedom of religion and freedom of expression from the government. The first amendment does not say church and state should be separate since our founders understood if church and state were completely separate, our government would fall apart.