When we hear the word politics we immediately think republicans or democrats, left or right. But what people don’t think about is religion. Hardly anybody uses those terms in the same sentence. But religion and politics are one. Even though religion does not control the government it plays a major role in creation of laws and regulations for the citizens of this “free country”. While the constitution expresses the separation of church and state, we can examine the laws to prove no such separation exist by highlighting the tax laws of church, the issue of abortion and the denial of gay rights. Though religion shouldn’t exist in politics, it’s there and it has taken citizens’ rights away. Churches have been exempted from paying taxes for many years saving millions and millions of dollars every year. The estimated value of untaxed church properties in the United States is on the order of $300 billion to $500 billion (Schweitzer). Though churches don’t pay taxes, they still use municipal services and expect police and fire departments to respond in case of an emergency, at the cost of regular tax-payers’ money. Just in New York City 627 million dollars were lost to religious institutions that are tax-exempt according to the New York Post. While churches do make charitable work, they are mainly visited for religious worship, where hospitals and shelters do work that otherwise would fall under the government therefore the tax exemption is justified. Freedom of religion is
According to other studies on church giving, congregants give an average of 2.58% of their income to their churches. That 's down from 3.11% of their income in 1968” (Garrison). When it comes to bringing our first fruits into the storehouse, we have become like Cain. We fail to provide for our widows and orphans and push the burden to our federal government and then complain when we pay federal taxes. The church of America is in a world of hurt, failing to follow God’s commands, and many are choosing to close the church doors permanently. “Of the 250,000 Protestant churches in America, 200,000 are either stagnant (with no growth) or declining; 4,000 churches close their doors every single year; there is less than half of the number of churches today than there were only 100 years ago; 3,500 people leave the church every single day; and since 1950, there are 1/3rd fewer churches in the U.S.” (Wellman). These statistics are staggering as our saints continue marching out the church door into a spiritual nap, slumber, or hard core coma.
"Prayer has been banished from schools and the ACLU rampages to remove “under God” from the Pledge of Allegiance. Moreover, “Separation of Church and State” is nowhere found in the Constitution or any other founding legislation. Our forefathers would never countenance the restrictions on religion exacted today." -- Bill Flax, Forbes, 2011
In today’s society, the separation of church and state is a fundamentally important aspect of our government. Most any citizen would agree that the government should operate based on the law and the constitution, not on the individual 's religious beliefs, yet when the issue is Abortion, that stance is flipped. The debate over abortion rages on despite the supreme court giving women the right to abortion in 1973 with the ruling of Roe v Wade. Looking at both sides objectively, the pro-choice arguments lineup with facts, while the pro-life arguments are either supported by facts yet purposefully misinterpreted, or simply not factual at all. State governments pass laws that regulate abortions and abortion centers all in the attempt to close these centers down and stop women from getting abortions at all, including situations of rape or incest. Just as the government in Brave New World controls the bodies of women by keeping them on contraceptives and controlling their bodily functions through medication, the American government seeks the same control over what women do and don’t do with their body by denying them abortions and birth control.
Our society lacks a moral compass today and we need to find a way to return to our country 's founding values. Is religion the answer? some may think so others may say keep church and state separate. The original statement was in a letter written by Thomas Jefferson to the Danbury Baptists Association. In his letter he says “American people which declared that their legislature should make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, thus building a wall of separation between Church & State” (Jefferson 1802). After this letter was written it went unnoticed or used until the mid 1800’s when a group petitioned Congress to remove Christian principles and values from government. They claimed that there needed to be a “separation of church and state”. Again it was unused officially until 1947 when in the case of Everson verses the board of education the court wanted to build the wall high and impregnable. That wall was never supposed to be as it is now referred to. We need to have the religious freedoms free from government control. How can a private petition be taken out of text and used as a guide for our federal court? Our forefathers were influenced by important values when establishing this country. Also, there were a lot of other influences in our founders thought processes; own life experiences, education, and even self gratification. Just reading The Declaration of Independence you can see where their
In today’s society, the separation of church and state is a fundamentally important aspect of our government. Most any citizen would agree that the government should operate based on the law and the constitution, not on the individual 's religious beliefs, yet when the issue is Abortion, that stance is flipped. The debate over abortion rages on despite the supreme court giving women the right to abortion in 1973 with the ruling of Roe v Wade. Looking at both sides objectively, the pro-choice arguments line up with facts, while the pro-life arguments are supported by facts yet purposefully misinterpreted, or simply not factual at all. State governments pass laws that regulate abortions and abortion centers all in the attempt to
“The power to tax involves the power to destroy.” This is what the Supreme Court determined in the landmark decision of McCulloch v. Maryland. Presently churches or religious establishments are tax exempt. Many people vividly oppose the government’s stance on the issue, but though the government does many things wrong, as many will tell you, this is not one one of them.
In a podcast on his church and Eminent Domain, “a New York church's founder, Reverend Fred Jenkins, says the town of North Hempstead in 1998 exercised eminent domain and took the sanctuary as part of plans for a shopping and housing complex. Jenkins says that was a blow to his congregation.” Why does one church even matter? Are the shopping and housing complex not going to directly benefit the public as people shop or look for residences? Jenkins thinks otherwise, explaining, “We'd been feeding people that were hungry and paying for their lights when their lights was out and buying Pampers for their kids when their babies was in need. If you put an apartment building there, nobody in that apartment building would do the same thing for the people that the church will do.” The church not only represents an institution of faith and prayer; it represents a home that people can turn to in times of struggle. Which should be more supported: the close-knit feeling of community that the church provides, or the economic profit by way of a mall and apartment building? Can or should religious liberty ever be sacrificed for economic redevelopment? As Mr. JOHN MAUCK (Attorney to Jenkins) puts it, “The ability to have a place to assemble, to come together, is integral to almost every faith. It's fine to say you can believe what you want in your head, but free exercise of religion really involves meeting
Under the separation of church and state, these organizations have the right to refuse service based on this objection; however, that separation is not being honored in such situations. Religious freedom laws would further separate religion from government intervention, allowing faith based businesses and organizations to conduct business in a manner that is suitable to their
This argument is based on information found on oyez.org. In 1963 a federal program, Higher Education Facilities, created grants for educational institutions. These institutions were sponsored by local churches. The grant specifically said the new buildings could have no religious associations for twenty years. After the twenty year period, the building could be used for any purpose the church needed it to. The grant attempted to neutralize the moral background that may influence the college students in the new building. In 1970 a law suit was filed. The sponsors believed if they were sponsoring these educational institutions, they should be able to use the building for religious reasons. In 1971 the court decided the twenty year wait for the building to be able to be used for any recreational purpose was unconstitutional. The court argued grants are considered federal aid; therefore, the federal government has no right to intervene with religious purpose. The first amendment claims the federal government cannot deny anyone of practicing religion anywhere including in a granted building. The court also said since the money was not used to fund religious activity the building was like any other building. The court believed college students would be able to decide with their own opinions on rather to attend these church services. The services were not mandatory to attend. Also, the court decided the period
One of the main viewpoints discussed in the article was that with the past court cases, they have never discovered a for-profit corporation and/or organization to be religious. And that if they let every company who refuses to abide by this law be exempt because they are a religious company, the government would fall apart. Walter Dellinger, who was a part of the Clinton administration, explained that the employees of hobby lobby shouldn’t have to share the same beliefs as the owners of the company because it’s not like the company is a religious corporation it’s only the owners and they cannot make them feel the same way as them because they are only employees. But Paul Clement, who was a part of the Bush Administration, says that, that is not
The breakdown of the separation of church and state occurs when one religion views their conception of truth as absolute, and attempts to use public policy as a means of imposing its will on the rest of the citizens. When a religion does this, and fails to appreciate and respect other world views, it fosters a political environment of intolerance and hate that is detrimental to the productivity of discourse. This intolerance of other people’s views, or bigotry, is practiced widely on both sides of every political issue in a battle between religious ideologies. A prime example of this fight between religions is on the issue of abortion. Liberal democrats, who worship the divine power of humanity, fight persistently for women to have the right
I believe that religious facilities should no longer be tax exempt. It is unjust and unfair for religious facilities to remain tax exempt . Ever since the roman ages religious facilities have been tax exempt, meaning that they don’t pay property tax or any tax at all. The 1954 federal Johnson Amendment prohibits a pastor from talking about candidates from the pulpit in light of Scripture. Thus, based on what a pastor says about an election from the pulpit, the tax code allows the government to tax a church. For over two-hundred years in america has been tax exempt, because of this the annual donations they rain in per year in the United States alone is about one-billion dollars. Religious facilities, like every other non-profit organization
Is there moral truth? Where does it come from and who decides? Man? God? Do our beliefs truly matter in the face of society? Or is religion only to be kept silent in our own homes. Separation of Church and State. This statement has not only caused controversy in the “rights” a church has, but has also lessened the impact a person of faith can have on society. Separation of Church and State has been falsely identified as being a part of the first amendment, however it is directly stated in the US Constitution that Congress shall make no law prohibiting the practice of a religion or prohibiting the practice of this religion in the eyes of society. Not once is Separation of Church and State mentioned in the First Amendment. However due to this inaccurate assumption, those involved in a religious activities in public settings have been victims towards brutality and minor religious persecution. The rampant influx of religious brutality in society, especially towards employees of various professions, has brought the first amendment under flame as society is beginning to question the true validity in the idea of “freedom of religion”.
Firstly, these religious organizations have the right to overturn the ban on Church-Based electioneering. By removing the ban on church electioneering would allow for these groups to guide resources toward far-right candidates who oppose diversity such as the same-sex marriages or the LGBT community. No relationship between church such as the House of Worship and politics should be established “Houses of worship must not become cogs in a partisan political machine”. This would allow for them to build a church-based political machine forcing other to obey their beliefs though laws. Houses of worship and religious organizations have the right to address social and political issues, however there are restrictions put in place such as the federal tax laws which ban tax-exempt entities to oppose candidates for public office. Such actions are clearly prohibited by the Internal Revenue Code. Most Christian public figures support The Alliance Defense
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.