Separation of Church and State

[Orbit]

You can see where your state (for those of you in the US) rates on separation of church and state. The scorecards show which laws are or aren't in place with respect to religion, religious discriminatory "exemptions", freedom from religion, and others.

State Scorecards — State of the Secular States

 

[Estro Felino]

Very interesting article

It is clear that in the South religion plays a very important role, both culturally and socially.
There are so many Protestant churches, Baptist mainly that have shaped the society in those states.

Btw I believe my country would be blue, according to that scheme.
The separation of Church and State is written in the Constitution, and it is the State that says to the religions what they can and can't do.

 

[Kenny]

You can see where your state (for those of you in the US) rates on separation of church and state. The scorecards show which laws are or aren't in place with respect to religion, religious discriminatory "exemptions", freedom from religion, and others.

State Scorecards — State of the Secular States

Highly biased agains true freedom of religion IMO

For an example:

"For example, a state law may create a religious exemption to civil rights laws specifically for wedding service providers so that they are not required to serve same-sex couples."

What in the world is a "Christian Nationalist??

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

What in the world is a "Christian Nationalist??

Christian nationalism - Wikipedia

Andrew Whitehead and Samuel Perry summarize Christian nationalism with the following statements:[42]

1. The federal government should declare the United States a Christian nation.
2. The federal government should advocate Christian values.
3. The federal government should not enforce the strict separation of church and state.
4. The federal government should allow religious symbols in public spaces.
5. The success of the United States is part of God's plan.
6. The federal government should allow prayer in public schools.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Highly biased agains true freedom of religion IMO

For an example:

"For example, a state law may create a religious exemption to civil rights laws specifically for wedding service providers so that they are not required to serve same-sex couples."

Yes - when a business offering service to the public attempts to stop or interfere with its customers' religious rituals, this is an affront to freedom of religion.

 

[Kenny]

Christian nationalism - Wikipedia

"Christian nationalists, in seeking to preserve the status of a Christian state,"

If it is seeking to preserve the status, doesn't that mean that it was and is?

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

The separation of Church and State is written in the Constitution, and it is the State that says to the religions what they can and can't do.

Agreed, which is why I consider the phrase a misnomer. What you described is keeping the church out of the state, but not the state out of the church.

That's not separation. Separation would be where the state had no authority over the church. That is no more separation of church and state than a parent giving a child some freedom to operate while maintaining full authority and the right to rescind those freedoms at any time is separation of parent and child.

 

[Kenny]

Yes - when a business offering service to the public attempts to stop or interfere with its customers' religious rituals, this is an affront to freedom of religion.

And visa versa?

 

[Estro Felino]

Agreed, which is why I consider the phrase a misnomer. What you described is keeping the church out of the state, but not the state out of the church.

That's not separation. Separation would be where the state had no authority over the church. That is no more separation of church and state than a parent giving a child some freedom to operate while maintaining full authority and the right to rescind those freedoms at any time is separation of parent and child.

You know ...we have the Vatican.
The Vatican has full authority within its borders.

But within the Italian Republic, the Church is just a religion like the others. And shall respect the rules.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

And visa versa?

Being a business owner is voluntary, so their freedom isn't at issue.

An observant Muslim who has a religious objection to handling pork shouldn't get a job as a cook at Denny's. Someone who has a religious objection to selling wedding cakes to same-sex couples shouldn't sell wedding cakes to to the public. The same principles apply.

As long as the person has the option of not doing the thing they find objectionable - by either quitting Denny's or not selling wedding cakes - their religious freedom is preserved.

 

[Kenny]

Being a business owner is voluntary, so their freedom isn't at issue.

An observant Muslim who has a religious objection to handling pork shouldn't get a job as a cook at Denny's. Someone who has a religious objection to selling wedding cakes to same-sex couples shouldn't sell wedding cakes to to the public. The same principles apply.

As long as the person has the option of not doing the thing they find objectionable - by either quitting Denny's or not selling wedding cakes - their religious freedom is preserved.

OK... we disagree. The cake woman didn't mind making the cake... just didn't want to be forced to say things that violate her religious beliefs to which I agree but agree with Denny's

 

[epronovost]

"For example, a state law may create a religious exemption to civil rights laws specifically for wedding service providers so that they are not required to serve same-sex couples."

Considering that marriage isn't a religious institution, but a civil one, wouldn't a wedding service providers who refuse to recognize the legality of a legal marriage commit an act of discrimination? Either you provide services to the population equally in regards to the law or you don't. If the State says, gay weddings are okay, then there are gay weddings; congratulation, your customer base has grown up.

 

[Kenny]

Considering that marriage isn't a religious institution, but a civil one, wouldn't a wedding service providers who refuse to recognize the legality of a legal marriage commit an act of discrimination? Either you provide services to the population equally in regards to the law or you don't. If the State says, gay weddings are okay, then there are gay weddings; congratulation, your customer base has grown up.

Actually, for religious people, marriage is a religious institution as it was made by God (in christianity) where we submit to the government in registering our marriage.

 

[epronovost]

Actually, for religious people, marriage is a religious institution as it was made by God (in christianity) where we submit to the government in registering our marriage.

Yes, for Christians that might be so, but that's not the case for anybody else. For Muslims, marriage is Muslim; for atheists, marriage is secular. The reality is that it's the government that define what is marriage and enforces that vision. What could be legal though is for a Church to refuse to loan its premise for a marriage ceremony they don't support; that's within its rights. It's not within the right of a Church, let alone a religious individual, to define what is or is not marriage. You have the right to your opinions, but not the right to enforce them.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

OK... we disagree. The cake woman didn't mind making the cake... just didn't want to be forced to say things that violate her religious beliefs to which I agree but agree with Denny's

She's not forced. Nobody's holding a gun to her head and making her bake anything.

The rule, basically, is that if you choose to sell your goods and services to the public, you have to sell them to the whole public without discriminating against certain customers.

If she doesn't like that deal, she's free to close up shop or change her offerings. "Sorry - we don't do wedding cakes any more. Just birthday cakes."

As I said: her religious freedom is intact.

Every business has to follow the law. An airline owner who thinks prayer is a substitute for preventive maintenance can't claim "religious discrimination" when the FAA says "no, you really do have to inspect your engines when we say you have to." The same principle applies.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Actually, for religious people, marriage is a religious institution as it was made by God (in christianity) where we submit to the government in registering our marriage.

... which is why when a business tries to interfere with a religious same-sex couple's wedding, it's an infringement on the religious freedom of the couple.

 

[ADigitalArtist]

"Christian nationalists, in seeking to preserve the status of a Christian state,"

If it is seeking to preserve the status, doesn't that mean that it was and is?

You skipped the first part of that sentence.
"In countries with a state Church,"
The US has never had a state church so the rest of the sentence doesn't apply. It would to countries which did, however.

 

[epronovost]

You skipped the first part of that sentence.
"In countries with a state Church,"
The US has never had a state church so the rest of the sentence doesn't apply. It would to countries which did, however.

In the case of the US though, the principles of Christian Nationalism would be to create a State Church that would of course be Christian Protestant and Evangelical. Many members of the religious right to like the principle of State Church though some would prefer to simply have Christianity be designed as "the founding religion of the US and the safekeeper of the morality of the State and its laws" and not create a American Christian Church.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Considering that marriage isn't a religious institution, but a civil one, wouldn't a wedding service providers who refuse to recognize the legality of a legal marriage commit an act of discrimination? Either you provide services to the population equally in regards to the law or you don't. If the State says, gay weddings are okay, then there are gay weddings; congratulation, your customer base has grown up.

It comes down to discrimination on the basis of gender or sex.

The difference between a same-sex couple and an opposite-sex couple is a matter of, well, sex. Discrimination on the basis of sex in public accommodation is illegal.

The principle isn't really different from telling a hospital that they can't refuse to hire male nurses, or that a landlord can't refuse to rent an apartment to a woman living on her own.

 

[Kenny]

You skipped the first part of that sentence.
"In countries with a state Church,"
The US has never had a state church so the rest of the sentence doesn't apply. It would to countries which did, however.

Thank you... didn't see it. (speed reading)