Find » Opinion/Editorial » How to Achieve a True Separation of...

How to Achieve a True Separation of Church and State

By Jack Oceano, published Nov 06, 2007
Published Content: 731  Total Views: 1,220,846  Favorited By: 131 CPs
Embed:  
Rating: 3.7 of 5
The doctrine of the separation of Church and State is constantly under attack in this nation, from those pushing school prayers to those advocating that the State maintain an established Church. It is a shame in this day and age that religion can dictate national policies, regarding everything from social domestic issues to foreign affairs. Yet, the separation between Church and State seems to be narrowing every year. Here are some ideas on how to achieve a true separation of Church and State.

One. Let's do away with the Bible in all state and federal court proceedings. Anyone who thinks that swearing on the Bible is going to ensure that someone tells the truth is out of their mind. There are laws against perjury, and they will have to suffice. If the penalties for perjury aren't severe enough, the wrath of an imaginary man in the sky certainly isn't going to do any damn good. If you must have the witness take an oath on a book of fiction, let it be the fiction of his choice. I'd choose Clive Barker's Imajica, for instance. It's a fantasy novel about Earth's four parallel worlds, with three main characters, including a genderless assassin. In other words, it's only slightly more believable than the Bible.

Two. It's time for God to get the hell off my money. If I earn a few bucks, it's mine to do with as I please, and I don't need to be reminded of anyone's batshit beliefs. And if money does have anything to do with God, shouldn't the poor get more of it? Isn't the Bible filled with stories about helping those in need? If it is indeed "In God We Trust," shouldn't we trust in his priorities? Didn't Jesus heal? Then why are the so-called Christians who are in power so set against universal healthcare? Sorry, hypocrites, but you can't have it both ways. Get God the hell off our money, or start practicing as your "Savior" preached. Until that time, how about "In Wal-Mart We Trust"? Every bit of currency ultimately ends up with them anyway, doesn't it?

How to Achieve a True Separation of Church and State

Church and State

Credit: schizophrenicnews.com

Copyright: schizophrenicnews.com

Comments
Showing Comments 1 - 15 of 60
Next >>
 
Thank you for writing your articles Jack. I stumbled upon them randomly, and then took time to read many of the related articles including this one. It is a sad state that all such voices of reason must content with such ignorant, and outdated beliefs. But for all of us not entrenched witin indoctrination, please continue.

Posted on 12/13/2007 at 2:12:57 AM

 
In regards to the welfare question... Most (if not all) people can take care of themselves in this country; it's fuckin' AMERICA. Around here, having money is a question of wanting money, and working for it; it's not "fair" to expect ME to pay YOUR bills: that would be rediculous. Also "Republican" is not synonomous with "Christian;" Republicans are more like Jews, in that they follow the law, and don't cut slack; they have a lot in common with Christians, which is why so many of us fall into both categories, but yes, there are areas where my faith forces me to disagree with certain Conservative politics. Although i can't speak for all of us, for me it's basically a question of "lesser of two evils."

Posted on 11/18/2007 at 5:11:00 PM

 
Of course atheists can give to charity, but the Bible teaches selflessness, and that God values everyone the same; the more reason for a true Christian to make charity a priority. Yes, many "Christians" do not live by Jesus' code: most atheists call them "hypocrites." Jesus did the same thing to the pharisees. But while often correct, these accusors fail to realize that we are ALL hypocrites; most Americans ackowledge "sin," but do it anyway. A Muslim who does not kill infidels is a hypocrite, and a Jew who does not execute gay people is a hypocrite. Believe me, i too am ashamed of what "Christianity" has become; but the true Christianity of the Bible, the kind Jesus taught, is what we should use as a reference point, to know what we SHOULD stand for.

Posted on 11/18/2007 at 5:11:00 PM

 
I'm mostly with Brett on this one. Salvation Army, the most well known charity in America, and the Red Cross, known world-wide, are both "Christian" organizations. The Red Cross only very recently adopted a Star of David, so as not to "offend" Jews; but it started out Christian. Salvation Army, of course, is also "Christian," which is why Target - a huge store in Arizona - kicked out the Santa Claus workers; you know, the ones who ring bells, and ask for donations to help the poor: they didn't agree with Target's morals and goals, and apparently this is reason to ban them from your store.

Posted on 11/18/2007 at 5:11:00 PM

 
By the way, using the Vatican as an example isn't a good idea when your in a debate with a BIBLICAL Christian. I am not someone who believes that Catholics are not Christians but I still disagree with them on many issues. As far as I can tell, the Pope's more frivilous spending is dedicated to extravagance. I would guess that the reasoning is to display God's glory but I am personally against it. The reason personnel are paid is that they have dedicated themselves so fully to their cause that they have neglected a career.

Posted on 11/17/2007 at 10:11:00 AM

 
No, I am not saying that only Christians are charitiable but aside from environmentalist groups, most major charity ORGANIZATIONS are Christian. I am not saying anything about the indivual level, only the level that is based on cooperation and existing ties between those individuals. The problem with wellfare(which isn't actually based on Christian values, it has more to do with which party Christians usually side with)is that the idea of universal wellfare is like trying to saving drowning people by tearing boards out of your own ship. In the end, all you have is more drowning people. Besides, the prices are actually lower for people without wellfare. I understand that wellfare means you don't have to pay anything, but you can't really argue that these people have to sell their houses or do anything else like that.

Posted on 11/16/2007 at 6:11:00 PM

 
Why are the Republicans/Christian Right so against welfare? Why are they so against Universal Healthcare? Because they're so good and charitable? Why is their policy: "Take care of yourselves"? Because they're so compassionate, so charitable, so Christian? Is that what Jesus would have said? Would he have denied healthcare to the poor? Would he have denied single mothers welfare, and made them travel two hours each way on a bus to work for minimum wage, denied them time to spend with their children? If he were president, would he have said, "Take care of yourselves; the government can't help the poor"?

Posted on 11/16/2007 at 2:11:00 PM

 
I beg to differ on that. Churches are businesses and they should be taxed like businesses. Where does all the money go that the Churches collect? To charities? Is all of it used for upkeep? For personnel? Maybe the Vatican bank? The Vatican didn't become the wealthiest entity in the world by accident. And you want to talk about backing up statements with fact? Where did you come up with that statement, that "nearly every major charity organization is Christian"? And are you saying that without Christians there would be no charity, or very little? Do only Christians give? I'm an Atheist, I give. And if Christians are so charitable, and the Republican party is theirs, why are their policies with respect to the poor so deplorable?

Posted on 11/16/2007 at 2:11:00 PM

 
I am not saying that there are simply "good Christians" I am saying that nearly every major charity organization is Christian. By the way, a church is not a bussiness(unless you are talking about Mormons, in which case I will not argue with you), a church is a COMMUNITY. And as a community, they exert influence over the world around them and in this world the most powerful influence is money.

Posted on 11/16/2007 at 2:11:00 PM

 
Did you notice when Oral Roberts told his audience to give him $8 Million or god would kill him? There is nothing wrong with charity; but it has nothing to do with Christianity, or religion in general. Sure, there are good Christians, just as there are good Atheists and good Muslims and good Jews and good Scientologists.

Posted on 11/16/2007 at 11:11:00 AM

 
Haven't you ever noticed all of those commercial by CHRISTIAN charity organizations? Haven't you ever noticed how almost all major charity organizations are Christian? Say what you want but Christianity is very generous

Posted on 11/16/2007 at 10:11:00 AM

 
Jennifer you are putting words in Ice Shards mouth he did not tell people to be christians or get out. So put on your glasses and read it over. good luck with that.

Posted on 11/15/2007 at 1:11:00 PM

 
Alyce: Are you the one that is stalking Jim Clayton?

Posted on 11/14/2007 at 8:11:00 PM

 
Alyce, then we both agree that Jesus was loaded. Therefore He was not "against" money. "Read it again"? You're mad. I've already read it, and i'm moving on to books that i haven't. Give me a reference, a story, something i can easily find or look for. And while Cam's comment about welfare was apparently unrelated, she(?) is right that it's a stupid idea. OH and i'm glad that you learned all this 45 years ago, but it would seem that your memory needed refreshing. Only here to help! :)

Posted on 11/13/2007 at 2:11:00 PM

 
Oh, I thought that comment from truthbetold was directed to me~about being an ex-attorney. The reason I said "I wish" is it would mean I had an excellent memory, would be highly intelligent, as well as having been able to go to college for, what is it 8 years, and pass the Bar Exam.

Posted on 11/12/2007 at 8:11:00 PM

Type in Your Comments Below - (1000 characters left)
Your name:

Submit your own content on this or any topic. Get started »
Showing Comments 1 - 15 of 60
Next >>
Most Commented On