Church and State - Time to bring back together?

[Farbin Kaiber]

Farbin, let me know if you need some help browsing monster, hotjobs or pe.com. We need to get you a job. You've become the forum pot-stirrer. Pretty soon you're going to start a riot. :giggle:

Between you and Danny you guys must have 40% of the posts here in the last month. That said, at least yours are thought out instead of one word replies intended only to boost post count.

Thanks. I actually found a nifty site, fleetjobs.com, I'd suggest it to everyone looking.

Oh, and....














Shitsweak.

[cferb]

Weird, Farbin Kaiber you have almost exactly the same number of posts on here as I do on bimmerforums.

But anyways, obviously I think church and state should remain seperated, but that doesn't seem to be quite what you're asking.

Now, pastors who swindle their congregants out of funds for "Outreaches" and other church based profit gathering are trying to change the laws that allow them to have a tax exempt status basically in trade for not having the power to publicly back a politician/ballot measure. Now they want both.

I do think that non profit organizations should be tax exempt, and I think the church should be allowed to publicly back whoever/whatever they want, not with money though, but everyone has a right to voice their opinion.

On the other side of that, I don't believe for a second the churches are non profit, they claim to be, but they're corrupt as they can be. Which I guess in essence means they churches shouldn't be tax exempt if they continue with these practices.

[Farbin Kaiber]

Weird, Farbin Kaiber you have almost exactly the same number of posts on here as I do on bimmerforums.

But anyways, obviously I think church and state should remain seperated, but that doesn't seem to be quite what you're asking.



I do think that non profit organizations should be tax exempt, and I think the church should be allowed to publicly back whoever/whatever they want, not with money though, but everyone has a right to voice their opinion.

On the other side of that, I don't believe for a second the churches are non profit, they claim to be, but they're corrupt as they can be. Which I guess in essence means they churches shouldn't be tax exempt if they continue with these practices.

The statement I made;

Now, pastors who swindle their congregants out of funds for "Outreaches" and other church based profit gathering are trying to change the laws that allow them to have a tax exempt status basically in trade for not having the power to publicly back a politician/ballot measure. Now they want both.

Was implied to state that churches are trying to have their cake, and eat it too. It's bad enough that all the big corporations use celebs to push their product, now can you imagine someone using God to push their angle? It's an unfair advertising advantage taken on trusting people from shyster individuals.

[peerless]

The big issue here is not religion itself but morality and responsibilty.

The trouble with religion is that it is expected to uphold morality. So instead of looking within ourselves for morality, we expect a church to guide us in our morale quest. But the problem is that religion can now dictate what morality is. They can twist into what fits their religous goals.

This can be said of individual responsibility. I believe in my mind that something is immoral so I don't do that something. Thats individual responsibility. If I go to church and they tell me that its ok then I beleive its ok, I am no longer taking personal responsibility. I have left the responsibilty to someone else. This is the EXACT case in point with Obama and his church and pastor. 'Well the pastor said it was ok in the name of religion so it must be ok and you can't hold me to that. It wasn't my responsibility'. (Morals being the subject of responsibility)

Look at Islam extremist, they are told that blowing up innocent people is a good thing in the name of god. That is the morality they have instilled into their heads. To them it is perfectly ok. Obviously to us with our religious morals we find it appalling.

So what we essentially have today is a huge religious war. A war of ideology.

Religion has been and always will be the most dangerous concept humans will ever know.

[Farbin Kaiber]

Wielding Religion for power over the masses has been and always will be the most dangerous concept humans will ever know.

fixed. And the level of the US as a whole's "morality" comes from the teachings in the Christian biblical scripture.

[TwoJ's]

If we don't give up our rights to revolt before then.

Hah, that is a funny idea. But, we don't have a right to start a revolution and overthrow, we have a duty to do so (only if necessary).

And as everyone has iterated already, church and state should be separate without a doubt. Like peerless said, we as humans should not need a book, a pastor, or a list to know what things are right and wrong. Look at the Christian extremists that protested the funerals of dead soldiers. Their religion enabled them to do that while being morally correct, but any rational person can see that their actions were very much immoral.

A very great man; and our best president to date (Abraham Lincoln), once said, "When I do go things I feel good and when I do bad things I feel bad. That is my religion." I couldn't have said it better.

Huh, it's strangely similar to the quote in my signature too.

[Farbin Kaiber]

Thanks for the description FK. I just wanted to know how it was being defined by you before answering your question.

I disagree with how the separation of church and state is defined now, but I am also not for church and state "working together on shared actions" like you defined it.

Currently our goverment interprets that letter from the sense that if an idea is something that has to do with a church, religion, or something of that sort then we will have nothing to do with it. First off, that is stupid becasue America is a deomcracy of the people meaning that if that represents the belief of the people it should be represented in the government. The religion should not be forced on people, but if the Bible speaks about creation or against gay marriage our society should be able to hold that as a moral belief or generally teach it in school as an idea from the soul fact that that represents the thoughts of the majority (i.e. how a democracy of the people should work). On top of that, somehow that letter from Jefferson is interpreted as part of the Consitution or whatever even though it is not.

While we should be co-branding our churches with our government, the ideas of the majority should be represented in the government since this is a country built upon having a democracy OF THE PEOPLE.

I am 100% for freedom of religion. Religion should not be forced down people's throats. It is a personal decision for people that should be upheld on their own. However, we also need to live within our coutry that allows us to have moral laws like not killing people and not stealing that may be something that a religion believes, but the popular vote also believes that.

This is probably poorly written becasue I am at work and in a hurry, so I hope you get the spirit of what I am saying and not the letter.

It came off understandable. Thanks for taking the time to dig into what I meant before going on a rant.

[Farbin Kaiber]

A very great man; and our best president to date (Abraham Lincoln), once said, "When I do go things I feel good and when I do bad things I feel bad. That is my religion." I couldn't have said it better.

Huh, it's strangely similar to the quote in my signature too.

But, he also could quote scripture better than any president to date, AND, in his time there was a fear of bringing the church/state debate/conversation up. So, that is his sidestep on the concept.

[jflip2002]

I think religion already is a part of our society, meaning state and church do overlap one another. I feel its at a fine median where it currently is. But like one of the earlier posters said, to totally intertwine them, where they are one would be disasterous. Again, like he said, we'd be like some of the middle eastern countries hating one another due to differences in religious beliefs. The best quote (even before this thread) is in TwoJ's signature. "With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion." Maybe I dont like change much, but Id like to keep things how they stand.

[DarkWing6]

It came off understandable. Thanks for taking the time to dig into what I meant before going on a rant.

BTW - I mean should NOT be co-branding. Edited original post. Oops!

[Farbin Kaiber]

BTW - I mean should NOT be co-branding. Edited original post. Oops!

I was confused by that fact. I didn't razz ya because I figured it was a mis-type.

[Ral]

On the other side of that, I don't believe for a second the churches are non profit, they claim to be, but they're corrupt as they can be. Which I guess in essence means they churches shouldn't be tax exempt if they continue with these practices.

most churches that I have ever been in will allow anyone to look over their financial records at will. Show me proof that the vast majority of churches are corrupt. When this forum discusses politics/economics, facts are used. When race/gender bets brought up stereotypically, people are up in arms. Why do these standards not apply to facts about religious threads?

for that matter, why is there so much animosity towards Christianity on this board?

While yes, there are corrupt churches, the vast majority of private programs to assist the poor (soup kitchens, Salvation Army, etc) are run by churches.

Before attacking something, educate yourself about it. To do otherwise appears ignorant.

[TwoJ's]

most churches that I have ever been in will allow anyone to look over their financial records at will. Show me proof that the vast majority of churches are corrupt. When this forum discusses politics/economics, facts are used. When race/gender bets brought up stereotypically, people are up in arms. Why do these standards not apply to facts about religious threads?

for that matter, why is there so much animosity towards Christianity on this board?

While yes, there are corrupt churches, the vast majority of private programs to assist the poor (soup kitchens, Salvation Army, etc) are run by churches.

Before attacking something, educate yourself about it. To do otherwise appears ignorant.

I do not think that there is a large animosity towards religion around here. There are an ignorant few that are avid in their hate, but I; along with the masses, are not that way. I may not agree with your beliefs, but I do not look down on anyone simply for their religious affiliation.

I think the problem is that there are also some "Christians" around here that post completely outrageous claims and attempt to back their ideas with religious justification. People, including myself, will reply to those individuals accordingly, but I do not think that they represent Christianity by any means.

[2Big4a3Series]

I was quite disturbed at the question and answer debate McCain and Obama attended here in Orange County at the Crystal Cathedral. A church should never be a platform for political arenas.

I was surprised to find out a couple of years ago that my local polling center was relocated from the local elementary school to a church. I am not offended by this and when I go to vote, nobody is standing out there trying to guilt me into voting one way or another but what about someone who is Muslim or Jewish? I personally think that I would feel a bit uncomfortable entering a synagogue to vote if there were guys in black hats and long beards officiating the machines and handing out literature in the parking lot.

[DarkWing6]

I think the problem is that there are also some "Christians" around here that post completely outrageous claims and attempt to back their ideas with religious justification. People, including myself, will reply to those individuals accordingly, but I do not think that they represent Christianity by any means.

I greatly respect this statement. I hope I never come across as one of those "Christians". I assume and hope that you continue this across the general consensus of most Christians everywhere and not generalize the entire church behind one nut-job or whako that claims to be a Christian.