|
|
#41
11-26-2005, 05:27 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Why don\'t people understand that seperation of Church and State...
[ QUOTE ]
Wait a second, my friend. I didn't make any argument. I answered a question. If the teacher's claim is correct, then her civil rights were violated, as defined by the Civil Rights Act. Personally, I agree with the church, and I don't believe the teacher's civil rights were violated; but I understand the argument going the other way. [/ QUOTE ] Hi Niss, I really wasn't trying to suggest that *you* were making that argument. Thanks for the additional elaborations, though. 
|
|
#42
11-26-2005, 06:26 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Why don\'t people understand that seperation of Church and State...
On a personal level, I think the Catholic school has a right to fire the pregnant teacher but it seems awfully unchristian to me. Casting the first stone and such.
Anyway... [ QUOTE ] Amendment I Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;... [/ QUOTE ] What leads the OP to conclude that Separation of Church and State works both ways? From what I can understand, the First Amendment only prohibits government from making legislation that favors particular religious groups. Yet I hear person after person claiming this Separation works both ways so it's okay for churches to be prohibited from speaking on politics in order to keep their tax exempt status, etc.
|
|
#43
11-27-2005, 02:16 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Why don\'t people understand that seperation of Church and State...
[ QUOTE ]
What leads the OP to conclude that Separation of Church and State works both ways? From what I can understand, the First Amendment only prohibits government from making legislation that favors particular religious groups. [/ QUOTE ] The "free exercise" clause. Heard of it? What else could it mean? This is what I was trying to get Whiskey to talk about when he went nuts before. How can you claim that the First Amendment only "insulates" the Church from gov't intervention, instead of outright banning it, especially if you accept that it does ban a National religion. On a side note, this episode is really having me question the constitutionality of discrimination laws. If we have the right to associate with the people of our choice, how can the gov't force a company (or a church) to associate with someone if they don't want to?
|
|
#44
11-27-2005, 03:21 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Why don\'t people understand that seperation of Church and State...
[ QUOTE ]
If we have the right to associate with the people of our choice, how can the gov't force a company (or a church) to associate with someone if they don't want to? [/ QUOTE ] Government has the right to regulate business. If the business is small enough, they can still hang a "we don't hire blacks or jews" sign in thier window. Regarding religion: Federal discrimination laws contain a ministerial exception based on the Free Excercise Clause of the First Amendment. The exception applies if the employee's primary duties consist of teaching, spreading the faith, church governance, or participation in religious ritual, and is not limited to ordained ministers or priests. Its pretty rock solid as long as the Church doesn't except federal money. Stu
|
|
#45
11-27-2005, 09:19 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Why don\'t people understand that seperation of Church and State...
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] If we have the right to associate with the people of our choice, how can the gov't force a company (or a church) to associate with someone if they don't want to? [/ QUOTE ] Government has the right to regulate business. [/ QUOTE ] Governments have no rights. [ QUOTE ] If the business is small enough, they can still hang a "we don't hire blacks or jews" sign in thier window. [/ QUOTE ] Why should a "big" business be different than a "small" business? What's the difference between government telling you who to do business with and who to be friends with?
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
