Anyone knowledgable on separation of church and state?
964317
I think it would be illegal under the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment. The school board is a public function. Having a prayer or some other religious observance centers out people who believe differently and it could even prejudice the proceedings against them. A person who leaves the room or just looks indifferent during the prayer might not get a fair hearing.
215583
The words "separation of church and state" are not in the constitution.  These words are from a letter written by Thomas Jefferson and are taken out of context by groups who want to eliminate the Judeo/Christian tradition from American life.  \n\nWhat the constitution says is that "Congress shall make no law regarding the establishment of religion"  \n\nNot only is congress not allowed to establish an official national religion, but they are expressly forbidden from making any laws regarding religion.  \n\nThis amendment was not intended to apply to the individual states.  Until the fourteenth amendment, (the ratification of this amendment was on very shaky legal ground) individual states could and did establish official state religions.
414831
I don't understand how this country (US) could be founded on religion when the 1st amendment guarantees the separation of church and state. Politicians who seek votes by professing their religion don't look like idiots to me. To me they come across as being anti-American.
260013
Has any one of you read the Constitution?\n\nThe term "separation of Church and State" is not a part of any document asssociated with the US Government.\n\nNot the Constitution.\n\nNot the Declaration of Independence.\n\nNot the Bill of rights.\n\nSooooo. . . .quoting "separation of Church and State" as a reason to make a legal decision is FRADULENT AND ILLEGAL.\n\nStill, you hear it all the time.  That's why it's an issue.
1067836
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."\n\nThere is nothing in the Constitution about a "separation of church and state." Congress is not allowed to pass laws forcing people to participate in one religion or another, and they are not allowed to stop people from practicing their religion. This does not mean that a politician can not use his religious beliefs to form his opinions, character, and doings.
404511
A previous poster was correct.  The Constitution does not state anything about a separation of church and state.  However, if we wish to have freedom of religion, it is in the best interest of all to have a separation of church and state.\n\nIf one religion became predominant and was adopted as an official religion... other religions would naturally face greater obstacles.  How would a christian feel if satanism was the predominant religion?  \n\nI am an atheist... I don't believe there is a god or gods.  I will be the first to admit that I could be wrong.  I believe firmly in freedom of religion.  We need separation of church and state if we wish to keep that freedom for all of us.\n\nI currently think that there are several religions (Mormonism, the Moonies, Christian Fundamentalists to name a few) that seek preferential treatment by the government over other religions.  I think a large civil divide is occuring over this issue.
221708
Oh Big Deal! Two people decide that they want to have something going on & the Goverment steps in & say's that's a big NO-NO... & at the same time the very Goverment that's supposedly watching to protect our Rights as (American Citizens) deny the two people theire individual & Constitional Right to freedom/s of expression. Marriage is something that man created-what two or three hundred years ago, & somehow it's related to the Church??? We as Good American Citizens have many Constitutional Rights to Excersize at will. & the Church thing is suppose to be a seperate issue other then those that threaten our very exsistance of haveing these liberties. Church & states Issues should never interfere W/each other about codes of conduct/s or Constitutionalities because they are seperate. It's alway's been legal to Marry anyone because of our Freedom/s  Of  Choices written In The U.S. Constitution, & not what some hang-up that some church has on someone. Where is the wheel of shame,when it's no-one's fault for doing the right thing w/someone? I liked your question because, alot of people have been fooled by the states taht say no.
966209
Oh, we most certainly need separation of church and state. If we didn't have that principle or the First Amendment, there would be nothing to stop this country from becoming a corrupt theocracy like those our forefathers left when they founded America.\n\nWith the First Amendment and the separation of church and state, we're all guranteed the right to believe as we so choose, including the right NOT to believe in anything at all. We're guranteed the right to our own deep, personal beliefs. Without the First Amendment, the government could TELL us what our beliefs have to be, whether we agree and truly believe in them or not. The government could arrest us or worse for daring to secretly practice a religion other than what it sanctions.\n\nThat's why the First Amendment and separation of church and state is so delicate and precious. It's not guaranteed for one or two select groups. It's for EVERYBODY, whether you like it or not. It safeguards your beliefs as well as those you don't agree with. Without such protection, your beliefs are in just as much danger as mine or anyone else's.\n\nWithout it, there's no guarantee that we'll be able to hold fast to our own beliefs, no guarantee that the government can't up and decide to become a religious nation and do away with those who can't obey without question. To keep that from happening, to preserve our personal rights, we have that separation. We have the First Amendment to guarantee our personal beliefs and protect them from being violated by the government, which cannot tell us to believe or not to believe. Only we can decide that.
878862
Under what circumstances?  The answer is likely "no," but the body of law dealing with the "Establishment Clause" of the First Amendment (known by most people as the "separation of church and state") is extremely fact specific and under a greate deal of flux right now.\nIf it's explicitly Christian religious music, ordered to be played by school officials (and not the students) in front of a mandatory meeting of the student body, it's probably not constitutional (that would be an "endorsement" of religion, or "coercion" to a particular religion).  However, a slight change in any one of those facts changes the analysis.  \nFurther, the fact that you're talking about a university, and not a junior high or high school (where students are expected to follow orders, listen to their teachers, and have not had a well-developed analytical mind) makes a HUGE difference.  Generally, religious clubs, discussions, demonstrations, etc., are tolerated (and perhaps encouraged) at this level (although I'd say that a school-mandated prayer at graduation would probably still be unconstitutional).
470954
True, it doesn't say verbatim "seperation between church and state", however that somes up the 1st amendment nicely.\n\nHow would you teach a specific religion in a public school and not consider that to be a favoring a specific religion above all others?
836238
The problem today is many people interpret the first ammendment to say there is a seperation of church and state.\nHowever you cannot read that in the 1st ammendment.\nThat came from a letter by Thomas Jefferson to the Danbury Baptists basically stating that we are not a theocracy, but a secular government based on laws of men and not laws of God.\nAll that may be true, but our laws were patterned from the Bible whether people like that or not.\nAren't there laws against stealing, murder, rape and the like.
361138
There is no such thing as separation of Church and State.  The President makes decisions based on his beliefs.  That is the Church deciding what the State should implement.  Whether the Church is directly influencing or indirectly in this case.
1110304
First of all the term "separation of church and state" is not found in the Constitution. It is implied due to the fact that the original settlers here were fleeing religious persecution in their home countries. That "separation" was to protect the rights of ALL people regardless of their religious background. There is no mention that the church cannot enter the government, the protection was to keep the government out of the church. The signers of the Declaration of Independence and the writers of the Constitution were all religious (Christian) men. Charles Carrol of Carrolington was the only Catholic, the rest were of other denominations, Anglicans, Calvinists, Quakers ect. It is in this century after World War II, that the move to remove any mention of God from public buildings, currency, schools has had full sway. As a result there are no longer any absolutes. You swear on no Bible in court, Schools have become battlegrounds and there is no respect or reverence of God to be found outside the private home or church. If you read thye writings of these men you will realize the changes that have been made to their original work have strayed drasticly from the original intent. They would be ashamed.
939867
There is no such thing as separation of Church and state in any government documents....that phrase originates with liberal media types over the last few years to try to remove Christianity from our heritage as a nation.....all the founding Fathers prayed and even had services in the Capitol Blgd. often.
448860
Unfortunately yes, a bill is being reviewed in Congress over the possible ban of religious texts upon public transportation.  Luckily its not a very popular bill.  Seems like a violation of the separation of church and state clause in the constitution.
210043
The US government claims to be separate from religion. IF that was true -\n\nWhy would there not be a civil legal arrangement (civil union, domestic partner, marriage, whatever) available to anyone who wanted to create a household?  Or - if these special relationships are solely for the care and protection of children, then change the rules so that only those intending/capable of parenthood are allowed to participate.  \n\nLeave a religious sacrament of marriage to the tenants of each individual faith.  As it is now, the government is treating different christian faiths differently, based on which ones they like.\n\nIn my opinion you can't have it both ways - either it is a religious sacrament and the government should have nothing to do with it OR it is an arrangement under civil law - in which case it should be open to all regardless of their religion. I suppose there is one more option - change the official statement about the separation of church and state and openly admit that our government DOES support one or more religions to the detriment of others.
392945
I have nothing against same-sex marriages. I think it's really stupid how the government is not allowing it in the US. We have the freedom of religion. Wouldn't that mean that we have the freedom to choose what sex our marriage partner is? This topic is purely religious, and what happened to "seperation of church and state"? For the land of the free, there are a lot of useless things restricting our freedom.