If the U.S. has no separation of church and state, what is the state religion?

[Quantum Windbag]

It is either/or.

You fail to explain how it's a fallacy.

You can't explain how it is a fallacy because it is not.

You've got nothing.

Merely repeating your fallacious argument is not arguing. In fact it is another fallacy.
So you've offered two fallacies: the either/or fallacy and the mere assertion fallacy.

You are the one who is repeating a fallacious argument.

I already made my argument--that if there is no separation of church and state, there must be an established state religion.

Your only response is to call it a fallacy.

I'm asking you to explain why you call it a fallacy, and you CAN NOT.

This is the point where YOU get stuck. Where YOU are proven to be full of shit.

It is a fallacy because you assume that the only two options for a government is to have a state religion, or to have separation of church and state. Germany has no official religion, yet no one who really understands anything, which I have to admit would exclude you, thinks that Germany has a strict separation of church and state. Germany grants approved religions the status of PLC (Public Law Corporations) and routinely denies that status to unapproved religions like Scientology and Islam. That means the state actually determines what is, and is not, a religion, even though there is no religion, thus making your claim blatantly untrue.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

How do you prove a negative? Along with prohibiting the establishment of a religion the 1st Amendment prohibits the making of any law that impedes the free exercise of religion. The bigoted left got around the "making" part of the Constitution by finding a loophole that did not exist. The modern concept of "separation church/state" is an invention by a FDR appointed Supreme Court justice who was also a former KKK member who hated Papists. The bigoted left drags out Jefferson letters that tend to reinforce the separation concept but Jefferson's letters are not part of Constitutional law.

There wasn't Jefferson's "letters" there was Jefferson't letter to the Danbury Baptists who wrote inquiring as to whether their Church would be allowed to exist. Jefferson wrote back assuring them that government would not interfere with worship as there was a separation between church and state.

The letter in question.

Gentlemen
The affectionate sentiments of esteem and approbation which you are so good as to express towards me, on behalf of the Danbury Baptist association, give me the highest satisfaction. my duties dictate a faithful and zealous pursuit of the interests of my constituents, & in proportion as they are persuaded of my fidelity to those duties, the discharge of them becomes more and more pleasing.
Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," thus building a wall of separation between Church & State. Adhering to this expression of the supreme will of the nation in behalf of the rights of conscience, I shall see with sincere satisfaction the progress of those sentiments which tend to restore to man all his natural rights, convinced he has no natural right in opposition to his social duties.
I reciprocate your kind prayers for the protection & blessing of the common father and creator of man, and tender you for yourselves & your religious association, assurances of my high respect & esteem.
Th Jefferson
Jan. 1. 1802.

To expand the bold part

act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," thus building a wall of separation between Church & State.

Note the "wall of separation between church and state." Barring the establishment of a religion is considered shorthand for the wall of separation between church and state.

In other words, as I said in my initial post...it's a synonym.

No it isn't. The wall of separation between church and state is the entire fucking clause, not just the part that turns you into an incompetent boob. If the state makes laws that restrict the practice of religion that wall of separation is breached. That is why the courts have repeatedly ruled that the government has no authority to decide what is, and is not, a religion. They have to treat all religions equally, even if it involves sacrificing animals to demons.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Actually the percentage of religious and spiritual Americans are decreasing.

Link?

One in five Americans today has no religious affiliation, and for the first time there are as many who claim no religion as there are white evangelicals, according to a new Pew report. With evangelicals forming the GOP’s backbone, the party may face a struggle to survive, says Michelle Goldberg.

A Pew poll reported in The Daily Beast. Pew Report Finding More Americans Unaffiliated With Religion Is Bad News for GOP - The Daily Beast

 

[Quantum Windbag]

There are challenges to prayers lead by employees of state institutions or group prayers.

Are you saying your religion requires that you pray in groups? Does God not hear your prayer unless it is part of an event? In fact, I recall a parable in the bible condemning such showy praying.

No, it does not, but it (the 2nd Amendment) forbids the Federal Government from forbidding me to pray in groups.

The federal gov't does not forbid you from praying in groups.

They only forbid you from using public property (meaning paid for and maintained by all taxpayers) when doing so. No federal law has ever been against prayer in groups.

Which is why there is no Easter Sunrise service at the Grand Canyon.

What was that? They have had a mufti-denominational prayer service on federal land inside the Grand Canyon National Park for almost 80 years? And that is not the only park that allows people to get together in large groups and pray? Damn, I guess that makes the idiot wrong, doesn't it?

 

[Unkotare]

A lot of religious nuts insist there is no separation of church and state in the United States because the constitution doesn't use the exact words "separation of church and state."

If there is no separation of church and state, than that means there must be an official state religion.

I'd like to know what they think it is.

Obviously, barring the establishment of a state religion means the exact same thing as separation of church and state. It's a synonym.

You seem confused by just about all the terminology you tried to use there.

How so?

Your basic premise is false, you don't seem to understand what "separation of church and state" means, what the actual words of the First Amendment mean, or what a synonym is.


Something tells me you're going to turn out to be another one of these illogical nutbags who gets some false notion stuck in its head and proceeds to repeat-insist-repeat endlessly while the rest of the world shakes its collective head.

 

[TemplarKormac]

If there is no separation of church and state, than that means there must be an official state religion.

No, it doesn't mean that.

(So much for that thread.)

If there is no separation between a government and a religion, of course it means there would be a government established religion. That's what no separation means, you idiot.

That is a fallacy of suppressed correlative. I can also make the case that this is a fallacy of false attribution, on top of it being a false dichotomy fallacy as Rab pointed out earlier today.

No no, not in my house.

 

[WinterBorn]

They are not. They are challenges from some aggrieved party egged on by the ACLU.
WHo are you to tell people what their religion requires?

So anyone can claim any action to be part of their religious practices, and it must be accepted regardless of what their own doctrines and holy texts actually say?

Are you sure you want to open THAT door? Many Wiccans believe their rituals should be performed "skyclad" (meaning naked). If your school led prayer should not be stopped, why should their skyclad rituals be stopped?

Yes.

For the record, I fully support the right of Wiccans to pray whenever, and however, they want. I do this because, unlike you, I actually believe in freedom, and see no reason the government should be able to tell anyone what they can, and cannot, do simply because it offends prudes like you.

I am neither a prude nor am I offended by anyone's prayers. I have simply tried to explain the errors in the claims made by those who insist they are being told they cannot pray ect ect.

 

[WinterBorn]

No, it does not, but it (the 2nd Amendment) forbids the Federal Government from forbidding me to pray in groups.

The federal gov't does not forbid you from praying in groups.

They only forbid you from using public property (meaning paid for and maintained by all taxpayers) when doing so. No federal law has ever been against prayer in groups.

Which is why there is no Easter Sunrise service at the Grand Canyon.

What was that? They have had a mufti-denominational prayer service on federal land inside the Grand Canyon National Park for almost 80 years? And that is not the only park that allows people to get together in large groups and pray? Damn, I guess that makes the idiot wrong, doesn't it?

Did I make any claims that every group is forbidden? I simply stated the reasons they stopped having prayer at high school football games or the other examples given of supposed religious oppression.

But, unlike you, I managed to make a point without throwing personal insults in.

 

[Ernie S.]

No, it does not, but it (the 2nd Amendment) forbids the Federal Government from forbidding me to pray in groups.

The federal gov't does not forbid you from praying in groups.

They only forbid you from using public property (meaning paid for and maintained by all taxpayers) when doing so. No federal law has ever been against prayer in groups.

Which is why there is no Easter Sunrise service at the Grand Canyon.

What was that? They have had a mufti-denominational prayer service on federal land inside the Grand Canyon National Park for almost 80 years? And that is not the only park that allows people to get together in large groups and pray? Damn, I guess that makes the idiot wrong, doesn't it?

Other examples include an Episcopalian church with regular Sunday services in another National Park.
This window is behind the altar.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

So anyone can claim any action to be part of their religious practices, and it must be accepted regardless of what their own doctrines and holy texts actually say?

Are you sure you want to open THAT door? Many Wiccans believe their rituals should be performed "skyclad" (meaning naked). If your school led prayer should not be stopped, why should their skyclad rituals be stopped?

Yes.

For the record, I fully support the right of Wiccans to pray whenever, and however, they want. I do this because, unlike you, I actually believe in freedom, and see no reason the government should be able to tell anyone what they can, and cannot, do simply because it offends prudes like you.

I am neither a prude nor am I offended by anyone's prayers. I have simply tried to explain the errors in the claims made by those who insist they are being told they cannot pray ect ect.

You have tried to explain errors other people made by lying? How has that worked out for you?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

The federal gov't does not forbid you from praying in groups.

They only forbid you from using public property (meaning paid for and maintained by all taxpayers) when doing so. No federal law has ever been against prayer in groups.

Which is why there is no Easter Sunrise service at the Grand Canyon.

What was that? They have had a mufti-denominational prayer service on federal land inside the Grand Canyon National Park for almost 80 years? And that is not the only park that allows people to get together in large groups and pray? Damn, I guess that makes the idiot wrong, doesn't it?

Did I make any claims that every group is forbidden? I simply stated the reasons they stopped having prayer at high school football games or the other examples given of supposed religious oppression.

But, unlike you, I managed to make a point without throwing personal insults in.

Is that your attempt not to admit that you are full of shit?

 

[JakeStarkey]

QWB, you had it explained to you, you don't like it, and now you are acting like a twit.

Who cares what you think?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

QWB, you had it explained to you, you don't like it, and now you are acting like a twit.

Who cares what you think?

Other than you?

 

[WinterBorn]

Which is why there is no Easter Sunrise service at the Grand Canyon.

What was that? They have had a mufti-denominational prayer service on federal land inside the Grand Canyon National Park for almost 80 years? And that is not the only park that allows people to get together in large groups and pray? Damn, I guess that makes the idiot wrong, doesn't it?

Did I make any claims that every group is forbidden? I simply stated the reasons they stopped having prayer at high school football games or the other examples given of supposed religious oppression.

But, unlike you, I managed to make a point without throwing personal insults in.

Is that your attempt not to admit that you are full of shit?

Why admit something that is not true?

 

[FA_Q2]

How is anyone stopping them from practicing Christianity? Has anyone been barred from a church, arrested for praying in a church or at home?

You qualify this statement with only 2 locations – church or home. The fact is that the government has no right to bar your practice of religion anywhere including public spaces.

So anyone can claim any action to be part of their religious practices, and it must be accepted regardless of what their own doctrines and holy texts actually say?

Are you sure you want to open THAT door? Many Wiccans believe their rituals should be performed "skyclad" (meaning naked). If your school led prayer should not be stopped, why should their skyclad rituals be stopped?

There are a few problems with this statement. First – no one here (at least AFAIK) has called for SCHOOL LED PRAYER – that is a straw man. There is a valid argument against having government officials representing the government (as a public teacher is) leading a prayer session. That is not what is being discussed though. Rather it is your ability to express your religion in whatever space that you wish to which you have a right to do.

Second – yes, anyone can claim whatever they want as part of their personal religious doctrine. That wall that you are so fond of requires that. Just like religions don’t have a right to demand that you practice one of their tenants, you do not get to define what the religious tenants are for that religion. A wall works both ways. Further, for you to demand that their religious tenants say something different is insanely arrogant. You cannot waltz in dictating what a religious text actually says when you don’t have faith in it to begin with. I can’t fathom how you can claim to understand what the ‘true’ tenants of a faith are when you are not of that faith.

Lastly – we DO want to open that door because it is already open. What you don’t seem to understand is that your religion does not give you carte blanche rights over existing laws. Those laws that might make it illegal for you to dance around naked in a school ARE NOT AGAINST RELIGION and therefore perfectly fine. No one is allowed to dance around naked in the school for other reasons completely separate from religious freedoms. You also don’t have a right to sacrifice a virgin to your pagan gods either – it violates others rights. What you don’t have the right to do, however, is demand that students cannot pray in a school setting or hold group prayer at an event because that IS specifically violating religion. It is not a rule or law that is aimed at some public interest, safety or protection of others rights. It is solely there to infringe on others ability ‘freely exercise’ their religion and it is wrong.

 

[FA_Q2]

You mean the one that was actually built?

Yes, apparently they were free to worship as they pleased.

They actually got one built?

I did not know that.

Then you should pay more attention. The community center (with the Mosque inside) was built without hitch from the government precisely because we ALL have the right to freely exercise our religions.

It is of worthy note that the exact same amendment protected the free speech of those speaking out against the construction. That even happened EXACTLY as it should have – angry people proclaimed their anger as is their right and the government did not stop construction of a perfectly legal project. That is what freedom looks like even if it seems so hard for so many to recognize it.

 

[jon_berzerk]

A lot of religious nuts insist there is no separation of church and state in the United States because the constitution doesn't use the exact words "separation of church and state."

If there is no separation of church and state, than that means there must be an official state religion.

I'd like to know what they think it is.

Obviously, barring the establishment of a state religion means the exact same thing as separation of church and state. It's a synonym.

what really

the first amendment says

-Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion-

it also says

-or prohibiting the free exercise thereof-

 

[jon_berzerk]

There is no "State Religion" because the Constitution specifically prohibits THE STATE from ESTABLISHING a religion - i.e., England and the Church of England,

These idiots that claim that every time there is a religious exercise anywhere NEAR a government building that somehow the state is endorsing a religion is ridiculous. The Congress of the United States opens each session with prayer. The 10 commandments are posted in the building. "In God We Trust" is over the Lectrum. The same with the schools and the recognition of "Christmas" (a federally recognized national holiday) is verboten - it is NOT and has been upheld a number of times in the courts. There is absolutely nothing wrong whatsoever with celebrating a national holiday in schools. The only confrontation comes when these jerk-offs and their "separation" threaten to file "action" against school systems and the school boards acquiesce to their BS demands rather than go to court (where they would win).

If anything, look at Barry and his followers. They would love nothing more than to impose the state religion of "GOVERNMENT" on every citizen of the United States.

Is Christmas a Federal Holiday?

Is Obamacare a tax?

yes

the administration said so at the SC

 

[RandallFlagg]

There is no "State Religion" because the Constitution specifically prohibits THE STATE from ESTABLISHING a religion - i.e., England and the Church of England,

These idiots that claim that every time there is a religious exercise anywhere NEAR a government building that somehow the state is endorsing a religion is ridiculous. The Congress of the United States opens each session with prayer. The 10 commandments are posted in the building. "In God We Trust" is over the Lectrum. The same with the schools and the recognition of "Christmas" (a federally recognized national holiday) is verboten - it is NOT and has been upheld a number of times in the courts. There is absolutely nothing wrong whatsoever with celebrating a national holiday in schools. The only confrontation comes when these jerk-offs and their "separation" threaten to file "action" against school systems and the school boards acquiesce to their BS demands rather than go to court (where they would win).

If anything, look at Barry and his followers. They would love nothing more than to impose the state religion of "GOVERNMENT" on every citizen of the United States.

Is Christmas a Federal Holiday?

Is Obamacare a tax?

yes


the administration said so at the SC

Often it amazes me the number of people that don't know that Ulysses S. Grant, in 1870, made Christmas a Federally recognized National Holiday.

Guess they attended public schools…..

 

[jon_berzerk]

There is no "State Religion" because the Constitution specifically prohibits THE STATE from ESTABLISHING a religion - i.e., England and the Church of England,

These idiots that claim that every time there is a religious exercise anywhere NEAR a government building that somehow the state is endorsing a religion is ridiculous. The Congress of the United States opens each session with prayer. The 10 commandments are posted in the building. "In God We Trust" is over the Lectrum. The same with the schools and the recognition of "Christmas" (a federally recognized national holiday) is verboten - it is NOT and has been upheld a number of times in the courts. There is absolutely nothing wrong whatsoever with celebrating a national holiday in schools. The only confrontation comes when these jerk-offs and their "separation" threaten to file "action" against school systems and the school boards acquiesce to their BS demands rather than go to court (where they would win).

If anything, look at Barry and his followers. They would love nothing more than to impose the state religion of "GOVERNMENT" on every citizen of the United States.

Is Obamacare a tax?

yes


the administration said so at the SC

Often it amazes me the number of people that don't know that Ulysses S. Grant, in 1870, made Christmas a Federally recognized National Holiday.

Guess they attended public schools…..

there are probably some that would argue with you about that

--LOL