Jamie_L

To those who come to this forum to strike out against church-state separation (few, I know. Radorth?)

So, in our recent rounds with Radorth, we've hit on themes such as Constitution vs. Founder's Intent. But, all that aside, how does the idea of church-state separation stand on its own merits? Ignoring all the history, traditions, and quote wars, is a radical "wall" good or bad? Why or why not? Should a more moderate wall be in place? What would that wall look like, if you could craft it? What does the current situation do that hurts the country?

Jamie

Just Another Infidel

I don't think the wall is a radical idea any longer. It's been there all of my life.

No, if anything the wall needs to be shored up and vigilantly protected. If for no other reason, because government can never observe the influences of one religion without violating the rights of or offending members of different religions or non-theists.

Nothing I can see with the possible exception that the secular government has not put anything in place which teaches morality (honesty, fair play and consequences) in the lower levels of the public education system.

JAI

Edited to apologize for answering a question which wasn't directed at me. I belong in the other camp. But I'm going to leave the post here because I feel so strongly about the issue!

[ December 17, 2002: Message edited by: Just Another Infidel ]</p>