Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Religious freedom essay 2016
Essays on school prayer
Church and state should not be separated
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Religious freedom essay 2016
The issue of the Separation of Church and state has been a frequent topic that has been discussed by the Supreme Court for over 150 years. Is the separation of church and state still essential in general, legal, and social aspects of a modern society such as the United States? Research and history have shown that keeping the church separate from the government is important for the ongoing success of a free and well functioning society. We all have our religious freedoms and the overall decision has been debated by both sides with understanding arguments. The members of our federal government have established a series of rules for the idea of a free and prosperous society. The most controversial clause in the First Amendment of our Constitution states that no law will ever support a religion or forbid those who exercise their religious beliefs has been nationally debated ever since the First Congress began meeting.
Our constitution has been changed and altered because of the effects of the modern controversy. When the founding fathers set up our nations guidelines they never intended to create a Christian nation. The citizens used to display crosses and the American flag and they
…show more content…
barely disagreed with it “Our founding fathers were believers who saw the need to keep neighbors from turning on neighbors because of their own personal beliefs” (Welton, Lynn, Barry).One of the founding fathers Thomas Jefferson felt like he didn’t need have the constitutional authority to guide people in their religious beliefs. Having been strongly influenced by Virginia, the states in the south had decided to revise the constitution and annul all of the Churches. They then rewrote the constitution and they removed God’s name. From the beginning Christians would have differentiated church and state, Jesus declared “My kingdom is not of this world” (John 18.36) the church fathers and the catholic church distinguished the church from civil government. Whether or not church and state should be divided didn’t begin until around the 19th century as for today it is a serious topic among both the separationists and accommodationists alike. The people who push for the separation of church feel that either the state or the federal government can set up churches or support religion; there shouldn’t be any governmental funding into religious displays such as praying in schools. The other sides oppose the separation between church and state, they go on exactly as it stated in the first amendment. Where in the text of the First Amendment it doesn’t say anything about the separation of church and state. This side supports the governmental funding of the religious schools and associations, and the support of the religious displays. Some would argue that church and state must have different personnel “If we seek the authority of Christ in this matter, there is no doubt that he wished to bar the ministers of his word from civil rule and earthly authority”. (Hamburger) The First Amendment holds great meaning for the American people because it gives us our freedom to be able to express whatever religion you choose.
Within our public schools this is a mail political issue because of this Amendment. The conflict in the public schools about the separation of church and state and people feel that the First Amendment is being violated by allowing direct prayer “The U.S. Supreme Court has been vigilant in forbidding public schools and other agencies of the government to interfere with Americans' constitutional right to follow their own consciences when it comes to religion” (Baker). They feel that this is a breach because, in the public schools you can not have prayer, bible readings, or moments of silence they are all banned according to the First
Amendment. The Separation of church and state is a political and legal document which states that the government and institutions are trying to be kept divided and independent from each other. The church should not decide the decisions made by the rule of the law and how the government functions. This idea refers to secular state which is understood as the combination of two principles, secularity of government and freedom of religious beliefs and practices. There are many beliefs on the proper relationship between the religion and government and they cover a wide range. One idea of complete secularization of government, and the other being a theocracy, the government and church are unified underneath one central leadership. Numerous issues and differences are raised along this path. The most important is the division between the two unique ideas of government secularization and the church independence. The early settlers to the American colonies were driven mainly by the desire to worship freely in their own way. These ideas included a mass number of nonconformists like the Puritans and the Pilgrims, as well as Catholics. An example of this come from The Americans United for the Separation of Church and State foundation or the AU, this organization believes that our modern day societies are to be as successful as possible and that the religion and government should not be directly related. Such as the use of ‘In God We Trust’ in the national motto and ‘under God’ in our Pledge of Allegiance, they may be kind and unimportant to many people. However others are offended by these statements and that government should avoid endorsing either religion even if it is an unbiased manner. The state uses religion for ceremonial purposes to have the effect of absolving religion of its power and meaning. This is a difference between religion and government to protect people that want to practice their religion in public rather than. A clear distinction between religion and government may better protect people that want to practice religion in a society rather than dishearten it. We all should be mindful not to interfere with the rights of the First Amendment that every citizen may share the same rights and liberties. Another reason that it benefits the separation between church and state can be seen when we think about the other countries. We always hear terrible news come in from places such as Afghanistan, Iraq, Israel and other violent areas where religion often collides with the politics. The U.S was founded of the beliefs of freedom and religion, and there shouldn’t be any influence from the government for the church. In the past many governments had been closely tied to a state mandated religion. This shows how keeping up a separation between the church and the state validates the valid concerns between both sides and it is still successfully instituted today. In different regions of the earth such as the Middle-East, is where many countries practice theocracy, and it often leads to the violence “Islam as a religion is incompatible with the values of freedom and democracy”(Tuininga). The church has influence over the government in these countries in the fact limited the freedoms of religion and theology. We all have the right to believe in what we do, nobody can ever take that away from us. But there is always going to be those people who don’t support it and they try to shut it down because they don’t believe in our beliefs. In conclusion, our nation has had a long lasting democracy that is directly related to the fact that it assures its peoples freedom to worship and practice their religion. Creating an official religion of the state and government would take away one of the great freedoms that we, as Americans, are granted. So maintaining religion and government separate is ideal for a free and just society is our best plan of action.
When it came down to the government during the convention of May 1776, instead of protecting our rights they had passed them down causing us to be under common law. If one had denied the Christian faith and went against everything it believed in, such as, “there are more Gods than one, or denies the Christian religion to be true, or the scriptures to be of divine authority, he is punishable on the first offence by incapacity to hold any office or employment ecclesiastical, civil, or military,” (Jefferson 176). This is what most people had thought about if you did not follow their religion. Thomas Jefferson believed that the wall between church and state should be very high in order to keep out and prevent hostile situations. Using an example from today’s news, many people get uncomfortable in the United Stated with the Muslim religion because of the previous horrific events that led to many cruel deaths in our history. By this, the way that we look at these people is forever changed because of the incidents and who knows if we will ever not be hostile with one another because of it. If church and state hadn’t been separated we may have not become a true democracy from what our developing country was seeming to lead towards. More people would not be as accepting of each other, and not that they are still not today, but I feel as if it may
The general court was set on a path to separating the beliefs of the church and the government. Luckily, years later a law would be passed in the Constitution that separates church and state.
A popular notion among many religious conservatives is the rejection of what is commonly referred to as the separation between church and state. They maintain the United States was founded by leaders who endorsed Christian principles as the cornerstone of American democracy, and that the First Amendment prohibition against government establishment was not intended to remove religion from public life. As a result, a number of disputes have made their way through to the courts, pitting those ready to defend the wall of separation, against those who would tear it down. Two recent cases have brought this battle to the forefront of political debate. The first involves an Alabama Supreme Court justice, who, in defiance of a Federal judge, fought the removal of a granite display of the Ten Commandments from the rotunda of the state courthouse. Also, a California man has challenged the constitutionality of the phrase “under God” in an upcoming Supreme Court case involving student recitation of the pledge of allegiance.
The First Amendment states “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof”. There are several ways to apply this to the issue of prayer in school. Arguments can be made for both groups of people who are for and against prayer in school. What does it all boil down to? Freedom of religion still applies, just do not organize or endorse it in our schools.
Prayer has been banished from schools and the ACLU rampages to remove “under God” from the Pledge of Allegiance. Moreover, “Separation of Church and State” is nowhere found in the Constitution or any other founding legislation. Our forefathers would never countenance the restrictions on religion exacted today." -- Bill Flax, Forbes, 2011. Church and State seem to be two words that are entirely inseparable from each other.
It has been suggested that there is currently a culture war taking place in the United States. Depending on who you listen to, you will get vastly different descriptions of the two sides. Some will insist that the fight is between the upholders of strong Christian, moral values and godless, secular-minded, moral relativists. Others will tell you that defenders of religious freedom and rational thought are battling religious fundamentalists who wish to impose their radically conservative views on the whole of the American populace. Regardless of which way you view the debate, the entire so-called “culture war” boils down to a basic disagreement over the place of religion in public life. In light of President Bush’s recent nominations of John Roberts and Samuel Alito to the Supreme Court, I believe it is prudent to have a thorough discussion of the Constitutional principle of separation of church and state, because how the Supreme Court rules on issues related to this principle in the future will have a profound impact on how we define ourselves as a country. In order to conduct a thorough inquiry into this debate, I believe it is necessary to start at the beginning and attempt to discern how our founding fathers viewed religion’s place in public life, and how they relayed this view in the First Amendment. After I have done this, I will try to apply some of the principles I have gathered to current hot-button social issues which are likely to come before the Supreme Court in the not too distant future.
In the United States, the average child goes through public funded schools that have a basic curriculum. According to the Texas Education Agency, some of the subjects include science, mathematics, social studies, English, and more. Nowhere in the subject is religion included. The basic curriculum is made in order to give students skills, knowledge, and to help develop the minds of the future. In science class, evolution is taught either briefly or detailed. It is taught because it is a popular theory that did not seem to choose a certain religion. So why believe that religion and science can be taught together? The evolution of Earth and the universe can be believed in any way an individual chooses.
“Separation of Church and State,” is a theory derived from different parts of the constitution; primarily the first and fourteenth amendment. The first amendment states “Congress shall make no law respecting and establishment or religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof....” The first amendment says that there can not be any laws against anyone’s individual religion. How far can we take this though? There are circumstances when you don’t want the government to intervene with your personal beliefs but is it sometimes necessary? What if there was a Satanist who believed in killing all other races. If the government was to punish them, wouldn’t that be suppressing their religious freedom? No. Sometimes different laws override the previous. For example, someone cannot practice their religion if it infringes upon another person’s rights.
Prohibiting School Prayer Threatens Religious Liberty. Civil Liberties. Ed. James D. Torr. -. San Diego: Greenhaven Press, 2003.
To open this discussion, I would like to start with the civil liberty of freedom of religion. This liberty was identified in my original Constitution essay through the mentioning of the separation of church and state clause. The reason for my including of this liberty, and my stressing of its importance, is that I feel that the government interprets this liberty in a one sided fashion because of the incorrect interpretation of the already in place separation of church and state clause. I also include it because I believe that recently the attacks upon religion have metastasized and tha...
In her article “Beyond the Wall of Separation: Church-State in Public Schools”, Martha McCarthy, a Chancellor Professor and chair of Educational Leadership and Policy Studies at Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana, makes it clear that her aim is to inform educators of the legal history and constitutional precedents of the Establishment clause and Free speech Clause of the First Amendment with an attached understanding of how educators should implement these findings. She summarizes and analyzes key Supreme Court rulings over the course of the 20th century as they pertain to religious expression in public schools. She clarifies the usage of both the Establishment Clause and the Free Speech Clause, including recent changes in trends that have been noted in the Supreme Court during the last decade. From the late 1940’s to the 1990’s most Supreme court rulings focused on the Establishment Clause to the increasing exclusion of the Free Speech Clause such that students were increasingly limited in the ways they were allowed to express themselves in school even in a private manner. In recent years, however, it has been noted that forcing students to suppress their religious expression is itself a religious statement and one that denies the role of religion in people’s lives. McCarthy notes that the public schools must take a neutral stand in relation to religion such that they do not defend or deny its role in people’s lives, either directly or indirectly.
The first and fourteenth amendments to the constitution establish the rules that apply to school prayer. The first amendment says: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof…and to petition the government for a redress of grievances. The 14th Amendment of the Constitution has several clauses; the clause that pertains to school prayer is the Equal Protection Clause requiring each state to provide equal protection under the law to all people within that state. What this means is, each student in the school is protected from being forced to pray in school in any certain way.
"God help, I'm so lost!" If you listen carefully, this is a common thought that is heard throughout many schools in the nation. Is this thought appropriate? The following statement clearly shows that the law allows students and adults to practice religion, but at the same time be respective of others and their beliefs even if they do believe or if they don't. "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, or to petition the government for a redress of grievances." (First Amendment, The Constitution of the United States). Prayer is not normally permitted as a scheduled part of classroom activities, because it would result in the violation of the principle of church-state separation, which has been defined by court interpretations of the 1st Amendment to the U.S, Constitution. The separation principle is extended to Public school as an arm of the government, with an exception which can be permitted if, during the school year, a mixture of prayers, statements, etc are delivered, using material derived from a number of different religions and secular sources. So far, this has never been tried in a school or ruled upon by a court (Religion in Public).
School prayer is a very controversial issue in today’s society. This issue has been a problem since America was first founded, in that the country was founded on religious beliefs. The Pilgrims wanted to be able to express their beliefs freely, but in England this freedom was not found, so they decided to come to the Americas, where their beliefs could be expressed freely. As time passed they realized that having this kind of freedom caused problems between different belief systems. Many people started questioning the founding of their nation and what the foundation was made of. This questioning is still going on today and people are torn between letting prayer in to the public school system or keeping it out.
While students are attending public schools they should be aware of their religion options. The student should have the right to practice their religion as they please, just on the own time. Yes, religion plays a huge part in molding a person but, should be practiced when the time is available, not in a classroom setting. The government should have the ability to control the protection of the students that just want to learn. The capability to regulate the religious practices while attending public educational institutions should be left to the government. Faith, religion and belief, usually are three words that are used to describe one situation, although these words have three different meanings. To have faith in something or someone you must first believe in it and also accept it as well, but have a belief without evidence. Religion is a belief in a heavenly superhuman power or principle, such as the almighty or creator to all things. Everyone has faith and belief, but not all believers believe in the almighty. Allowing religion into public schools while everyone attending not having the same belief is unfair, unconstitutional and is complicated to teach to a verity of students.