62
edits
Changes
Separation of church and state (view source)
Revision as of 16:16, January 7, 2009
, 16:16, January 7, 2009Added notes on Pat Robertson's take
== Separating the Church from the State's Influence ==
== Separating the Church from the State's Influence ==
Like many political doctrines, the separation of church & state is a double-edged sword. If religion cannot influence government, nor can government influence religion. Accordingly, churches and religious organizations are kept from government intrusion with the highest deference to ecclesiastical matters. For example, Title VII contains a built-in exception for religious organizations.<ref>42 U.S.C. 2000(e)-(1).</ref> The provision has been construed to allow churches to handle their ministerial matters without government intrusion in any way.<ref>McClure v. Salvation Army.</ref> In this sense, separation of church & state is ''good'' for the church, as it ensures religious autonomy.
Like many political doctrines, the separation of church & state is a double-edged sword. If religion cannot influence government, nor can government influence religion. Accordingly, churches and religious organizations are kept from government intrusion with the highest deference to ecclesiastical matters. For example, Title VII contains a built-in exception for religious organizations.<ref>42 U.S.C. 2000(e)-(1).</ref> The provision has been construed to allow churches to handle their ministerial matters without government intrusion in any way.<ref>McClure v. Salvation Army.</ref> In this sense, separation of church & state is ''good'' for the church, as it ensures religious autonomy.
==Only a Limit on Federal Power==
Pat Robertson has argued that the [[Establishment Clause]] was intended merely to prevent the Federal government from imposing a state religion, as many of the original 13 states already had their own official religion.<ref>http://www.patrobertson.com/Statesman/StatesRights.asp</ref>
:''Let's look again at the constitution's intent to empower the legislature. With Congress holding such power, the states got nervous. They reasoned that relinquishing so much power to the Congress threatened state sovereignty. After all, this is a United States of America. It is not one vast democracy of homogeneous people. It is Maryland. It is Connecticut. It is Massachusetts. It is New York. These are separate states. So the Constitution was enhanced by the Bill of Rights. The first point in the Bill of Rights, the First Amendment to the Constitution, said "Congress shall pass no law respecting the establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof." There were certain states at that time that had established religions. Massachusetts was a case in point. They had a state religion. And they didn't want this enormously powerful Congress to superimpose a religious system on their state system. To guarantee the states retained critical rights, the tenth amendment said, "All the power that is not expressly delegated to the federal government is reserved for the states." The intent? The people, i.e. the states, have delegated power. They gave up some powers, but they did not give up all powers because they are sovereign states.''
:Pat Robertson, Yale University Law School, March 25, 1986
== References ==
== References ==
<references/>
<references/>
[[category:politics]]
[[category:politics]]