Separation Between Church and State
As indicated in the post below, I have been up since before dawn today. (although a bit methophorical, please read my post below.) As my brain started to warm up, I could not help but noticing that over the weekend Presiden Bush spoke as commencement speaker at Trinity Luthern College. (this may not be the actual name, but it was a Christan school.) The issue of our government legislating morality, and not respecting the First Amendment is one that gets my blood pressure, normally 96/63 to double diget proportions.
Rather than pontificate endlessly on my opinon on the subject and get the aggitated before my concert this afternoon, I ask you this question: should our President during his tenure as in office be allowed to give a commencement speak at a religious based school? Does that act violate the first amendment and its principles regarding seperation of church and state?
Thank you for your minds.
Rather than pontificate endlessly on my opinon on the subject and get the aggitated before my concert this afternoon, I ask you this question: should our President during his tenure as in office be allowed to give a commencement speak at a religious based school? Does that act violate the first amendment and its principles regarding seperation of church and state?
Thank you for your minds.
12 Comments:
B,
I think it's a violation b/c it's a clear endorsement of a certain religion. This administration runs willy-nilly over that line constantly, and it angers me greatly. I think once his term is up he should be able to speak when and where he chooses, but as long as he is supposed to represent the people it's highly inappropriate for him (or any elected official, for that matter) to do something like this.
That's my 2 cents! Hope you're well!
B, you know the increasingly blurry line between church and state has my panties in a bunch.
But I'm not sure it's even possible for the Prez to avoid all nonsecular speaking engagements.
Brigham Young? Mormon. Notre Dame, Boston College, DePaul, Georgetown, Loyola? Catholic. Add religions and the list gets very long, very quickly. Soon he's hopping in one square foot of secular land, making his speech with a bullhorn and hoping it's loud enough for everyone to hear.
This is not to say he shouldn't TRY to avoid implicit endorsement of a certain religion by choosing to speak at secular locales--if I were Prez I certainly would--but let's face it, our current Prez has never shown much interest in creating the impression that he's not a servant of Christian interests. In that respect, at least, he's always been honest.
I guess if Clinton, Gore and Kerry can hop around and shout-speak at black churches, then Bush can speak where he pleases.
I have no problem with any President speaking at churches, religious based schools, etc...
I do have a problem if any President tries to make all USA citizens practice a certain religion. I've never to date seen that happen; thank God! (or Allah, etc...)
Actually, the line does not seem as blury as one would think anymore, it just is that Bush has no respect for it and crossed it by making his own rules.
I think that Trina put it perfecly. During a President's TERM, I think that he it is a violation if he speaks at a college endorsing a certain religion, abeit Christian, Jewish Budist or Muslim. When his term is over he could do what he wants.
Kerry never spoke as President, and I believe Clinton only spoke at a commencement when his term had expired.
Trina: Tell me where I know you from please. Is it MUA?
All excellent comments from wondreful minds, thank you.
Should he be allowed to speak at a religious school? Well, I don't think we should make a specific law forbidding it. Is it the right thing to do? Absolutely not. I agree that it is a violation ,atleast in spirit, of the first ammendment and it is in very poor taste.
But this is a man who thinks that 51% is a mandate and that being re-elected to office is all the justification he needs to torture people. He is so out of touch with reality that it wouldn't cross his mind that he might be doing the wrong thing.
hmmm... my first reaction is that -- and please keep in mind that I *hate* W -- the First Amendment guarantees freedom of speech, including for the President of the United States. IMHO, the President *should* be allowed to speak anywhere s/he wants -- it's up to the PEOPLE to know what's what and to *not* elect and re-elect a dope who says the only book s/he reads for pleasure is the Bible. I think the line is crossed only if the President tries to make a particular religion somehow the official religion of the United States. I think that for decades now, US Presidents have come perilously close to making Christianity a state religion. But speaking at a Christian school isn't a big deal in and of itself, nor would speaking at a Jewish school or what have you. Just my opinion.
Excellent points, aral, but is Bush not inching up on promoting Christianity as the offical religion of the state by engaging in what I believe to be non-neutral behavior at a school. As trina indicates, he is supposed to represent the people of this country, who are not all Christians?
If he says that he wishes all the people of the United States to become Christan, in a secular forum, is that not giving him the right to free speech, but inapproriate nevertheless because he is President of the U.S. which allows seperates the Church from the State?
I do think it would be *inappropriate* for Bush to say that he wishes for Americans to become Christians. I still think -- in an annoying, devil's advocate, card-carrying ACLU member way -- that Bush has the *right* to say it.
I think the fine line comes into play if it could be interpreted that he was trying to create policies or appoint people who would somehow push us toward becoming (officially) a Christian nation. AND it's possible to argue that he HAS crossed that line at times!
The sad thing is, I think this already *is* a de facto Christian nation, even though it's Constitutionally forbidden for it to become a de jure Christian nation.
Bridger,
You are a great thinker and well balanced person to boot. You have helped me have respect more respect for Christans, and realizing that not all right wingers who are out to use their own religion to justify their own ends. Thank you for the enlightment.
You know I feel the same way you do about the separation of church and state. It's of paramount importance for a democracy, it's crumbling all around us (no - it's being torn down), and it's very dangerous.
However... I don't think Bush speaking at a religious college or any other religious institution is any violation of church/state separation. Elected officials speak at actual houses of worship ("more religious" than a school) all the time. It's just reaching a certain audience.
I loathe Bush and his phony Christianity which calls for killing and intolerance. But giving a commencement speech at a religious college doesn't violate anything. We could probably go back through the last 10 or 12 presidents and find many others who did the same.
Btw Barbara, I'm still blogging. I'm only taking a break from commenting and chatting with commenters during the day, while I work furiously to meet my deadlines. I wasn't sure that was clear... Hope you're well.
the belief used to be freedom of religion NOT FREEDOM FROM RELIGION.
Radical secularism is a religion to some.
Liberals have no problem with the church thing when IT IS LIBERAL CHURCHS THAT DO THE TALKING.
HIPOCRITS.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home