Separation of Church & State?

Churches provide morals & humanities 鈥?while State provides transportation, law & order, military/police, taxation, and Executive 鈥?so why is the State involved into so many humanitarian causes (education, environment, retirement/ unemployment) 鈥?doesn鈥檛 it seem that government is encroaching on the Churches responsibilities a bit too much???

I actually think it's the other way around. I think it's going to become worse of a battle also. My fear is that in 200 years people will be saying "Remember when there was religion."

'-)

Yes...lower my taxes and let me donate my money to the cause that I would like.

If I want to donate to unwed mothers without jobs...then I should be able to make that choice...I shouldn't be forced to.

They want a separation of church and state when it is convenient.

"Separation of church and state" is not the law of this country, it does not appear in the constitution ANYWHERE. Basically it's a phrase made up by a bunch of liberal activist judges to advance their atheist / communist agenda.

The church does not and has never been involved with retirement or environment as it is covered by the law. Education should never be left in the hands of the church as it is biased as to what it will teach and how.

So the answer to your question is no the government is not encroaching on church business.

Separation of Church and state does not exist in the constitution.

yes

no not to me the government is just saying that not everyone believes in the same thing and to some praying to one god while that person is there may disturb them in some way. but it doesnt matter to me because i go to church every sunday and dont find nothing wrong with other people praying to their god in front of me. i mean get serious its more than just one religion out there.

It is the other way around the church is trying to put there agendas into the state like gambling, ABORTION, immigration. That is why the separation of church and state is necessary. The Church is a tax free entity and should keep its nose out of politics.

why would it be the churches responsibility to educate everybody, protect the enviornment, and do retirement and unemployment....I am sorry to say I do not want the church deciding all of that for me (of course the government is not much better) but I am not a member of a church/religion so why would they govern so many aspects of my life

Churches provide superstitious hope for the impossible. Otherwise it should stay out of anything else. If education was left to the churches, each domination would sneak in their beliefs to the detriment of other subjects.
Not too many good Lutherans would care to have their kids go to a school run by Buddhists. Each community would have to have a school of each domination of each religion. There would be more church run schools than houses.
Forget employment or retirement. I believe churches should stick to praying, and keep out of everything else.

The concept of a separation of church and state simply means that Congress (and by application of the 14th Amendment, the States) cannot legislate religion. We cannot be told what religion, if any, we must practice, or what religion we may not practice.
The Executive Branch of the government (whether state or federal), is charged with protection of its people. Laws concerning education, environment, retirement, unemployment, etc., are concerned with protection of the people (although it may not always seem that way!).
Churches, on the other hand, have no legal obligation to provide any of these services, but may, of course, provide whatever humanitarian services it wishes to its congregation or others. The government, however, does have such an obligation, and cannot shirk this obligation and hope that the various churches pick it up.

Not at all. The idea of separation of Church and State is stated in the 1st amendment to the constitution. We shall not make any laws establishing a religion or to prevent the free exercise thereof. This only means that the State cannot place one religious belief system over another. There can be not an official religion of the united states...all are equal. The government social programs do no encroach on any of the churches doings. Churches are still able to help out in any way they can. There are no limits place on them. All churches and the government can co exist.

Well, think about it for a moment...the church provides morals, but the government does not. They may work on humanitarian needs, but things life education, unemployment and the environment are certainly important legal matters, so it actually fits in perfectly with what their role should be! I see no confusion as to what they should or should not be doing!

I think there is some confusion about what is meant by separation of Church and State. It certainly doesn't mean that state should not involve itself in humanitarian causes. Would you really want that? You might not like all the causes supported by the state, but have you never benefited? Have you never attended public school, received a scholarship or financial aide? Has no one in your family ever received unemployment benefits? Has no child you know ever gone to Headstart? I myself work full time, but can't afford health insurance- thank goodness for the low income program at Denver General! Why would anyone object to their government being involved in humanitarian causes? We should all involve ourselves in humanitarian causes.

Separation of church means that no one religion shall be able to mix its beliefs and values into government. When you get religion and government mixing everyone who is not part of that religion tends to be oppressed. Look at Iraq. Another example would be the 'Christian' extremists in this country who are constantly trying to push laws against gay people. I have no doubt that, were it not for the separation of church and state, there are plenty of extremists who would love to support their local prison interment camps. And speaking of which, one can even say that Hitler's regime was another example of church and state mixing and running amok. Hilter's 'church' was atheism, but he twisted that to persecute people of other religions.

As for it not being in the constitution, well, neither is a woman's right to vote and if that's the work of bleeding heart liberals, then I say bless the bleeding heart liberals.