Faith Based Organizations vs. the Separation of Church and State
Issues regarding the separation of church and state frequently resurface. The first time this issue was made know to American citizens was when the Supreme Court removed prayer from the public school system. Last year, the Supreme Court made another decision in regards to this same concern, but with a slight twist. In June 2000 the hot topic case of the nation was the Supreme Court’s decision to rule that, “public schools cannot let students lead stadium crowds in prayer before high school football games.” (Alpert 1)
Separation of church and state functioned as a primary concern even during Thomas Jefferson’s Presidency and remains current today. Today the headlines focus on President George W. Bush and his proposal to use faith- based organizations to provide social services to the public.
Faith-based organizations and the Separation of Church and State created one of the biggest debates since its very inception. Maintaining the separation provides a foundational premise for America. Continuous growth of the United States encourages the law for separation of church and state even further. Population growth increases diversity issues for the United States of America and prevents the nation from affirming any particular religion.
Therefore, the First Amendment to the Constitution that formulates a mandate for the separation of church and state was designed to alleviate problems. Based on citations from a website article the Christian Banner exchange, in the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America states that, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; o...
... middle of paper ...
...ourt Restricts Prayer at Public Schools.” Times-Picayune 20 June 2001: A1
2. Bencivenga, Jim. “Church and Lawsuit.” Christian Science Monitor vol. 93 (2001):11
3. Waveney, Anne. “Plan to Give Faith Groups Money Enters Briar Patch.” St. Petersburg Times 28 April 2001: 5
4. Doerr, Edd. “Church and State.” Humanist vol. 61 March/April 2001: 2, 37
5. Duin, Julia. “Clerics Attack Faith Initiative Diverse Coalition Signs Open Letter.” Washington Times 1 May 2001: A1
6. Lampman, Jane. “Faith in Government.” Christian Science Monitor vol. 93 (2001): 11
7. Lazarus, Edward. title not listed. Los Angeles Times 4 July 1999:8
8. Author, Unknown. Christian Banner exchange http://www.spiritual-answers.com/Questions/church_and_state.htm
9. http://www.ncpa.org/pi/welfare/pdwel/pdwel202.html
10. http://www.welfarereformer.org/articles/articles/church.htm
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.
The Supreme Court case in Elk Grove Unified School District v. Newdow result in a unanimous ruling that the phrase “under God” may remain in the Pledge of Allegiance as narrated in public school classrooms. The court made the decision because the atheist father did not have grounds to sue the school district on behalf of his daughter. While the ruling was made on the Flag Day, it did not meet the clear endorsement of the constitutionality of the pledge as sought by President Bush and leaders of Republican and Democratic Parties in Congress. Notably, the eight judges who participated in the case had voted to turn over a federal appeals court decision in 2003 that would have prohibited the use of the phrase in public schools as an infringement of the constitutional outlaw on state-sponsored religion. A majority of these justices i.e. five made that ruling on procedural grounds in which Michael A. Newdow, the atheist, did not have legal reasons to sue the school district (Lane, 2004).
The first Amendment of the United States Constitution says; “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, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”[1] Our fore fathers felt that this statement was plain enough for all to understand, however quite often the United States government deems it necessary to make laws to better define those rights that are stated in the Constitution. Today the framers would be both encouraged and discouraged by our modern interpretation the First Amendment the United States Constitution.
Samples, John. "Religion and Civil Rights." World & I. 01 Jan. 2004: 32. eLibrary. Web. 24 Aug. 2011.
How the judicial branch rules in cases relating to the 1st and how they relate that to all the rights of public school students. This includes anything from flag burning to not saluting the flag to practicing religion in school. The main point of this paper is to focus on the fact that schools have a greater ability to restrict speech than government.
Separation of church and state is an issue in the forefront of people’s minds as some fight for their religious freedoms while others fight for their right to not be subjected to the religious beliefs of anybody else. Because public schools are government agencies they must operate under the same guidelines as any other government entity when it comes to religious expression and support, meaning they cannot endorse any specific religion nor can they encourage or require any religious practice. This issue becomes complicated when students exercise their right to free speech by expressing their religious beliefs in a school setting. An examination of First Amendment legal issues that arise when a student submits an essay and drawing of a religious
“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, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.” (First Amendment Center, 2008)
America in today's society is burdened with many economic and political problems that have begun to plague the nation. Controversial topics are constantly being debated from sunrise to sunset across the country with supporters and those who oppose each bearing various levels of financial and political misfortune. With the numerous economic and political problems that affect the nation, the argument over the issue of income inequality is one of the most notable. Creating a political civil war, proponents from both sides have brought the issue into national view and debate has grown substantially within recent years.
Summers, Lawrence. "Our Inequality of Opportunity." Washington Post. 16 Jul. 2012: A.15. SIRS Issues Researcher. Web. 24 Mar. 2014.
Income inequality has affected American citizens ever since the American Dream came to existence. The American Dream is centered around the concept of working hard and earning enough money to support a family, own a home, send children to college, and invest for retirement. Economic gains in income are one of the only possible ways to achieve enough wealth to fulfill the dream. Unfortunately, many people cannot achieve this dream due to low income. Income inequality refers to the uneven distribution of income and wealth between the social classes of American citizens. The United States has often experienced a rise in inequality as the rich become richer and the poor become poorer, increasing the unstable gap between the two classes. The income gap in America has been increasing steadily since the late 1970’s, and has now reached historic highs not seen since the 1920’s (Desilver). UC Berkeley economics professor, Emmanuel Saez conducted extensive research on past and present income inequality statistics and published them in his report “Striking it Richer.” Saez claims that changes in technology, tax policies, labor unions, corporate benefits, and social norms have caused income inequality. He stands to advocate a change in American economic policies that will help close this inequality gap and considers institutional and tax reforms that should be developed to counter it. Although Saez’s provides legitimate causes of income inequality, I highly disagree with the thought of making changes to end income inequality. In any diverse economic environment, income inequality will exist due to the rise of some economically successful people and the further development of factors that push people into poverty. I believe income inequality e...
Inequality today is one of the most significant problems that America faces. According to Inequality.org in 2015 Household income of the top 0.1% of the population gained $6,747,439 while bottom 90% of the population got $34,074 (Inequality.org). The gap between incomes only continues to grow every year, which requires a change in social and economic policies of the country. However, it should be remembered that economic indicators can tell about working conditions, living conditions, nutrition, education of representatives of various groups of the population, but they can not show a picture of the realizability and opportunities to be successful in life for different groups of the population. That is why at the end
"Vegetarianism." Opposing Viewpoints Online Collection. Detroit: Gale, 2010. Opposing Viewpoints in Context. Web. 10 Apr. 2014.
...." Editorial. First Things: A Monthly Journal of Religion & Public Life; Dec. 2008: 13-16. Academic Search Premier. Web. 19 Oct. 2010.
...ming I will be willing to contribute in any way that I can, and becoming a vegetarian will help the environment a great deal. Becoming a vegetarian can also lead to becoming a healthier person and living a healthy lifestyle. And lastly, the way animals are killed and treated in factory farms are unethical and they should not be treated the way they are just to create a meal for the next person.Consider that the animal you are eating was a vegetarian and the meat contains all the minerals and vitamins of the plant foods it ate when you eat it. Along with fats yourbody needs in substantial amounts to stay healthy.....more on the fats later. Meat is as close to a complete meal as you can get because of this.