Contradiction or not? - Page 2

Xcaezarx · 03-24-2008, 11:14 AM

Both are true. You protect the right to freedom of religion. Keep church and state seperate. Basically, don't give the churches say in how to run the government.

I guess in theory it is not contradicting, but in the US, the churches do try to affect state decisions, and so we do not keep church and state seperate.

cheapseats · 03-26-2008, 11:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Malkavian

Except if you follow no religion, you don't get a church...

Or freedom from taxation, with or without representation.

Malkavian · 03-26-2008, 01:47 PM

that too...

Ptech · 03-26-2008, 02:36 PM

I would say that both statements could easily be true.

The founders wrote the law so that government would be neutral in matters religious.

About a century or so later, however, the religious zealots had coerced unprincipled politicians into putting religious slogans on the currency and coin, and religious words engraved in buildings.

cheapseats · 03-28-2008, 10:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ppatt

Can the following two propositions be true or do they contradict one another?

The founders of the United States believed that churches should be protected and encouraged
The founders of the United States believed that the government should not assist or support churches

They can both be true without contradiction, so long as terms are divided narrowly...which is what Law is all about, yes?

To protect the right to assemble and practice in faith is not to assist read-that-facilitate beyond protecting the right to assemble and practice a faith.

To encourage assembly and practice in faith is not to support it, any more than encouraging participation in, say, extracurricular sports and music is to imply a free ride on athletic equipment and musical instruments.

Jonesy · 04-05-2008, 03:04 PM

I'm not sure the founders wanted churches to be tax-exempt. It could very well be a legal loop-hole, in the way the amendment was written.

All they really wanted was for religion to stop causing problems.

Free Parking · 04-05-2008, 03:40 PM

To me, it comes down to how you define "encourage". It sounds a lot like assistance to me, so I voted that they contradict.

Malkavian · 04-05-2008, 03:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Free Parking

To me, it comes down to how you define "encourage". It sounds a lot like assistance to me, so I voted that they contradict.

Yes. If statement 1 talks about the same thing as statement 2 (government, which is explicitly mentioned in statement 2), then "encouraged" definitely means special interest. Only theocracies have a business in "encouraging" religion.

View Poll Results: Are the two statements true or contractions?
Both statements are true	7	53.85%
The statements contradict one another	3	23.08%
I am not playing. It is a trick question	3	23.08%
Voters: 13. You may not vote on this poll

03-24-2008, 11:14 AM	#11 (permalink)
Xcaezarx Damn sexy Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Virginia Posts: 39 My Mood: Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts	Both are true. You protect the right to freedom of religion. Keep church and state seperate. Basically, don't give the churches say in how to run the government. I guess in theory it is not contradicting, but in the US, the churches do try to affect state decisions, and so we do not keep church and state seperate.
	Top

03-26-2008, 01:47 PM	#13 (permalink)
Malkavian Milked Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: Resting in Peace Posts: 4,428 My Mood: Thanks: 279 Thanked 62 Times in 54 Posts	that too... __________________ Woof!
	Top

03-26-2008, 02:36 PM	#14 (permalink)
Ptech Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Fort Pierce FL Posts: 1,304 Thanks: 35 Thanked 24 Times in 22 Posts	I would say that both statements could easily be true. The founders wrote the law so that government would be neutral in matters religious. About a century or so later, however, the religious zealots had coerced unprincipled politicians into putting religious slogans on the currency and coin, and religious words engraved in buildings.
	Top

04-05-2008, 03:04 PM	#16 (permalink)
Jonesy Truth Lion Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 2,554 Thanks: 10 Thanked 32 Times in 23 Posts	I'm not sure the founders wanted churches to be tax-exempt. It could very well be a legal loop-hole, in the way the amendment was written. All they really wanted was for religion to stop causing problems.
	Top

04-05-2008, 03:40 PM	#17 (permalink)
Free Parking Do Not Pass Go Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 1,160 My Mood: Thanks: 6 Thanked 25 Times in 15 Posts	To me, it comes down to how you define "encourage". It sounds a lot like assistance to me, so I voted that they contradict.
	Top

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode