Separation of Church and State ~ Atheists View

The separation of Church and State was and was not the agenda in the beginning of this country. It was the agenda if we accept the idea that it was to keep the State from imposing a particular religion on the people in order that people can worship freely or not at all. It was not the agenda because it was not meant to eradicate religion from any American's public life. The 1st Amendment was written as such to control the State from having ultimate authority over and above any

one's public and private life. In this country, we have a right to have a voice 'freedom of speech' in public and in private.

We have many other civil liberties that grant us freedom of personhood as long as we are not breaking laws that prohibit others from their same right and not causing physical and or emotional harm. The later is much more difficult to manage since what my neighbor or boss might call just positive criticism could be for me derogatory and hurtful. Relativism is a slippery slope. The atheist would know this too. And, they would also agree that people have a right to believe what they want to, since that is what they want - not believing in God is the belief that man is all there is. Any believer in God then would have to tolerate the unbeliever and there are not enough incidents that show or prove a believer being intolerant of an unbeliever... it has always been the other way around.

Likely, the atheist would agree that it is better to know people publicly ...where someone stands on issues, laws, preferences and beliefs as declared publicly. One would and should feel and be safer in such a society knowing those things about you.

Atheists must also know that most of what modern man considers moral is what has come out of religion. Mosaic law is still the basis for 21st century law. If that is not true, there where has man taken his law and morality from? If man is the basis for all perfection and good in this world, then where did he get is ideas from? Many only knows what works for him in the place he is. That does not mean it is good for him or anyone... only a reasonable amount of giving and taking is what he accepts in his life and he wants the most in every instance. Rarely, do we see man giving what he has to another. If that were so popular among men, there would not be any poverty.

If you argue that man is inherently bad and that is why we need law then your atheist argument does not work -which is that we can all be good without God... we just have to be good and good laws make us good. Who makes good laws? Good people??? Atheists recognize that people are not good and thus they need good laws. So, who makes good laws? The State? Who is the State ... remember man is inherently bad.

If someone finds a way to keep man in check or create good men, then who will decide if they are good enough. It's a bottomless pit. Only an absolute perfect being like God could know what is good and good enough. You may ask, Man is not good then??? Did not God create man in his image? Yes, then man disobeyed and fell into corruption and out from paradise. Is man still the image of God? Now, that is a good question? To be sure, the atheist is glad to have no answer for it, though not better for it.


~ John 14:9 Jesus said, "Anyone who has seen me has seen the Father."