Were Republicans anti-separation of church and state before the

[Lisa0825]

Christian Right took over? Or did this aspect of the party come about in the recent past? I have been googling for info on this to use in a discussion I am having (outside of DU), but I haven't found any good sources yet. The person I am arguing with says, "Separation of church and state means that the government will not mandate one particular religion...that's all it means." If this used to be a non-partisan issue, I'd like to be able to point that out to her, since she basically just tows the party line on everything, and is not extremely religious.

Thanks for any info:-)

[madrchsod]

1. yes they were

the rise of fundamentalism in all religions across the the world has changed all that. i suppose it is a reaction to the natural evolution of society and the inability to change the dogma into evolving terms and ideas..

[murielm99]

2. All I can tell you is that I have heard Jimmy Carter discuss it

recently.

I read a magazine interview he did. I think it was American Progress, but you would have to Google it to find the article. It was a few months ago.

He said that separation of church and state used to be a theological point of pride with the Southern Baptists.

I know Carter is a Democrat, but not all Southern Baptists are Democrats.

Maybe you can find some of the older statements they made about separation of church and state. Carter said this was a theological point of view twenty-five years ago.

It was probably during the times they were all yelling about states' rights.

Good luck.

[Sandpiper]

3. When JFK ran for President

The Repukes complained that because Kennedy was a Catholic, he'd take marching orders from the Pope rather than the American people.

Fast forward 44 years and you have another Massachusetts Catholic, John Kerry, running for President. Their complaint this time is that Kerry DOESN'T take marching orders from the Pope.

Go figure.

[Warpy]

4. No, they were actually a reasonable party prior to 1980

when Reagan sold the party platform out to the fundies in order to increase the party base by promising to put women back into the kitchen, barefoot and pregnant, and force the kiddies to pray the "right" sort of prayers by mandating them in the schools. However, even Reagan didn't foresee paying the fundies back by lavishing the money going to the few social programs onto their churches, instead.

(The reason the GOP hasn't really done jack shit about their promises to the fundies is because corporate America won't stand for losing its cheaper workforce to enforced pregnancy and childbirth, and they really couldn't care less about Baptist prayers over school intercoms. Now if the platform had mandated 5 minutes of cereal and toy commercials every day, they might have gone for it...)

I sincerely hope we're seeing the nadir of this sellout to religious lunacy in the GOP, and I sincerely hope the lunatics start running some of their own in 2008. Former judge Roy Moore nearly made a run this year, and he's likely to run in the future. Out of a job, you know.

[Cats Against Frist]

7. I think you're my twin postmate

Your tone and everything sounds a lot like myself.

I too, think the ONLY solution to this is to get the whackos on their own ticket.

[Warpy]

10. Nicest compliment I've had in a long time. Thanks!

[RoyGBiv]

5. Historical Perspective

You might try looking for some things Thomas Jefferson had to say about this, in particular in letters to Baptist Churches. (Ironically, Baptists were among the first adamant adherents of the separation because they felt themselves to be persecuted under the establishment of official relgions under State authority.)

Here's a quote from a letter Jefferson wrote to the Virginia Baptists in 1808:

"Because religious belief, or non-belief, is such an important part of every person's life, freedom of religion affects every individual. State churches that use government power to support themselves and force their views on persons of other faiths undermine all our civil rights. Moreover, state support of the church tends to make the clergy unresponsive to the people and leads to corruption within religion. Erecting the "wall of separation between church and state," therefore, is absolutely essential in a free society."

[Cats Against Frist]

6. That's one of their favorite ploys

As if the whole reason that the founders wrote about the wall between church and state, and put freedom of religion in the FIRST amendment, because they were scared that one day, someone looking suspiciously like the coronor munchkin in the "Wizard of Oz" would stand up with a rolled-up parchment and decree: "As president, I must aver, I thoroughly examined her and she's not only merely a Christian Nation, she's really, most sincerely a Christian nation."

You think that's why they put it in there? Just in case someone decided to "decree it?"

And further, what if it was decreed? And god was mentioned on our money, mandated in our schools, placed above every judicial doorway in the land. If we funded religious schools, funded religious charity organizations, let churches particpate in politics tax free, censored television according to Christian sensibilities, amended the Constitution every time a narrow passage in the bible warranted it.

I think that would pretty much mean that we've decreed ourselves a Christian nation, right? Those are all things that the religious right is either trying to do, or Bush and the GOP is letting them do.

And further -- OK. I hear Christians and Christian politicians stand up, and go on TV, and in call-in shows EVERY SINGLE FRIGGIN DAY, repeat these words: "The United States is a Christian Nation."

So are they decreeing it? Are they not supposed to do that?

There are PLENTY of argument against this -- limitless. Study the writings of the founders, particularly Thomas Jefferson and Ben Franklin -- study the enlightenment and how it helped birth democracy.

This, however, is to help your friend how ludicrous that particular argument is.

As far as separation goes, the founders wrote about it, and the only thing in the Constitution that mentions religion is the first amendment and the clause about how politicians should not have to pass a religious test. The declaration of Independence cites nature's God, which is the god of rationality. The SC, thankfully, has seen it fit to interpret all this information to mean there should be a separation of Church and state, but I wouldn't be so sure if the Chimp gets re-selected.

[Lisa0825]

8. Thanks everyone. I have found a lot of good info in a historical

context. I was hoping to find some info on more recent (or pre-fundie-takeover) Republicans who were pro-separartion. I haven't found anything like that yet but some great quotes and this in particular: http://www.theocracywatch.org/separation_church_state2.htm

[noonwitch]

9. I have heard Gerald Ford and William Milliken comment on religion

Both condemned the GOP/Religious right marriage as extreme. Milliken is a pro-choice liberal, who supports environmentalism and labor unions. He was Governor of Michigan from roughly 1974 to 1982.

Gerald Ford was the representative from a very conservative community, but even as moderate as he was, managed to get elected repeatedly to office. The mayor of his home town in the early 70s was a moderate african american republican named Lyman Parks (Grand Rapids mayor). This was all in the days before Reagan, when conservatives had voices in both parties as did liberals. It lead to both parties being rather moderate, with republicans supporting big business and democrats supporting labor. Social issues were really not a big deal for either party at the time.