Should religion and the state be separate?

John_C_87

@MayCaesar ;
I think you are confused here a bit. Removal of prayers from schools is not an anti-religious act; it is a pro-neutrality act. 
It's governing liberty, prayer is still in school the school does not police the preyers that take place basically. The issue was no-one defended the literature as just that writings.

@TKDB
Religion is harmless.
Prayer is harmless.
Not really they can be an instigation and intimidation to some people, they can involve rituals that can be harmful as well.

As for religious schools, they are publicly funded, the funding is not tax-based, but the schools are religiously exclusive by their enrolment process, there is a difference. Also, keep in mind a school run by a governing legal state, which collects taxation on its own behalf, is not an authority on the instruction of the church, and instruction of religion. They are boards with directors who are members of different religious backgrounds in a community. And when assuming control of a religious undergoing like teaching and schooling the board as the elected representation has no means to eliminate religion from instruction with this extensive history other than constitutional separation. The basic principle being the contradiction to the test of intelligence common sense takes second place to the fears of grading.

TKDB

@MayCaesar

The Atheist crowd using the Separation of Church and State Law tool to purge Religion out of the Public School system is the definition of Religious Discrimination being utilized by the Atheists of the United States.

And I'm still waiting for the descendents of that 1962 Atheist generation, to hire another group of attorneys to go after the Catholic School system, and the Religious Colleges in the United States, to purge Religion from those education systems as well?

To see another example of the Atheist Equality Standard? 

John_C_87

TKDB said:

@MayCaesar

The Atheist crowd using the Separation of Church and State Law tool to purge Religion out of the Public School system is the definition of Religious Discrimination being utilized by the Atheists of the United States.

And I'm still waiting for the descendents of that 1962 Atheist generation, to hire another group of attorneys to go after the Catholic School system, and the Religious Colleges in the United States, to purge Religion from those education systems as well?

To see another example of the Atheist Equality Standard? 

They are vying for control, not the removal of religion from education. The idea of an education system without religious influence cannot exist as the basic principle of both are a United State. Separation of church and state points that out. Atheism like the choice in abortion simply does not exist people are convinced that it does exist by how they are educated. I was taught in a private school that GOD is an axiom that the word of what some call a deity is also just numbers.

Where did the idea of God being only a deity come from? 
In basic, I would believe it arose from prejudice.

TKDB

@John_C_87

I believe you're right, some of the Atheists via their Separation of Church and State Law tool, are vying for control with it.

SkepticalOne

@MayCaesar

Removal of prayers from schools is not an anti-religious act; it is a pro-neutrality act

Agree, except I think we should be careful to describe the situation accurately. Prayer is not being removed from schools - if it were then @TKDB may have a point.

John_C_87

TKDB said:

@John_C_87

I believe you're right, some of the Atheists via their Separation of Church and State Law tool, are vying for control with it.

Not some atheists, all religions vie for control over education, it is due to the structure of religion itself. All religions share the basic principle of publicly shared belief as a united state. learning is nothing more than publicly share beliefs.

TKDB

@John_C_87

I've been to various Catholic churches, Baptist churches, and non Denominational churches, and in none of those Religious experiences, was any of the Religious leaders, parents, students, or seniors citizens, plotting to do any sort of a Religious takeover of the Public School systems with any Religion.

"Not some atheists, all religions vie for control over education, it is due to the structure of religion itself. All religions share the basic principle of publicly shared belief as a united state. learning is nothing more than publicly share beliefs."

MayCaesar

@TKDB

Once again; removal of religious privilege is not an act of discrimination. The presence of that privilege in the first place is discrimination, and its removal is an act of neutralisation and equalisation.

There were no prayers at my post-Soviet schools. There was also no longer collective loyalty swearing to the Party. There was nothing: you come to school, you sit at your desk, and the classes start - that is it. No weird rituals, no singing national anthems or bowing to flags. That some of these things are present at American schools is truly bizarre, when even in some openly communist states, such as China, many schools no longer have them. You would expect the freest country in the world to not have such elements present at taxpayer-funded schools, right?


@SkepticalOne ;

I am not really familiar with the actual argument people make; @TKDB specifically refers to the proposals to remove prayer from schools, and I am simply explaining to him that these proposals are not discriminatory.

TKDB

@MayCaesar

@SkepticalOne

Sure, it's discrimination.

And it's discriminate because, the Atheist Equality Standards, aren't upholding its own discrimination standards by not going after the Catholic School system, and the Religious Colleges, with the Separation of Church and State Law tool, in order to purge Religion out of those educational facilities?

MayCaesar

@TKDB

I do not understand most of what you are saying. Explain to me how removal of a religious privilege from schools constitutes discrimination. Nobody talks about "purging religion"; we are talking about separating religion from the government, which includes government-funded entities such as public schools.

Private schools and colleges are free to introduce any religious rituals they want, obviously.

What are the "atheist equality standards"? Equality is equality; "atheist equality" is a phrase that has no meaning.

John_C_87

TKDB said:

@John_C_87

I've been to various Catholic churches, Baptist churches, and non Denominational churches, and in none of those Religious experiences, was any of the Religious leaders, parents, students, or seniors citizens, plotting to do any sort of a Religious takeover of the Public School systems with any Religion.

"Not some atheists, all religions vie for control over education, it is due to the structure of religion itself. All religions share the basic principle of publicly shared belief as a united state. learning is nothing more than publicly share beliefs."

Interesting you would say that.

piloteer

It is time that religion is separated from all things concerning the government, but also all things cultural, and social, and religion should be left in the past for the rise of the new God that will be based on objective reasoning. Emotions are for the weak.    

Dee

Absolutely , you want to be religious fine but government have no right to inflict religious on others , that’s a dictatorship 

TKDB

@Dee

Where is your EVIDENCE?

Show me where the Government went out of it's way to shove Religion down an individuals throat?

Back your opinion up Dee?

"Absolutely , you want to be religious fine but government have no right to inflict religious on others , that’s a dictatorship"

Is the above comment, an example of your individual dictatorship?

TKDB

@piloteer

Look at your dictatorship?

"It is time that religion is separated from all things concerning the government, but also all things cultural, and social, and religion should be left in the past for the rise of the new God that will be based on objective reasoning. Emotions are for the weak."

Is the above a sign of your weakness?  

TKDB

@John_C_87

I've been to various Catholic churches, Baptist churches, and non Denominational churches, and in none of those Religious experiences, was any of the Religious leaders, parents, students, or seniors citizens, plotting to do any sort of a Religious takeover of the Public School systems with any Religion.

"Interesting you would say that."

Because I've experienced zero EVIDENCE to the contrary.

I think that the anti Religious individuals like to use the internet as a Scare Tactic device, against Religion, and to have multiple persons from other countries, and the United States itself, to have their ways with their ways with their anti Religious narratives on the internet?

And those individual anti Religious talking heads are failing with their individually talked up anti Religious scare tactics.


I've LIVED the below experiences in person:

(I've been to various Catholic churches, Baptist churches, and non Denominational churches, and in none of those Religious experiences, was any of the Religious leaders, parents, students, or seniors citizens, plotting to do any sort of a Religious takeover of the Public School systems with any Religion.)

I did so, in the event that if any Religious indoctrination was taking place, that I could see it with my own eyes.
And no indoctrination is, or had taken place.

Not one time, that I know of has a Religious building been shut down by local law enforcement over "ANY FEARS," that Religious indoctrination was going on in any Religious building?

And I'm still waiting to see one anti Religious person in the news for going to a Religious building, and to protest Religion where the Religious building stands?

Or one news article, where Religion was found guilty of a crime, along with criminal or offender who committed any crime?

TKDB

@MayCaesar

"Nobody talks about "purging religion"; we are talking about separating religion from the government, which includes government-funded entities such as public schools."

But purging Religion from the public school system is what has been going on since 1962, true or not?

JFK made a speech about it.
(I'm becoming a student of history because of some of the Atheists and their Equality Standards.)

And again I'm still waiting on that same Atheist Equality Standards mechanism, to go after the Catholic School system, and the Religious Colleges, to purge them as well of Religion?

Thus being fair and equal to the Public School system, because Religion was purged from that School system first, right?

If the Atheists are going to be about Fairness and Equality, when it comes to their utilization of the Separation of Church and State Law tool, they can't just stop with the Public School system, can they?

The reason being this, it's hypocritical to single out the Public School system, and then leave the Catholic School system and the Religious Colleges out of the mix, because some might view the Atheist Equality Standards, as being biased in an unfair and unequal way?

"Private schools and colleges are free to introduce any religious rituals they want, obviously.

What are the "atheist equality standards"? Equality is equality; "atheist equality" is a phrase that has no meaning."

The Atheist Equality Standards do have meaning, it's a set of equality standards, that some of the Atheists themselves inspired.

John_C_87

Because I've experienced zero EVIDENCE to the contrary.

I've LIVED the below experiences in person:

(I've been to various Catholic churches, Baptist churches, and non-denominational churches, and in none of those Religious experiences, was any of the Religious leaders, parents, students, or seniors citizens, plotting to do any sort of a religious takeover of the Public School systems with any Religion.)

I did so, in the event that if any Religious indoctrination was taking place, that I could see it with my own eyes.
And no indoctrination is or had taken place.

Again, I find it interesting you would say that. You are considering the seen of the crime automatically to be the Churches and not the schools were the crime is to is/have taken place. As if you have a low opinion on the intelligence of the criminal and the commitment to wrong.

Not one time, that I know of has a Religious building been shut down by local law enforcement over "ANY FEARS," that Religious indoctrination was going on in any Religious building? And I'm still waiting to see one anti Religious person in the news for going to a Religious building, and to protest Religion where the Religious building stands?
Or one news article, where Religion was found guilty of a crime, along with criminal or offender who committed any crime?

Isn’t it federal law enforcement who is better exposed to the crimes that would be investigated? While the schools themselves have been confiscated, taken from the establishments of churches and religion in America. I’m am not saying that the argument of management is not justified, the argument by fact and evidence taking place. You do not honor the issue by not admitting relevance to conflicts between the people.

And, both sides of this debate form do not see all the use of separation of church and state. The power is to me, as a person who attends a church of some kind and the power is given are to separate my opinions from those of the churches, by the principles a state itself can form.

TKDB

@John_C_87

About you, I know this, you have a history of lamenting in a way that is totally yours:

"Again, I find it interesting you would say that. You are considering the seen of the crime automatically to be the Churches and not the schools were the crime is to is/have taken place. As if you have a low opinion on the intelligence of the criminal and the commitment to wrong."

"Isn’t it federal law enforcement who is better exposed to the crimes that would be investigated? While the schools themselves have been confiscated, taken from the establishments of churches and religion in America. I’m am not saying that the argument of management is not justified, the argument by fact and evidence taking place. You do not honor the issue by not admitting relevance to conflicts between the people."

"And, both sides of this debate form do not see all the use of separation of church and state. The power is to me, as a person who attends a church of some kind and the power is given are to separate my opinions from those of the churches, by the principles a state itself can form."

@John_C_879 ;

I want to see the Evidence, and not the standard lamenting that you're known for.

Dee

@TKDB


******Where is your EVIDENCE?

Show me where the Government went out of it's way to shove Religion down an individuals throat?


What government are you talking about?    Let’s start with Saudi Arabia do you think there’s a separation of state and religion?

Should religion and the state be separate?

read how I answered again .......


You want to be religious fine but government have no right to inflict religious on others , that’s a dictatorship

TKDB

@Dee

Dee, I live in the United States, so geographically I'm talking about the US.

"What government are you talking about?    Let’s start with Saudi Arabia do you think there’s a separation of state and religion?"

And more examples of how your individual pro Atheist dictatorship stance is utilized by your own word's:

"What government are you talking about?    Let’s start with Saudi Arabia do you think there’s a separation of state and religion?"

Should religion and the state be separate?

"read how I answered again."


"You want to be religious fine but government have no right to inflict religious on others , that’s a dictatorship."

Dee

****** Dee, I live in the United States, so geographically I'm talking about the US.

Yes you are , the question didn’t ask that though did it?

piloteer

TKDB said:

@piloteer

Look at your dictatorship?

"It is time that religion is separated from all things concerning the government, but also all things cultural, and social, and religion should be left in the past for the rise of the new God that will be based on objective reasoning. Emotions are for the weak."

Is the above a sign of your weakness?  

@TKDB

The above statement is a sign of our strength in knowing that humanity refuses to align any longer with insignificant religions no more worthy than a grain of sand in a desert of nothingness. My dictatorship is our dictatorship. Look in awe at the amount of people who are now proudly atheist and have a need for a new religion that fits their new order. Humanity will triumph over petty emotions.   

MayCaesar

TKDB said:

@MayCaesar

"Nobody talks about "purging religion"; we are talking about separating religion from the government, which includes government-funded entities such as public schools."

But purging Religion from the public school system is what has been going on since 1962, true or not?

JFK made a speech about it.
(I'm becoming a student of history because of some of the Atheists and their Equality Standards.)

And again I'm still waiting on that same Atheist Equality Standards mechanism, to go after the Catholic School system, and the Religious Colleges, to purge them as well of Religion?

Thus being fair and equal to the Public School system, because Religion was purged from that School system first, right?

If the Atheists are going to be about Fairness and Equality, when it comes to their utilization of the Separation of Church and State Law tool, they can't just stop with the Public School system, can they?

The reason being this, it's hypocritical to single out the Public School system, and then leave the Catholic School system and the Religious Colleges out of the mix, because some might view the Atheist Equality Standards, as being biased in an unfair and unequal way?

"Private schools and colleges are free to introduce any religious rituals they want, obviously.

What are the "atheist equality standards"? Equality is equality; "atheist equality" is a phrase that has no meaning."

The Atheist Equality Standards do have meaning, it's a set of equality standards, that some of the Atheists themselves inspired.

Perhaps; I do not know the subject well enough to comment on it. But I am talking about the particular proposal to remove prayers from schools; I am not talking about what has actually been done in this regard so far.

Why go after Catholic schools and religious colleges, when they are private entities? Private-funded entities are free to do whatever they want, but the public-funded entities I am forced to pay for better be ideologically impartial (note: not the same as atheist).

Okay, how do "atheist equality standards" differ from the regular notions of equality? Are there different interpretations of equality? If "equality" is the term that raises questions, then replace it with "impartiality", which is my preferred term, considered how loaded the term "equality" nowadays is.

TKDB

@piloteer

Your below statement, shows how ritualistically dependent, that some of the Anti Religious rhetoric messengers have become on the internet, to get their messeging across though, right @piloteer?

"The above statement is a sign of our strength in knowing that humanity refuses to align any longer with insignificant religions no more worthy than a grain of sand in a desert of nothingness. My dictatorship is our dictatorship. Look in awe at the amount of people who are now proudly atheist and have a need for a new religion that fits their new order. Humanity will triumph over petty emotions."

"The sign of our strength?"

Have you and others formed an anti Religious congregation/dictatorship on the internet, @piloteer?

@piloteer You're a proud Atheist pushing dictator, aren't you?

"My dictatorship is our dictatorship."

Who do you draw your dictatorship mindset from?

Stalin, Jim Jones, or maybe another dictator who's inspired your Atheist political messeging?

"Look in awe at the amount of people who are now proudly atheist and have a need for a new religion that fits their new order."

@piloteer

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dictator

"A dictator is a political leader who possesses absolute power. A dictatorship is a state ruled by one dictator or by a small clique.[2] The word originated as the title of a magistrate in the Roman Republic appointed by the Senate to rule the republic in times of emergency (see Roman dictator and justitium).[3]

Like the term "tyrant" (which was originally a non-pejorative Ancient Greek title), and to a lesser degree "autocrat", "dictator" came to be used almost exclusively as a non-titular term for oppressive rule. Thus, in modern usage, the term "dictator" is generally used to describe a leader who holds or abuses an extraordinary amount of personal power. Dictatorships are often characterised by some of the following: suspension of elections and civil liberties; proclamation of a state of emergency; rule by decree; repression of political opponents; not abiding by the rule of law procedures, and cult of personality. Dictatorships are often one-party or dominant-party states.[4][5]

A wide variety of leaders coming to power in different kinds of regimes, such as military juntas, one-party states, dominant-party states, and civilian governments under a personal rule, have been described as dictators. They may hold left or right-wing views, or may be apolitical. "

@piloteer

"Humanity will triumph over petty emotions."

Humanity has already triumphed over Stalin, Hitler, Jim Jones, and the like already.

So triumphing over the Atheist dictatorship won't be any much different, than those previous victories were, at @piloteer.

piloteer

@TKDB

I and others have formed an anti-religious group on the internet. We're called society. We see how the mythologists point their fingers at us and claim we are "dictators". Yet, we know that we do not have to force others to disregard their mythology. We only need to grow larger as a group, until one day the old religious order will be forgotten, or relocated to 5th grade history books as an example of the ignorance of the past. Perhaps stalin and jim jones were triumphed over, but so was zeus and aphrodite. How many people make sacrifices to them now? There's is a forgotten religious order like a worthless grain of sand in a desert of insignificance. And so to will be the mythological figures of today. The new religious order is upon us now!!!!       

TKDB

@piloteer

You do realize you're now preaching from your Atheist dictatorship podium?

Just like Stalin did, just like Hitler did, and Jim Jones did?

You're no different from them, they talked a lot as well:

"I and others have formed an anti-religious group on the internet."

"We're called society."

"We see how the mythologists point their fingers at us and claim we are "dictators". Yet, we know that we do not have to force others to disregard their mythology."

"We only need to grow larger as a group, until one day the old religious order will be forgotten, or relocated to 5th grade history books as an example of the ignorance of the past."

"Perhaps stalin and jim jones were triumphed over, but so was zeus and aphrodite."

"How many people make sacrifices to them now?" 

"There's is a forgotten religious order like a worthless grain of sand in a desert of insignificance."

"And so to will be the mythological figures of today."

"The new religious order is upon us now!!!!"
      
@piloteer Why not use some extra punctuation marks, to really get your dictatorship messeging across next time?

The rest of the internet, is really waiting for you to sound off, and do you know why this is? 

Because I, and they, really didn't hear you the first time.

Hurry up, my popcorn is getting cold.

TKDB

@piloteer


https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_atheism

"State atheism is the incorporation of positive atheism or non-theism into political regimes.[27] It may also refer to large-scale secularization attempts by governments.[28] It is a form of religion-state relationship that is usually ideologically linked to irreligion and the promotion of irreligion to some extent.[29] State atheism may refer to a government's promotion of anti-clericalism, which opposes religious institutional power and influence in all aspects of public and political life, including the involvement of religion in the everyday life of the citizen.[30][31][27] In some instances, religious symbols and public practices that were once held by religion were replaced with secularized versions.[32] State atheism can also exist in a politically neutral fashion, in which case it is considered as non-secular.[27] "

"The majority of Marxist–Leninist states followed similar policies from 1917 onwards.[30][28][33][34][9][35][36] The Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic (1917–1991) and more broadly the Soviet Union (1922–1991) had a long history of state atheism, whereby those seeking social success generally had to profess atheism and to stay away from houses of worship; this trend became especially militant during the middle of the Stalinist era which lasted from 1929 to 1939. In Central Europe, countries like Belarus, Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Russia, and Ukraine experienced strong state atheism policies.[34] East Germany and Czechoslovakia also had similar policies.[28] The Soviet Union attempted to suppress public religious expression over wide areas of its influence, including places such as Central Asia. Either currently or in their past, China,[28][33][36][37] North Korea,[36][37] Vietnam,[24] Cambodia,[9] and Cuba[35] are or were officially atheist."

"In contrast, a secular state purports to be officially neutral in matters of religion, supporting neither religion nor irreligion.[38][39][27] In a review of 35 European states in 1980, 5 states were considered 'secular' in the sense of religious neutrality, 9 considered 'atheistic', and 21 states considered 'religious'.[40] "

MayCaesar

@TKDB

Will you change your mind on my stance if I tell you that I have spoken on behalf of religious people (namely Christians and Muslims) against proposals by some extreme atheists to outlaw or restrict religious freedoms? There was a lawyer lady from Sweden I used to be friends with who believed that religion only does harm and wanted to outlaw all religion altogether, down to people being prohibited from reading religious books - and I pretty openly spoke against it in public.

You are wrong in assuming that atheists somehow fundamentally oppose religion. I have many problems with religion, but the notion that people should be free to believe whatever they want and promote any ideas they want trumps any personal considerations I might have. I also recognise that there are many different interpretations of various religions, and although I disagree with religion fundamentally, some of these interpretations I see as actually beneficial to people's lives.

I do not know why religious people so often think that atheists are their enemies, while atheists actually often side with them on, for example, free speech issues. I personally only have real problem with religious fundamentalism, when religious people starts demanding that the society regulate itself according to religious norms. As long as you keep your religion outside the law-making process and do not let it interfere with your interaction with others, you are my ally.

TKDB

@MayCaesar

Did you read the below from piloteer?

(Maybe he's expressing more than you're used to hearing/reading, via an Internet setting?)

@MayCaesar, do you agree with his statements?


Statement #1
"The above statement is a sign of our strength in knowing that humanity refuses to align any longer with insignificant religions no more worthy than a grain of sand in a desert of nothingness."

"My dictatorship is our dictatorship."

"Look in awe at the amount of people who are now proudly atheist and have a need for a new religion that fits their new order."

"Humanity will triumph over petty emotions."

  

Statement #2
"I and others have formed an anti-religious group on the internet."

"We're called society."

"We see how the mythologists point their fingers at us and claim we are "dictators". Yet, we know that we do not have to force others to disregard their mythology."

"We only need to grow larger as a group, until one day the old religious order will be forgotten, or relocated to 5th grade history books as an example of the ignorance of the past."

"Perhaps stalin and jim jones were triumphed over, but so was zeus and aphrodite."

"How many people make sacrifices to them now?" 

"There's is a forgotten religious order like a worthless grain of sand in a desert of insignificance."

"And so to will be the mythological figures of today."

"The new religious order is upon us now!!!!" 

MayCaesar

@TKDB

Piloteer has his/her own opinion, and I have mine. My point is that atheists are all different and there is no some sort of fundamental idea in atheism that suggests having an active stance against religion.

Also, piloteer is obviously partially jesting; do not take everything so seriously.

John_C_87

@TKDB ;

The largest piece of evidence there is to view is tax exemption. If you cannot see that then I'm not sure if your mind has the faculty to understand what evidence is and how it affects the influence of governing. In addition to that evidence of how the tax income is used by governing is also evidence of the influence on a political process. The point, however, is that evidence of religious influence does not really even matter as the separation of church and state is something that is self-imposed as a form of protecting a governing state and those who govern it.

It is here you obviously do not feel the constitutional state needs to be brought to a united purpose held in states of the law so that it may be more effective. By the way, marijuana placed in a united state with narcotics as a crime by ownership is a form of religious influence in governing. As the legal issues of Marijuana itself is on a level of public pollutant. A much greater issue is when religious followers once dependent on ta church begin to rise against the religions they once belonged and fully supported. This has nothing to do with tax exception, atheism, or controls over the information given as educational instruction.

TKDB

@MayCaesar

When an individual boldly states this kind of rhetoric from behind the anonymity of his profile name, he's not being funny, he's being serious:

Statement #1
"The above statement is a sign of our strength in knowing that humanity refuses to align any longer with insignificant religions no more worthy than a grain of sand in a desert of nothingness."

"My dictatorship is our dictatorship."

"Look in awe at the amount of people who are now proudly atheist and have a need for a new religion that fits their new order."

"Humanity will triumph over petty emotions." 


Statement #2
"I and others have formed an anti-religious group on the internet."

"We're called society."

"We see how the mythologists point their fingers at us and claim we are "dictators". Yet, we know that we do not have to force others to disregard their mythology."

"We only need to grow larger as a group, until one day the old religious order will be forgotten, or relocated to 5th grade history books as an example of the ignorance of the past."

"Perhaps stalin and jim jones were triumphed over, but so was zeus and aphrodite."

"How many people make sacrifices to them now?" 

"There's is a forgotten religious order like a worthless grain of sand in a desert of insignificance."

"And so to will be the mythological figures of today."

"The new religious order is upon us now!!!!"  

@MayCaesar, he's using the internet as his own pro Atheist messaging pushing platform.

He knows, what he's doing.

John_C_87

@TKDB ;

The point is all evidence leads to the one fact religion is not always democratic. There is a freedom of religion that exists without the cost or assigned charge TKDB, there are religions that thrive only on the costs and assigned charges that are required by us, the people. People work for money, money is a receipt on community debt, followers bring receipts of debt to churches as offerings of faith. GOD is an axiom as separation of church from the very state of churches themselves. The axiom does not make God any less religious to those who follow faith it only insures the debts of the people are not only religious by their creator therefore are more human in nature the supernatural.

The reason why the phrase separation of church and state has been cultivated through the centuries, A church can hold a state which does not govern it dictates to followers, this is a religion inside a home, the home is called the church, the religion is one of the states a church has, as a united state title for the home of religion. A form of governing that separates from its own states moves to become that form of dictatorship that religions require in the home of a church-state. We can just as easily say Mosque-state. Any evidence you seek has accumulated outside the general home of the religions and has already accumulated in civil and criminal laws. 

In our history here the evidence is legal precedent creates in perjuries, also known as a woman President, Gay Marriage, the general principle where ownership as a crime. A woman has not since the formation of the United States of America, moved, or had been moved by religions to be created equal by their creator. Their creator in this instance is the executive office a position in the political area, in line with an establishing of all legal precedents. Marriage between couples of the same gender is a crime as it places all who witness these couples as some-one committing perjury. Yes, I admit I am guilty of perjury due to this malpractice and corrected any religious influence by accounting these events and either Binivir or Unosmulier. I have publicly admitted guilt, but that guilt was not sexual discrimination it was a perjury while under oath of truth on official governing documents. 

Really a translation can and should have already been made to the separation of Mosque and state, the separation of Synagogue and state, also the separations of Temple and state. Again this statement is more incriminating as some type of evidence to the negligence of religious influence than the words "IN GOD WE TRUST" on the Federal Reserve Note, the receipt on all debt. As the Separation of church and its state has openly called this GOD numerical axiom on its behalf.