Separation of church and state

[[File:DUBLIN LGBTQ PRIDE PARADE 2019 -NEAR MOSS STREET - TALBOT BRIDGE--153838 (48154595687) (cropped).jpg|thumb|right|300px|Part of the 2019 Pride Parade in Dublin, [[Ireland]]]]
{{politics}}
{{hatnote|For the philosophical underpinnings of separation of church and state, see our article on [[Secularism]].}}
{{sources needed}}
{{cquote|[[Senator]], when you took your oath of office, you placed your hand on the [[Bible]] and swore to uphold the [[United States Constitution|Constitution]]. You did not place your hand on the Constitution and swear to uphold the Bible. |||Jamie Raskin<ref>http://www.gather.com/viewArticle.action?articleId=281474976736092</ref>}}
'''Separation of church and state''' is the political position that the civil government should not have any involvement in religious matters, and <i>vice versa</i>. While not a universal trait of all Westernized governments, such a position is enshrined in the constitutions of a number of countries, including the [[United States]] (through its [[United States Constitution|constitution]]'s "no religious test"<ref>{{wpa|No religious test clause}}</ref> clause and [[First Amendment]]), [[Turkey]] ([[Recep Tayyip Erdoğan|though that probably won't last much longer]]), and [[France]], and exists <i>de facto</i> in some countries.

==History==
The concept of separation sprang from the ecclesiastical abuses following the [[Middle Ages]], where many [[Europe|European]] city-states were essentially vassals of an often-corrupt [[Roman Catholic]] [[theocracy]]. This arrangement carried over into the [[English]] colonies that later became the United States, where in some of the colonies the [[Church of England]] was the established church. Dissenters (non-Church of England [[Protestants]] such as [[Presbyterian]]s, [[Congregationalist]]s, or [[Baptist]]s) did live in the colonies but were subjected to varying degrees of toleration. During the [[American Revolution]], many of these dissenter groups seized on the opportunity to seek disestablishment. Due to experiences with religious repression in both the Old World and the New World, many of the founders of the United States (along with many of their correspondents in the churches of the new country) felt that the best way to protect the country from the hegemony of any one religion was to word either the state or national constitutions to require the government to show no favoritism towards any church, first with the [[Virginia]] Statute of Religious Freedom, then in the national constitution with a clause in [[Article Six|Article VI]] forbidding the government from requiring any employee to belong to any specific faith (the so called test-oath clause), later forbidding any civil involvement with religion at all with the [[First Amendment]] of the [[Bill of Rights]] and affirming the whole enterprise by the [[Thomas Jefferson|Jefferson]]-era [[Treaty of Tripoli]].<ref>{{Wpa|Treaty of Tripoli}}</ref> Other governments, most notably that of [[French Revolution|revolutionary France]], followed suit.

In Mexico, Catholicism was declared the official religion after Independence, since the Catholic Church was one of the few unifying features of the largely fragmented society. In 1858, a war broke out between the Liberal and the Conservative parties over the 1857 Constitution which established separation of church and state. Since the conservative defeat in 1867, no serious threats have been made to the principle, and both the right and the left uphold it as one of the fundamental principles of the modern Mexican state.

[[Christian democracy]] was originally a political group opposing this and managed to get success in some areas (such as the CVP/PSC (which is now the CD&V/CDH), in Belgium, which successfully opposed the purging of religious education in the scholar curriculum and the end of a religiously devoted monarchy). Nowadays, however, most of these groups have shifted towards more secular social conservatism and have purged the Bible-thumpers from their ranks.

==The middle approach==
Between [[Antitheism|those who would see religion purged from ''all'' public environs]], and those who embrace it in all its forms, and more, judicial and political moderates favor some form of compromise under which certain religious expressions, by virtue of their distance from any particular sect, and continuous use over time, are seen as areligious cultural and historical landmarks, rather than sectarian expressions.

This approach has been embraced by [[Supreme Court of the United States|Supreme Court]] Justice [[Sandra Day O'Connor]]. During her tenure on the high Court, she evaluated first amendment challenges to public religious displays by examining the totality of the circumstances, and asking whether, in this context, the religious display appeared to have been placed with an exclusionary message. O'Connor, for example, distinguished between a [[Ten Commandments]] display placed within a courthouse in recent memory by [[Roy Moore|a fundamentalist politician]] (unconstitutional; excessive entanglement of church and state) and one placed one hundred years ago and only recently challenged (permissive use of religious imagery, as a historical landmark).

There are more serious concerns; for example, people convicted of crimes where alcohol or drug abuse was a factor are sometimes forced to attend religion-based treatment programs, such as [[Alcoholics Anonymous]]. This is unconstitutional<ref>[http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2016/06/13/california-to-non-theistic-parolee-enter-a-religious-drug-treatment-program-or-go-to-jail/ California to Non-Theistic Parolee: Enter a Religious Drug Treatment Program or Go To Jail]</ref> and was successfully challenged in [[California]].<ref>[http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2016/06/20/california-tells-non-theistic-parolee-he-does-not-have-to-enter-a-religious-drug-treatment-program/ California Tells Non-Theistic Parolee He Does Not Have to Enter a Religious Drug Treatment Program][http://americanhumanist.org/news/details/2016-06-california-must-offer-a-secular-substance-abuse-prog California Must Offer a Secular Substance Abuse Program to Nontheist Parolee, Says Humanist Group][http://americanhumanist.org/news/details/2016-06-california-will-provide-faith-free-rehab-programs-fo California Will Provide Faith-Free Rehab Programs for Nontheist Parolee]</ref>

==Islam==
{{cquote|We live in an age where totalitarianism is masked as divine righteousness, theocrats legitimised, dissent vilified and [[Blaming the victim|victims blamed]] [[Honor killings|for their own murder]]. This is a time where “solidarity” is no longer an act of defending revolutionaries but [[Fascism|fascists]]; where there is always support for Islamist projects like [[Sharia]] courts, the [[burqa]], gender segregation, [[apostasy]] and [[blasphemy]] laws – whether de jure or de facto – but never for those who refuse to be silenced, erased and “disappeared”. It’s a time when “progressive” all too often means protecting [[Regressive left|regressive]] identity politics, which homogenises entire communities and societies, and deems theocrats as the sole legitimate arbiters and gatekeepers of “community” values. It’s a politics of betrayal – devoid of class struggle and political ideals – which sees any dissent through Islamist eyes and immediately labels it “Islamophobic” and blasphemous.|||Maryam<ref>[http://www.butterfliesandwheels.org/2016/vive-la-laicite/ Vive la laïcité]</ref>}}

==See also==
*[[Theocracy]] &mdash; one end of the religion/government spectrum, with [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_atheism State Atheism] being the other end.
*[[Dominionism]] &mdash; a [[revisionist]]-cum-alternate reality view of the founding of the United States

==External links==
*[https://www.au.org/ Americans United For Separation of Church and State], founded in 1948
*[http://academics.umhb.edu/sites/all/files/academics/documents/CRL/jefferson_danbury_bap.pdf Jefferson's Letter to the Danbury Baptists: The Origin and Meaning of the "Wall of Separation" Metaphor] by Derek H. Davis
*[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S1-ip47WYWc Pretty much says it all.]
*[http://www.badnewsaboutchristianity.com/gcc_politics.htm Christians and Right-Wing Politics - Nazis, KKK, etc.] (About how the church often opposes democracy while favoring authoritarian rulers that give the church special treatment.)
*[https://www.au.org/church-state/february-2015-church-state/featured/myths-debunked Myths Debunked: Religious Right Activists Love To Spread False Information About The Separation Of Church And State. Here Are Ten Rebuttals]

==References==
{{reflist|2}}
[[Category:Religion]]
[[Category:Political terms]]
[[Category:Political philosophies]]
[[Category:Political theory]]

Categories: Religion, Political terms, Political philosophies, Political theory