Why is law based on Christian beliefs acceptable, when Sharia law is opposed on the basis of separation of church and state?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Metis2
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
M

Metis2

Guest
I can not see the reasoning.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Because we aren’t Muslims, and we think our morality is divine. Whether this is true or not is a separate issue (I think it is obviously). Anyone who believes he has the truth is fine with imposing it on others. If you believe murder is wrong, and this is true, then you’re fine with sometimes killing murderers to stop them, and using jail, etc, to punish or stop them, no matter what their belief is.

So yeah the long and short of it is that we aren’t Muslims.

Also isn’t sharia law radically different than what most people think it is? I’m pretty sure it is, I’ll have to look that up again though
 
Last edited:
Because Islam is a heresy and Christianity, specifically Catholicism is true revelation from God to man.
 
I wouldn’t attempt to justify Christian legislation on the basis of “separation of Church and State”, so I think we’re starting with a false premise.
 
@Thom18 You misunderstand. I am asking why is separation of church and state only applied to one religion but not the other?
 
In the United States, isn’t the separation of church and state, according to the Constitution, applied to all religions? What are you specifically referring to?
 
Last edited:
Some law makers will decide whether to vote for or against a law based on the Bible and Christian values. Why is it acceptable to base law on the Bible but not the Qur’an?
 
When it comes to certain topics, such as abortion, stem cell research, etc., some will argue against it because they claim the topic in question goes against the teachings of God.
 
Some will argue for, others against these topics based on a whole variety of reasons, including their religious beliefs, whatever they may be. These beliefs are not limited to Christian beliefs.
 
If this is acceptable, then why does Islam, for instance, get criticized when they make an argument justifying it on their god, in this case Allah?
 
Criticized by whom: lawmakers? People criticize Christianity as well. The U.S. is a country which espouses both freedom of religion and freedom from religion.
 
Last edited:
You are correct, people do criticize Christianity, but my point is that is it not hypocritical for Christian law makers who justify their actions based upon God and the bible to go against Islamic legislation because it would violate the separation of church and state? I am not arguing a point, I am just wondering about the rationale behind this.
 
Separation of church and state actually isn’t even in the constitution.
 
Not the specific phrase, but in the First Amendment there is the Establishment clause and the free exercise of religion clause, which, to my knowledge, strongly suggest the separation of Church and State.
 
Probably talking about this maybe?
“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;…“
Separation dealing with the government can not establish a national religion, but can make laws based on the tenets of a belief.
That was the explanation I was given years ago.
Sharia law overall wouldn’t work unless you had enough elected officials who would support it, and help elect others as well. No majority in the matter to draft, and create laws.
Dominus vobiscum
 
At the federal level. At the time of the ratification of the constitution several of the states had official religions. Massachusetts for example had a state religion until 1833
 
Yup. “Congress” can’t establish “one for all”. (Makes the mention “separation of church and state” quote a bit odd doesn’t it?)
Dominus vobiscum
 
Last edited:
The actions of such lawmakers are not for the purpose of instituting Canon law as the law of the land. If they were, we would have a very different nation. Likewise, if a Muslim representative were to justify his bill on the basis of his belief in Sharia law, so long as the bill were not imposed on all the American people, this would be acceptable. Our country is not a theocracy.
 
Last edited:
Metis2 said:
I can not see the reasoning.
Click to expand...
The laws that are enacted by the U.S. Congress, or by an equivalent legislative assembly in any Western democracy, naturally reflect the values of the prevailing culture, and in Western countries those cultural values are derived, to quite a large extent, from the Christian religion. In other words, the precepts of the Christian religion tend to find their way into our laws, but by an indirect path, and subject always to the consent of civil society at large. Our churches are free to campaign for this or that change to the laws — the laws governing abortion are a case in point — but no church is empowered to dictate our laws.

Can you see the reasoning now?
 
^^^ That there
IF there were enough support, we could have similar laws to sharia created. Probably have to include their “morality police” too. In public, and dare to scandalously reveal your navel? (For men revealing) Public whipping.
I don’t see the support necessary to proceed.
Forgot to include: The above incident was on a beach area with young men swimming. It was recorded on video. When they exited the water, their lower garment (traditional wrap like seen in Egyptian paintings) slipped just below one person’s navel. The “morality police” (group of two, with a third on standby) had small whips they hit the boy with as he covered his navel while running away.
Their entire chest was uncovered, yet the infraction was for the belly-button.
Dominus vobiscum
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top