The debate "Should the Bible be a mandatory curriculum" was started by
December 3, 2018, 4:35 pm.
11 people are on the agree side of this discussion, while 37 people are on the disagree side.
That might be enough to see the common perception.
It looks like most people are against to this statement.
letsgobro posted 3 arguments to the agreers part.
Brynn posted 3 arguments, Sanjib posted 1 argument, Nemiroff posted 1 argument, TheExistentialist posted 1 argument to the disagreers part.
letsgobro, jemiju and 9 visitors agree.
Nemiroff, Brynn, A_communist94, Sanjib, Coriander, TheExistentialist, tenyiyi, zain, jrardin12, TJ, JDAWG9693 and 26 visitors disagree.
You're sort of correct.....however, for all intents-and-purposes there it is law. "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof". The first clause (the establishment clause) formed the jurisprudence in Reynolds v. U.S., 98 U.S. 145 (1878) that gave us the legal enactment of "separation of church and state".
This has been re-affirmed multiple times in multiple supreme court cases. These decisions made it clear that the 1st and 14th amendment along with article 6 of the constitution are a legal separation of church and state.
The Treaty of Tripoli (which requires senate affirmation) states: "As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion..."
While congress has not made a "Law" that states there is a separation of church and state, the legal precedent is that our constitution forms the legal basis for a separation of church and state and is thus enforceable.
the phrase was more a description of the effect of the law, not the wording of it. the mandate to separate church and state is definitely law.
Still against freedom of religion
oh good point jdog
While the U.S. is a secular country, "separation of church and state" isn't actually in any law.
let's make it
As long as it's not promoting the religion and only talking about factual things supported by evidence sure.
oh ok so it can't be like a school subject everyone could learn? if it won't be mandatory ?
That's against freedom of religion and the separation of church and state.
as far as an argument I won't be able to start until someone responds because I don't know where to start