[TheRealVille]

The formally mentioned "seperation of church and state" by the founding fathers in various documents of our nation's history, was an attempt to avoid the conflict of interest that the politically knitted the Anglican Church or the Church of Enland and the Crown. The Archbishop of Canterbury was considered the head of the Anglican Church. Because church and state had become politically knit together, corruption of the church ensued. Very often the King of England would appoint a man to become Archbishop as if it were a cabinet post. Therefore the office became a political appointment and the the Church of England fell under the control of the King.

Many colonists came to America to escape the religious tyranny of the state controlled Church of England. I agree the Chruch should not have any controlling interest in government and conversely government must leave their hands off any attempt to govern or legislate matters of the church. However, to say that Christians shouldn't be members of the Congress of the United States or even become president of the United States is patently false. As is the notion that the concept of the seperation of church and state means anything like that. Christian leaders should be prized in government not pilloried by those who don't share a faith in God. The unholy alliance of the Anglican Church and the King of England wielded enormous power over the common folk of England and life became controlled down to the last detail. Information about those who would rebell would merely be turned over to a bishop and discipline would be handed down from the church, which was just another arm of the Crown making the folks miserable. In short you were one who had power and controlled people or you were one the those who were controlled. It was almost like being in jail.

Fast forward to present day. We have the Obama administration DOJ quietly trying to get the Supreme Court to give the Federal Government the authority to tell churches who their Pastors will be LINK--- http://cnsnews.com/blog/terence-p-jeffre...rs-will-be


RV you should be upset about this because it [B]really is[/B] a violation of the concept of the seperation of church and state. But, generally speaking, it totally escapes me what you think is so unacceptable about Christians. If they are real, and not political Tares, you can believe everything they say. You'd rather be lied to and propagandized by the state? I don't get it. We ARE a nation founded on Christian priciples, the problem is YOU don't want that to be true, and you are never going to be able to see the truth because it's not the way you want it to be.

Who said they couldn't? I'm all for Christians holding office, if they wish. What I'm not for, is them making laws that goes against peoples' rights, because their book says it's against God's will. That is exactly what Michelle would like to do. The bible is not America's book of law.