President Obama's speech

[tropicalshox]

Just watched the eulogy given by President Obama. Wow, that was Amazing!

[ShockdaWorld]

I have not seen it, so I'm not sure how it would fit, but just from somebody that hasn't seen it yet, it appears he is picking and choosing when he wants to separate church and state, and when he does not. Again, I haven't seen it, so can't say for sure, just the first thought I had when I heard he was doing it.

[Rlh04d]

I have not seen it, so I'm not sure how it would fit, but just from somebody that hasn't seen it yet, it appears he is picking and choosing when he wants to separate church and state, and when he does not. Again, I haven't seen it, so can't say for sure, just the first thought I had when I heard he was doing it.

I don't understand what that's supposed to mean. Because he spoke at a church?

[ShockdaWorld]

I don't understand what that's supposed to mean. Because he spoke at a church?

Exactly. As I said, I haven't seen it. Every funeral I've ever been to in a church was very much driven by said church's doctrine. Perhaps this was different. I don't know. I just wondered. I'll try to watch it tomorrow, and then I'm sure I'll have a better understanding.

[ShockRef]

He is certainly a wonderful orator. No denying it.

Poets, preachers and politicians all make a living with the use of words.

That is all.

[jocoshock]

Exactly. As I said, I haven't seen it. Every funeral I've ever been to in a church was very much driven by said church's doctrine. Perhaps this was different. I don't know. I just wondered. I'll try to watch it tomorrow, and then I'm sure I'll have a better understanding.

I believe the service was not actually held in the church, but a nearby arena of some sort, but there was a intentional effort to create a church like atmosphere/setting in the venue.

[Rlh04d]

Exactly. As I said, I haven't seen it. Every funeral I've ever been to in a church was very much driven by said church's doctrine. Perhaps this was different. I don't know. I just wondered. I'll try to watch it tomorrow, and then I'm sure I'll have a better understanding.

I think you need to reevaluate the meaning of the separation between church and state. Otherwise every single President in the history of the United States was "picking and choosing when he wants to separate church and state" by regularly attending church services.

[ShockdaWorld]

I think you need to reevaluate the meaning of the separation between church and state. Otherwise every single President in the history of the United States was "picking and choosing when he wants to separate church and state" by regularly attending church services.

You may be correct, and God forbid if you may not. My original comment was not about "attending church services," but take it as you wish. We can't all agree about everything.

[Rlh04d]

You may be correct, and God forbid if you may not. My original comment was not about "attending church services," but take it as you wish. We can't all agree about everything.

I don't see as we're disagreeing. I'm just confused by your point, and how a speech at a church is somehow about separation of church and state. If you'd like to expound on why you think that's the case, maybe we disagree and maybe we don't. But you've just thrown out a random point that I can't see how you're correlating to what I see as a completely different point, and not explaining why you see a correlation there. Right now you're just confusing me, which isn't about agreement or disagreement :)

Bush's speech at the Episcopal National Cathedral just days after 9/11 is probably one of the more prolific speeches of a President in American history: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-0VQH8hODlo

Clinton had a rather famous 1993 speech at the Memphis Church of God in Christ: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=upRaNQT5L78

I don't believe Reagan made any famous speech at a church, but he also chose not to attend churches while President due to fears of his presence putting church-goers at risk. He did speak to the United Pentecostal Church International by video once.

You'd be hard pressed to find many Presidents in American history who have not given speeches at churches.

[ShockdaWorld]

I am quite obviously less interested or educated about presidential history than you are, and I actually wasn't trying to make a point one way or the other. Was just wondering aloud about something that I have wondered about with not only the current POTUS, but also some of his predecessors. I suppose if I cared enough about it, I would do some research, rather than just wondering aloud. I guess I was just being lazy and hoping someone would say something that would enlighten me. It confuses me that they want everything church related (crosses, 10 Commandments, etc.) taken out of government buildings, but they want to make speeches/statements/eulogies in church settings. Not saying it's right or wrong. Just seems odd to me.

[shox1989]

I just watched the POTUS speech on youtube. It was very good.

[wufan]

Separation of church and State means that the federal government answers to no church authority. It was about denying the authority of the papacy and not about religion of our leaders. Remember that at the time of the founding of our nation, the rest of Europe was governed by Kings that were "chosen by divinity". The United States was the first government to be "of the people".

[WuDrWu]

I am quite obviously less interested or educated about presidential history than you are, and I actually wasn't trying to make a point one way or the other. Was just wondering aloud about something that I have wondered about with not only the current POTUS, but also some of his predecessors. I suppose if I cared enough about it, I would do some research, rather than just wondering aloud. I guess I was just being lazy and hoping someone would say something that would enlighten me. It confuses me that they want everything church related (crosses, 10 Commandments, etc.) taken out of government buildings, but they want to make speeches/statements/eulogies in church settings. Not saying it's right or wrong. Just seems odd to me.

I think you're making a good point, even if that wasn't your intent. The founding fathers never intended nor interpreted the meaning to keep religion out of politics but to keep politics out of religion.

This is supported by more than 200 years of factual evidence. It's only been recently, as the country has become far more litigious, that an increasing plurality of liberal jurists are interpreting what I call a least common denominator mentality to laws across the board. In other words, find the most unique circumstance and that's your baseline. It's an argument as old as time. Some people don't want change, others believe all change is good, similar to evolution. Adapt and survive. This day and age however, there seems to be little if any middleground. Both sides are digging in their heels, and a clear victor has emerged, I believe, to the detriment of society. But that's only my opinion.

[Kel Varnsen]

Separation of church and State means that the federal government answers to no church authority. It was about denying the authority of the papacy and not about religion of our leaders. Remember that at the time of the founding of our nation, the rest of Europe was governed by Kings that were "chosen by divinity". The United States was the first government to be "of the people".

It also means that the church has freedom to practice without interference or control of the state (in theory). Has to go both ways.

[SB Shock]

Separation of church and State means that the federal government answers to no church authority.

The constitutional revisionist would love for you to think that. But it is the exact opposite. It is to keep the federal government out of the affairs of the church and to insure there is no "State directed church". It is not freedom from religion, but Freedom of Religion.