Because most of the time that State attempts to govern religion, it is to the detriment of Christianity; taxing the church, lending credibility to non-Christian faiths, etcetera. By contrast, the only time religion attempts to govern state is when Jesus compels them to do so, and anything Jesus says is not to be questioned.

If you take the time to read the constitution you will find the "seperation of church and state" argument does not exist. The constitution only bans the government from establishing a state run or supported religion.

The reason is that those who get upset when the government intervenes in religion, and feel that it is ok for religion to intervene in government have this hypocritical view because they come from a paradigm wherein their religion is the absolute deity-given truth. It is "right". Therefore, it is what everyone should do. I just wish they'd leave me out of it. How about a nice theocracy on an island somewhere? They can all go there, if a theocracy is what they really want.

It isn't ok for religion to formally govern the state. This violates the establishment clause of the 1st amendment. Decisions entrusted to the state cannot be delegated to religious bodies, see the case of Grendel's Den. On the other hand, state actors may be motivated by religious interests. The free exercise clause of the 1st amendment stands for the proposition that the state will not look into the motivations of its population, nor will it require belief or disbelief in a God. If laws have secular purposes, they comport with the establishment clause, regardless of the individual legislator's actual motivations. To look into his actual motivations would violate his freedom of conscience under the free exercise clause.

When "separation of church and state" actually becomes part of our governmental system, then we'll talk.

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances." This is what the Constitution actually says.

{Reference at the end} Jefferson's Wall of Separation Letter Thomas Jefferson was a man of deep religious conviction - his conviction was that religion was a very personal matter, one which the government had no business getting involved in. He was vilified by his political opponents for his role in the passage of the 1786 Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom and for his criticism of such biblical truths as the Great Flood and the theological age of the Earth. As president, he discontinued the practice started by his predecessors George Washington and John Adams of proclaiming days of fasting and thanksgiving. He was a staunch believer in the separation of church and state. Jefferson wrote a letter to the Danbury Baptist Association in 1802 to answer a letter from them written in October 1801. A copy of the Danbury letter is available here. The Danbury Baptists were a religious minority in Connecticut, and they complained that in their state, the religious liberties they enjoyed were not seen as immutable rights, but as privileges granted by the legislature - as "favors granted." Jefferson's reply did not address their concerns about problems with state establishment of religion - only of establishment on the national level. The letter contains the phrase "wall of separation between church and state," which led to the short-hand for the Establishment Clause that we use today: "Separation of church and state." The letter was the subject of intense scrutiny by Jefferson, and he consulted a couple of New England politicians to assure that his words would not offend while still conveying his message: it was not the place of the Congress or the Executive to do anything that might be misconstrued as the establishment of religion. Note: The bracketed section in the second paragraph was been blocked off for deletion in the final draft of the letter sent to the Danbury Baptists, though it was not actually deleted in his draft of the letter. It is included here for completeness. Reflecting upon his knowledge that the letter was far from a mere personal correspondence, Jefferson deleted the block, he noted in the margin, to avoid offending members of his party in the eastern states. This is a transcript of the letter as stored online at the Library of Congress, and reflects Jefferson's spelling and punctuation. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mr. President To messers Nehemiah Dodge, Ephraim Robbins, & Stephen S. Nelson a committee of the Danbury Baptist association in the state of Connecticut. Gentlemen The affectionate sentiments of esteem & approbation which you are so good as to express towards me, on behalf of the Danbury Baptist association, give me the highest satisfaction. my duties dictate a faithful & zealous pursuit of the interests of my constituents, and in proportion as they are persuaded of my fidelity to those duties, the discharge of them becomes more & more pleasing. Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between man & his god, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, and not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, thus building a wall of separation between church and state. [Congress thus inhibited from acts respecting religion, and the Executive authorised only to execute their acts, I have refrained from presenting even occasional performances of devotion presented indeed legally where an Executive is the legal head of a national church, but subject here, as religious exercises only to the voluntary regulations and discipline of each respective sect.] Adhering to this expression of the supreme will of the nation in behalf of the rights of conscience, I shall see with sincere satisfaction the progress of those sentiments which tend to restore to man all his natural rights, convinced he has no natural right in opposition to his social duties. I reciprocate your kind prayers for the protection and blessing of the common Father and creator of man, and tender you for yourselves and your religious association, assurances of my high respect & esteem. (signed) Thomas Jefferson Jan.1.1802. {from here: http://www.usconstitution.net/jeffwall.html}

Many of those who have no problem with a religion governing the state, have no problem with THEIR religion governing. They're the ones who get all snarky if they get the notion that it'll be another religion calling the shots. Which is the MAIN reason why we don't have a religion running the show.

It is the nature of human beings that they cannot see eye to eye. If an idea comes from one human being there’s bound to be another human being who thinks he knows better. Now, State trying to govern Religion is a few human beings trying to implement their ideas on the rest. There will be many human beings who will think that they have better ideas. However, if an idea is accepted as coming from outside the human sphere then it is regarded as neutral and stands a better chance of being accepted. This is why Religion governing the State is more acceptable, especially since religion is regarded as coming from the creator who knows what is best. As HQ 67:14 puts it "Should He not know,- (meaning who knows better than) He that created? and He is the One that understands the finest mysteries (and) is well-acquainted (with them)"

The big issue I have with "separation of church and state" is how inconsistant it is. Think about it, grade school through high school can't have a Christmas tree, no one talks about Hannakuh, Eid isn't even whispered these days on the premise of "separation" but STATE FUNDED COLLEGES offer degrees in Religious philosophy. When are politicians going to learn that TEACHING ONE SIDE OF A DEBATE WITHOUT ACKNOWLEDGING THE OTHER IS BRAINWASHING.

African Americans delineate Church AND STATE