Relgion?

Some valid points but one very fundamental flaw. With hundreds of religions in the world today, many of which are recognized and practiced in Utah, who is to say WHICH religion will have most interest in working with government. In Utah the ideals of the LDS will continue to be at the forefront. In the South it will be the Southern Baptists just as the Catholics in Boston. My point is that religion already is intertwined with Government. That was the whole point to the seperation of church and state. To allow people to worship who and how they would like without the government stepping in and telling people what to believe. The goverment's role is to represent ALL people, not just those of a certain religious majority.

When I think of all the things that have been done in the name of religion, I'd say it's absolutely imperative that there be a seperation of church and state. Most of the time religion has been used to justify some injustice like slavery or equal rights but when it was used to change things like civil rights it was only some that pushed it while others used religion to block it. The sad thing is religion is used to close minds, not open them. Our system of government was created to guarantee freedom of choice and to not limit an individuals choice. We need to remember that about government and then in our personal life use religion to guide our choices. But, my choices should never be enforced by the government and I think many religious people today just don't get that.

The Founders were very explicit about Seperation of Church and State for very fundamental reasons. If churches use Govt. funds they become accountable to the Govt.

When a Church actively engage in effecting the outcome of elections they open themselve to oversight by the Govt., losing their tax status.
Let the Churches to the Church's work with the Chuch's tithes to do good, not tax monies.

They will always carry the stigma of "prostylsizing" being attached to their efforts.

The more the Churches encroach on Govt. actions the more they expose themselves to the reverse.

Use you tithes as you will but if you accept Ceasar's he will demand yours.

I just posted the following as was told it was a duplicate! Or violated something. Would someone explain as I try again.
The Founders were very explicit about Seperation of Church and State for very fundamental reasons. If churches use Govt. funds they become accountable to the Govt.

When a Church actively engage in effecting the outcome of elections they open themselve to oversight by the Govt., losing their tax status.
Let the Churches to the Church's work with the Chuch's tithes to do good, not tax monies.

They will always carry the stigma of "prostylsizing" being attached to their efforts.

The more the Churches encroach on Govt. actions the more they expose themselves to the reverse.

Let's see what happens this time.

I humbly apologize, I reacted to the duplicate error and rather than responded, I reacted.

Please let me explain. I spend a lot of time on the Tribune. Although I know longer live in Utah my baby daughter does so it's incumbent upon me to stay aware of her 'world'.

Well, there are many LDS, Repubs, neo-cons whatever that post over there. This is good in that reason arises from differing opinions. Problem though is that too often they resort to personal attack, insult, profanity, inuendo, labeling, universal statements and more.
I intended to parrot their methodolgy here to show that for all it's liberalism it welcomes opinion thorns and all.

Well, I found that I'm unable to use that manner. I even cut and paste one of those comments. I see it hasn't appeared.

I don't believe in censorship by any sense. I do believe that contrary opinions be given the opportunity to disagree in a public forum as long as its civil. With few exceptions 'Offensive' 'abusive' is subjective. Off-topic is iffy. I thought that using separation would be found at least-off topic.
So, I apologize, I was wrong, thank you for your forebearance