The separation of church and state is bad

Which church?

>yes of course I want my liberties and the democratic process hindered by religious ideals and values

t. Orthodox
UK is teochracy

i'm a proud neo-tengriist my TURK brother

If you don't separate church and state, the church with the most lobbying power will be in charge. Take a guess which one that is.

I didn't say it is bad ok. Its fine.

The idea of having a "state church" like in UK sounds kinda romantic until you look at Church of England.

I am just saying that orthodoxy is basically impossible to properly separate from the church, because orthodox churches exist under state super vision, meanwhile Catholics have the pope.

Whoa the US Reformed Synagogue....

Why?

Thank god we have a history of the governement beating unruly clergy into submission

It is bad

God does not want forced worship

Attached: Roger_Williams.jpg (1920x2560, 993K)

Didn't the government just kill everyone like actual genocide to region that didn't support them?

Not what separation of church and state means. UK has a state church but it doesn't force people to worship God. It just works as their state sponsored version of Christianity.

>government forcing people to believe god

What the third world country

Attached: 1535330425139.jpg (552x559, 23K)

he means people get bored of it when its forced upon them and he is probably 14

Yes, it's very romantic to have the president du jour decide religious doctrine. That's how you get shit like Swedish lesbian bishops saying crucifixes need to be removed from churches.

>UK has a state church but it doesn't force people to worship God
A very recent development. Until not too long ago you were either Anglican or a second rate citizen (despite the UK just being Greater England, the Scots always had it easier than the Catholic Irish, part of why the Irish broke away in the first place) and the royal family still can't not be part of the CoE.

Laïcité was a mistake though. It's just a soft dechristianization of a Christian country, meaning it's effectively gutting its identity. No wonder the modern left are the biggest proponents of it in France: a Christian country would offend the Muzzies.

>soft dechristinisation
You say that like its a bad thing, religions will always be the ennemies of republicanism. And you clearly are overestimating the christian part of the French identity, since anticlericalism has also become part of it throighout the eras.

republicanism is evil

>republicanism is evil

Attached: IMG_4958.png (485x443, 28K)

>That's how you get shit like Swedish lesbian bishops saying crucifixes need to be removed from churches.
check his posts. it ruining religion is why he wants it

it is and we would have been a monarchy had frogs not been such niggers as to cause an outcry about having a german monarch

You must have me confused with some other American flag because I am and I don't want to ruin religion, in fact I do agree Church of England is a massive and bizarre joke.

How very French of you

Indeed it is, seems like you recognised my French identity even though it is without Christian religion, guess that Dutch dood was wrong.

democracy is cancer, we need a theocratic regime like in Iran

>religions will always be the ennemies of republicanism
You base that on what exactly, my leftist friend? Especially considering the man who founded the Fifth Republic explicitly emphasized France as a Catholic Country, the 1801 Concordat reconciled France with the Vatican and the Tennis Court Oath was led by an abbot?

>And you clearly are overestimating the christian part of the French identity
It's literally impossible to overestimate the christianity of the eldest daughter of the Church

>since anticlericalism has also become part of it throighout the eras.
Anticlericalism is not the same thing as antichristianity. This is why the French Revolution separated juring priests from non-juring priests.

Far from it, it's just that the French left has poisoned the well. The only options that exist in France are kneeling before the catholic king like a dog or living in THE CURRENT YEAR. France is sorely lacking a catholic republicanism, the only thing that can feasibly preserve their liberties.

The problem with nu-French identity is that it has equivocated the nation to the state. This is why the French are so willing to believe that the French nation will continue to exist even after it has been replaced purely because the French state will continue to exist. In other words, they believe a France without Frenchmen can exist as long as the republic stands, while the reality is that France will exist only as long as Frenchmen exist -republic or no republic.

the french revolution was a SATANIC revolution against ORDAINED authority. lucifer rebelled against his FATHER much like the french rebelled against their FATHERland. Jesus is the KING of KINGS, not the PRESIDENT of PRESIDENTS.

>catholic republicanism
>preserve their liberties
Holy fucking shit, at least other religion fags are most honest about their opinions. How will the inclusion of a state religion result in the preservation of liberties ?
>eldest daughter of the Chruch
Mainly political and diplomatic nickname about the special relationship between the Vatican and the French kingdom. And even then, the cultural impact of the religion doesnt need the religion itself to survive, the marks of it are already there.
>nu-French identity
I guess a Dutchman is the prime person to talk about French identity, didnt know a Frenchman actually needed to be Christian to be French. And before you do your usual "muh mudslim" shit, I was talking about native French people. I dont understand in what way the reinclusion of Christianity would stop the WHITE GENOCIDE while you also believe it will preserve our liberties.

>Jesus is the KING of KINGS
Jesus also rendered unto Caesar what is Caesars. That "satanic" revolution also resulted in the 1791 constitution that preserved the authority of the king. Look into what happened between 1789 and 1793 and how hard the French tried to NOT kill the king. You can only take sabotaging your country so far before you're rightfully executed for treason.

>How will the inclusion of a state religion
I never argued for that, nigger. I argued against laïcité or the desire to eradicate all religion from the public sphwere. America has secularism without laïcité for example.

>And even then, the cultural impact of the religion doesnt need the religion itself to survive
The nation does, however.

>didnt know a Frenchman actually needed to be Christian to be French
I guess I'm not in a position to speak here. Would you say De Gaulle is in a position to speak about this? Because that De Gaulle proclaimed France to be a nation that is white of race, Christian of religion and Latin of culture.

>I dont understand in what way the reinclusion of Christianity would stop the WHITE GENOCIDE
The proven link between religiosity and fertility rate, the restoration of public morality and the fact that church going christians are more likely to see ancestry as a defining factor of nationality than others?

>while you also believe it will preserve our liberties
What exactly about Christianity goes against classical liberalism? In fact, Tocqueville pointed out that in the mind of the Americans Christianity and Democracy had become one in the same. Which makes sense considering a democracy demands a demos, not atomized individuals (which is what socialism requires, hence the desire of socialists to destroy all institutions that compete with the state for authority -including religion and the family).

And i say De Gaulle was wrong about that, I know of his traditional values. I still dont know why it proves me wrong. A large portion of the French enlightenment writers sure as hell didnt consider themselves Christians, and that was over 250 years ago. Would you be able to retroactively deny them of the French identity ? And when their thoughts and ideas impacted the history of France so much after their time, itd be ridiculous to think that.
Also, dont you see the clear dissonance in thinking that a religion will preserve our liberties when any religion is about restricting your liberties as an act of faith ? And even outside of your individual sacrificies, there is also the repression of many groups linked to it. You keep going on about socialism assuming I subscribe to it, when Im actually right leaning. I just dont think the trade off will ever be worth it. Religions were useful as a social glue and to introduce laws in societies, but they arent needed for that anymore while the many downsides to them are still there.

politically incorrect to say the separation of church and state is bad

True freedom is freedom from the slavery of sin French demon

I dont give a shit about the church or the state tho.

niggers iffy uh

Attached: gebaseerd en geroodpild.png (990x672, 61K)

Lucky for you America doesn't separate church and state.