There are 72 churches within Maricopa County that will be used as polling locations for residents to vote in the presidential preference election, Feb. 28. Registered voters help choose their political party's nominee for the general election in November.
Polling places, pulpits, prayer and politics - some of these churches in the 14 cities (throughout this county) have significant religious icons, pictures of Jesus Christ, paintings, and information available for voters to pick up, see, and/or review.
To increase turnout, government seeks to make voting as convenient as possible, and an important civic duty. Churches are required to abide by all local laws concerning politicking and the distribution of campaign literature.
In America, during election seasons, communities have polling places in churches in addition to fire stations, town halls, libraries, schools, or other sites. Americans of faiths, or those of no faith, all enter a house of worship in order to fulfill one of our most cherished liberties of all - that of our God-given right to vote.
Along with seeking to remove "In God We Trust" from our U.S. currency, the "Godless" American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) objects to Christian churches and religions.
Dismissing separation between church and state claims and arguments by atheist organizations, courts have upheld the use of churches as polling places for voting in all states, which proves that there's no such thing as separation of church and state.
Jack Salley
Mesa
sockratties posted at 4:34 pm on Sun, Feb 19, 2012.
Jack – Although there may be those that prefer to not go into churches or buildings on church premises, use of these building does not relate to either the prose or intent of the 1st amendment. Remember that one of the reasons the pilgrims came to the New World was the English imposition of the Protestants i.e. the Church of England. “Freedom of religion” was high on the list of priorities when Madison was crafting the constitution.
Jefferson was the one who defined the language, in a letter, that eventually became known as separation of church and state. Notice that the Bill of Rights limits what Congress can do.
The part of the 1st Amendment relating to religion is: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.” Also remember that in early American history the local church was often the one available meeting place for the community.
Thomas Jefferson wrote: “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, & 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 & State.”
If people have a problem with their polling place being provided by a local church they always have the option of a mail in ballot.
The ACLU is often unpopular for taking a stand to defend the Bill of Rights against erosion by radicals left or right on the political spectrum. Most people are only willing to defend the Constitution when it is being interpreted in a way with which they disagree. The ACLU will defend your rights even if they don’t like how you exercise them.
Cerulean posted at 4:48 pm on Sun, Feb 19, 2012.
I agree with the ACLU. In my opinion, election days should be a school holiday and public schools should become the polling arena.
I know many people who will not vote in a church, they use a mail-in ballot.
Dale Whiting posted at 7:02 pm on Sun, Feb 19, 2012.
Since I respect both people of all faiths and all faiths, going into someone's house of worship to vote has never been a problem for me. I have yet to see the "sanctuary" being used for voting. Rather it's been a some sort of casual meeting room, typically a room used to socialize after services. I assume that the congregations is compensated financially for use of the building.
And I have seen some congregations that don't yet have a building of their own renting a school on Sundays. Nothing wrong with that! In fact, it puts a few of Cesar's coins into the public school coffers.
So what is all this fuss about? I can't see anything wrong with doing what makes the most sense. But apparently Jack does! My neighbor and I are separated by a common property line. But we still cooperate to our mutual benefit! I recall a famous American poet once saying that cooperation [he used the example of fense building] makes good sense and makes us much better neighbors.
Arizona Willie posted at 10:34 pm on Sun, Feb 19, 2012.
Use of the building for voting isn't the big problem.
The BIG problem is the involvement of priests and ministers in politics.
Catholic priests have told parishiones it is a mortal sin to vote Democratic because of the Democratic Party's support of women's rights.
Various priests and ministers have " instructed " their congregations who to vote for / against on many many occasions.
Thus they should lose tax exempt status because they are involving their church in the political scene.
They have a right to be politically active as an individual ... but not from the pulpit.
And they cross the line almost every Sunday.
Dale Whiting posted at 11:28 am on Mon, Feb 20, 2012.
Willie,
Are you Catholic? Did you hear a priest characterizing voting democratic as a mortal sin? I doubt that having priests do so will help keep Rome on top of its congregants! If fact, telling congregants to vote republican might just be the best thing that could be done to help support the President's re-election! The Roman Catholic congregant I know best is working for Obama's re-election here in Chandler!
Regardless, the priests are not in the hall when it is being used for voting. And I am unaware of any Catholic facilities which are being used this coming Feb 28th. But assuming that there are some, are the priests privy to which ballot, democrat or republican, a potential congregant takes into the booth? I think not! Most would be hard pressed to know which voters are parrishoners! And assuming that congregants who do vote are republicans, can the priest assume that those who do not vote are democrats? I think not!
Willie, it's back to the drawing board with this idea of yours! It's crazy. You're much better than this!
Accuracy posted at 12:51 pm on Mon, Feb 20, 2012.
"No such thing as separation of church and state".......... Certainly not at any of the churches used as polling places in this state.
In many neighborhoods, the churches are the most convenient -- and those churches help the communities by allowing voting there during elections. The large number of churches used, are logical and legal as polling places.
Churches used in the United States as polling places have served the people well. It is not a constitutional violation.
Church-state watchdog groups, Americans United for Separation of Church and State, and the ACLU, who are offended about the use of houses of worship for voting, simply need to get over it.
truth posted at 1:09 pm on Mon, Feb 20, 2012.
Jack a little information for you, from 500 ad to 1500 ad the christian church of Rome burned all the bibles they could locate and also burned their owners, they rewrote the bible to control the people. Jack they elimated YOHANAN, YESHU'A and MIRYAM.
[sad][sad][sad][sad][sad][sad][sad][sad]
VofReason posted at 1:42 pm on Mon, Feb 20, 2012.
Yes yes, yet another day off school for voting. Great idea. Don't put any new complexity into it, they can't figure it out as is. Schools already have late starts, early outs, collegiat days (whatever that is). I remember the good old days when you just went to school at the same time everyday except for Holidays (you know winter soltice, fall break and all the other eduHolidays). That was before the administration hired smart and very expensive people to dream up this stuff. No, no additioanl days off school.
Accuracy posted at 11:31 am on Tue, Feb 21, 2012.
truth posted: ….. “ from 500 ad to 1500 ad the christian church of Rome”
------------------------------------------
During the Dark Ages (A.D. 500-1500), Rome burned Bibles along with their owners. The Pope of the Roman Catholic Church put the Textus Receptus (the traditional Greek text) on the Index of Forbidden Books.
Martin Luther challenged the authority of the Pope of the Roman Catholic Church and translated the Bible into the language of the people (instead of Latin) to made it more accessible. In 1517, Luther taught that salvation is not earned by good deeds but received only as a free gift of God's grace through faith in Jesus Christ as redeemer from sin.
Teaching that the Bible is the only source of divinely revealed knowledge and opposed sacerdotalism by considering all baptized Christians to be a holy priesthood.
Friends of Luther translated the 95 Theses from Latin into German in 1518, printed, and widely copied, making the controversy one of the first in history to be aided by the printing press. Within two month, copies of the theses spread throughout Europe.
This influenced the translation into English of the King James Bible. An English translation of the Christian Bible by the Church of England that begun in 1604 and was completed in 1611.
sdjtaz posted at 12:48 pm on Tue, Feb 21, 2012.
While the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution guarantees us freedom of (and through various rulings from) religion, it does not mean that government has been or will ever be completely free from religion.
It essentially only states that the United States would remain essentially neutral in religous matters. In the cases you state, the government is using available space as a polling place. They have not said that you had to be a member of that church to vote there. Additionally, the government will use a wide variety of different churches (including synogogues) as polling places, so therefore not giving preference to any one belief. The use of common meeting places such as churches have been used for elections since the beginning of our Republic. As an aside, another frequent polling place in the early days of the US were public taverns, which make for an interesting contrast.
The main issue we have (and why churches are often used) is that there are not many other locations available. Often, the two options are either use a church for this or force people in an area to go significantly farther to vote. Of the two, I would rather see the church used and make it as easy as possible for as many people as possible.
Using "In God We Trust" on our currency is a more troubling issue, since it does show preference to those that believe in a deity. Since this motto is not nearly as historic as many believe (only being added to our money in the 1950's in response to the "Godless' communist threat), it is my belief that this motto will eventually either be ruled unconstitutional or simply be done away with.
Accuracy posted at 5:23 pm on Tue, Feb 21, 2012.
sdjtaz posted: "Using "In God We Trust" on our currency is a more troubling issue"
----------------------------------------------
“Oh, thus be it ever when free men shall stand Between their loved homes and the war's desolation! Blest with vict'ry and peace, may the heav'n rescued land Praise the Pow'r that hath made and preserved us a nation! Then conquer we must, when our cause it is just, And this be our motto, ‘In God is our trust’ And the Star-Spangled Banner in triumph shall wave O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave”!
The final stanza of The Star-Spangled Banner, written by Francis Scott Key in 1814, contains an early reference to a variation of the phrase: "..."And this be our motto: 'In God is our trust.'"
The phrase “In God We Trust” was first seen on coins during the Civil War in 1854. It was adopted as the official motto of the United States in 1956 – and last November, by a vote of 396-9, the House of Representatives reaffirmed our national motto “In God We Trust.”