The Supreme Court and the Blaine Amendment.
Struck by big business.
The West forgets the biblical tradition at its own peril.
They’re not subsidies, and they don’t violate the separation of church and state.
Contemporary debates forget that it serves a distinct social and moral purpose.
Does the doctrine of separation of church and state mean that any discussion of religion in public schools is dangerous and out of bounds? That. . .
Separating religion and state sends the wrong signal in principle, and could wreak havoc in practice.
There should be no place in Judaism or in the state of Israel for religious coercion of any type. This is not a facile concession to modernity, nor to convenience. It is a position rooted in deep theological reflection.
Moshe Koppel wants to clear something up: He's not actually calling for less religious involvement in public life.
It is often remarked that America is the most religious Western democracy because and not in spite of its separation of religion and state. Would an Israel that adopted a similar system be both more democratic and more Jewish? Yes but also no, argues Ruth Gavison. In the Israeli context, the relevance of the American model is limited.