For now, I'm not a fan of the First Amendment when it comes to the Separation of Church and State. In short, I think that it throws out the good and the bad of religion. I'd like to see proposals from any system, religion or secular, being able to become law just as long as it is good. I may not be seeing all of the reasons behind the Separation of Church and State so I'll offer this up for discussion, but first here's some good information about it:

The words "separation of church and state" do not appear in the U.S. Constitution, but the concept is enshrined in the very first freedom guaranteed by the First Amendment:
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion."
Known as the establishment clause, the opening lines of the First Amendment prohibit the government from creating an official religion or favoring one religion (or nonreligion) over another.

The separation of church and state enables all Americans to practice their deeply held beliefs in private and in public.

Today, the establishment clause prohibits all levels of government from either advancing or inhibiting religion.

The idea of separation of church and state ensures the government cannot exercise undue influence over Americans' spiritual and religious lives. From ending school-mandated prayer to banning the government from coercing Americans to participate in religious activities, the wall of separation has been an essential tool in building a freer democracy. And this uniquely American approach has resulted in one of the most religiously diverse nations in history.

The idea of separation of church and state ensures the government cannot exercise undue influence over Americans' spiritual and religious lives. From ending school-mandated prayer to banning the government from coercing Americans to participate in religious activities, the wall of separation has been an essential tool in building a freer democracy. And this uniquely American approach has resulted in one of the most religiously diverse nations in history.

Critically, the establishment clause separates church from state but not religion from politics or public life. People are free to bring their religious convictions into the public square precisely because the government must treat all faiths equally.

This includes politicians who are free to express their religious beliefs —
but not to sponsor legislation based solely on religious convictions.
The establishment clause protects the majority from undue influence from the government and encourages lesser-known religious traditions to petition the government for equal rights.

All quoted material above comes from the FreedomForum.org

It's the highlighted parts that i really don't like. Someone being able to make laws based on ANY secular system, but then any religious-based law is not allowed. Seems like it goes too far.

For Discussion:
What is your view on the Separation of Church and State? Are there any conditions under which religious-based laws would be good?
 
This may surprise you coming from me, a conservative Christian, but I whole-heartily agree with the establishment clause of the First Amendment. Let me explain...I believe everyone should obey the Ten Commandments. I believe the Bible should be read, believed and followed. But I believe both should be voluntary and not mandated. Once a government starts mandating religion, then another religion could win power and mandate their beliefs be adhered to. Suppose a majority Muslim Congress passes, and a president signs, Sharia law into effect. Should everyone be forced to obey Sharia law? I don't believe Christianity should be forced onto people anymore than I believe Sharia law should be forced onto folks. Also, once a religion is made into a national law, you will have a vast number of false worshippers. They will support that religion only because they are forced to. Our forefathers were familiar with the Church of England which forced all British people to agree with the state church. That's why they put the establishment clause in the First Amendment.

I believe too many people have taken the separation of church and state too far. Forbidding prayer in school and government buildings is ridiculous. I know in certain areas there is a certain religion that dominates. Here in Tennessee, most of us are fundamental Christians. In the northeast many are Catholic. In Michigan there are many Muslims. If a school that is predominately Muslim wants to have a Muslim prayer before a football game. I have no problem with that. If a school's basketball team has a Catholic priest lead in prayer and all the team gives the sign of the cross because they are mostly Catholic, I have no problem with that either. That is not a government establishing a religion. That is allowing people to worship as they want to.
 
.I believe everyone should obey the Ten Commandments. I believe the Bible should be read, believed and followed. But I believe both should be voluntary and not mandated. Once a government starts mandating religion, then another religion could win power and mandate their beliefs be adhered to. Suppose a majority Muslim Congress passes, and a president signs, Sharia law into effect. Should everyone be forced to obey Sharia law?
[emphasis added]

I would only be okay with it being passed if it's done just like other laws are. For instance, you may not agree with abortion, but we have laws that says it is legal. That doesn't mean that every woman is mandated to have abortions of course. I'd be okay with Sharia Law being on the table for consideration or even made law (in a Democratic way) in the same way. A better example would probably be passing individual aspects of Sharia Law as opposed to the entire system, like if it says that only married couples should have kids.

Ideally, I would only want religious and non-religious ideas to become law if they are supported with logic and evidence, or at least there's evidence that it would benefit society. So it would all depend on how it is framed, but in general, I still think it should be given opportunity just as much as any other secular idea is given.

I believe too many people have taken the separation of church and state too far. Forbidding prayer in school and government buildings is ridiculous.
Exactly my thoughts! If it can be done in such a way that it is optional, then I think it should be allowed. I'm not even pro-religion, but rather i'm looking at this from an equal opportunity standpoint by giving all ideas a chance to be on the table. Let logic and evidence and the democratic process decide, as opposed to just a dictate that this is automatically out.

In Michigan there are many Muslims. If a school that is predominately Muslim wants to have a Muslim prayer before a football game. I have no problem with that. If a school's basketball team has a Catholic priest lead in prayer and all the team gives the sign of the cross because they are mostly Catholic, I have no problem with that either. That is not a government establishing a religion. That is allowing people to worship as they want to.
If that could be done without passing a law, then I'd be okay with that. But, I feel we need laws in place just to protect that being an option. I think there's more protection that way.