Talk:Establishment of religion

This page is somewhat incoherent, and could do with extensive revision by a scholar in interanational constitutional law. Which I am not.

I've fixed some very old vandalism.
This page was maliciously turned into a redirect about a year ago. I restored the previous version. That said, the previous version is not great, suffering greatly from POV and OR problems. It could use some serious clean-up and sources. I will put it on my list. --Loonymonkey (talk) 21:20, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

The whole of this article
This article is full of errors, including the first few sentences. The following, for example, contradicts all mainstream opinion. It is at best controversial, and at worst a false and unsourced misreading. "Unfortunately, "establishment" is frequently misused as "establishing," but its use here is closer to a "dry cleaning establishment" than establishing anything."

The article's information isn't presented in a balanced way either (notice the presence of the word "unfortunately" in the next sentence). Given that the much better articles State religion and Establishment Clause of the First Amendment exist, I'm really not sure I see the point of this article. --Lo2u (T • C) 01:20, 23 November 2008 (UTC)


 * To clarify further, I visited this page in the hope of finding something about established churches and state religions. Instead, I was told, "an establishment of religion" is another word for a religious organisation, in the same way that an establishment of hairdressing is a hairdressing establishment (and, yes, the comparison really was made). So "the Catholic Church, Judaism and the Church of England are all establishments of religion".


 * Now, this isn't in any way a mainstream view. The common debate is completely different. Firstly there's a more conservative view, that, when the first amendment prevents the establishment of religion, it prevents only the setting up of a state church. Secondly there's a less conservative view, that, "It was . . . nonpreferential assistance to organized churches that constituted ‘establishment of religion’ in 1791 and it was this practice that the Amendment forbade Congress to adopt." (C Herman Pritchett ). Either way, there's no doubt the meaning of this phrase is verbal. "Establishment" is not considered a synonym for an organisation, foundation, institution or similar by any reliable authority; it is a practice or action that is called establishment.


 * Now once this misconception, which seemed to be the whole purpose of the article, is corrected, I'm not sure I see how this article differs from State religion.--Lo2u (T • C) 10:17, 23 November 2008 (UTC)


 * You were correct to remove that sentence about dry cleaning (it did seem to be original research and opinion). However, as I said, problems with this article can be solved with editing, not by deleting or merging the article.  "Establishment of Religion" has more meanings than simply "State Religion," particularly in the context of the U.S. First Amendment where "Establishment of Religion" also refers to a governmental preference of one religion over another or religion over non-religion.  Neither of these concepts are synonymous with a government-run church or "State Religion."  This is explained briefly in the article (and could certainly be cleaned up, I agree).  But to redirect this article to "State Religion" would be to push a particular POV held by a minority of Americans that the Establishment Clause only  refers to the creation of a state church.


 * If we really wanted to redirect this article (an idea I'm not sold on but don't vehemently oppose either) then at the very least it should be a disambig page with links to both Establishment_Clause_of_the_First_Amendment and State religion so it is clear that we are taking a world view and not pushing a particular POV. --Loonymonkey (talk) 18:14, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Hi Loonymonkey. This article was used in the past as a content fork and it basically dealt with state religion, which is why it seemed best to redirect it there. I think you're right that the redirect could be construed as POV: establishment of religion isn't the same as established religion. Rather it is an American legal concept that appears in the Constitution. If there's nothing that this page could contain that isn't mentioned in Establishment Clause of the First Amendment (and I don't think there is; this article is simply a cut and paste), how do you feel about a simple redirect to Establishment Clause of the First Amendment? --Lo2u (T • C) 18:33, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
 * I have no problem with that. Really, I have no attachment to this article (and certainly not in the form it currently exists).  I don't mind a redirect, as long as we're pointing in a neutral direction.  Thanks for your help in the matter.  --Loonymonkey (talk) 23:22, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Alright then. Well I'll leave it a couple more days, see if anyone else has any comments. Best wishes. --Lo2u (T • C) 22:26, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Redirecting this to "State religion", since the term "establishment of religion" is a term applicable around the world, and non-US readers will be puzzled at redirection to an article solely about establishment in the US. There are existing established churches in Europe, for example, and disestablishment is currently an important topic of political debate in England.  Thanks, OttoTheFish (talk) 07:09, 26 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Really? I haven't seen any non-U.S. sources that use the phrase "establishment of religion" as a synonym for "state religion."  If you have sources that indicate as such please post them here for discussion.  If that's the case, we may have to create a disambiguation page instead of a redirect as piping directly to "state religion" creates serious POV issues, at least within the U.S. meaning of the term (as described above).  Thanks. --Loonymonkey (talk) 20:11, 26 December 2008 (UTC)
 * A dab page may well be necessary: here are three British sources discussing "establishment of religion":, and .  Perhaps this article should be renamed Establishment of religion in the United States? Thanks, OttoTheFish (talk) 23:11, 26 December 2008 (UTC)