Neil deGrasse Tyson Quotes

The problem we have in America is the systematic erosion of our religious values in an attempt by certain liberal groups to expunge our Christian heritage from the public square.

The basic assumption of the secular society is that modernity overcomes religion.

I don’t see a bit of danger from us having an established religion.

The liberty I contend for is more than toleration. The very idea of toleration is despicable; it supposes that some have a pre-eminence above the rest to grant indulgence; whereas all should be equally free, Jews, Turks, Pagans and Christians. Test Oaths and established creeds should be avoided as the worst of evils.

As both Christianity and Judaism have done, Islam can not only survive but thrive in a secular state. Once disassociated from coercive power, it will witness a renewal of spirituality….The secular state has not killed religion; rather, it has put a brake on the state’s manipulation of religion. It took three centuries of efforts by many European philosophers and several revolutions for this fundamental nuance to be developed, accepted, and made understandable to the masses.

Probably at the time of the adoption of the constitution, and of the amendment to it, now under consideration [i.e., the First Amendment], the general, if not the universal sentiment in America was, that Christianity ought to receive encouragement from the state, so far as was not incompatible with the private rights of conscience, and the freedom of religious worship.

Is it the duty of a deist to support that which he believes to be a cheat and imposition? Is it the duty of the Jew to support the religion of Jesus Christ, when he really believes that he was an imposter? Must the papist be forced to pay men for preaching down the supremacy of the pope, whom they are sure is the head of the church? Government has no more to do with the religious opinions of men than it has with the principles of mathematics

Government may not assist in the fight to keep Christ in Christmas.

… the growth of the political independence of Christian, Hindu, Jewish, and Muslim groups from the institutions of government has allowed them to exercise greater leverage over the state and the development of more activist political theologies.

Many in our increasingly secular culture want to chase Christians out of the public square altogether.

I think here is the irony of American history. We don't have an established church. When you have an established church nobody takes religion as seriously as we do here. We have a free market in religion. The religious groups are competing with each other.

The Constitution established the United States of America as a Christian nation.

In Europe, the Enlightenment of the 18th century was seen as a battle against the desire of the Church to limit intellectual freedom, a battle against the Inquisition, a battle against religious censorship. And the victory of the Enlightenment in Europe was seen as pushing religion away from the center of power. In America, at the same time, the Enlightenment meant coming to a country where people were not going to persecute you by reason of your religion. So it meant a liberation into religion. In Europe, it was liberation out of religion.

The Founders believed that pluralism survived only within the concept of religious liberty espoused by American Christianity.

Are we a Christian nation now? It's doubtful. But did we start out as one? Without question.

To speak against religion (the Christian) is breaking down the bond of good government.

Perhaps more than ever before, there is that aggressive secularism and there are those who would indeed try to destroy our Christian heritage and culture and take God from the public square. Religion must not be taken from the public square.

We have taken God out of our education system. We have taken Him out of government. You have lawyers that sue you every time you mention the name of Jesus Christ in any public forum.

Government needs to stay out of the religion business altogether.

Secularism is categorically not saying that the religious may not speak out publicly or have a say in public life. It is about saying that religion alone should not confer a privileged say in public life, or greater influence on it. It really is as simple as that.

We can't equate democracy with Christianity because the largest democracy on earth is India, which is primarily Hindu. The third largest democracy is Indonesia, which is Islamic. Democracy and freedom are not dependent on Christian beliefs.

Whatever America's founders believed about Christianity - and they believed a wide range of things - they clearly rejected the idea of an established church.

The problem is that you can't impose the church's teachings on all Americans as a matter of law.

A just laicism allows religious freedom. The state does not impose religion but rather gives space to religions with a responsibility toward civil society, and therefore it allows these religions to be factors in building up society.

The Constitution provides for freedom of religion, not freedom from religion.