can the government enact a religious belief into law?

Question

same sex marriages debates continues, but the real issue here is the separation between religion and goverment. I understand that many of our laws are based on religious belief, but when is it enough? How fair is it to force Christian views onto people of other religions?

Answer 1

Religious laws? Like when people decide that oil companies are too 'greedy' and need to be taxed more. Or when people decide that rich people are too 'greedy' and need to be taxed more? Or when people decide that they will use the power of government to take money out of your pocket and give it to somebody else as a matter of 'charity' or 'compassion'? Those type of Marxist morality laws? Yes, they are evil indeed.

Answer 2

Your points are quite valid. Sticking to the question itself, though, yes, the government can enact a religious belief into law. If the representatives which we elect have the willpower and the numbers to do so, they can enact any law they please. It is up to the courts to determine which laws are valid and constitutional. Can laws banning same sex marriages be upheld? The Supreme Court has very much avoided the issue until now, though the changing composition of the Court can always threaten to alter the legal interpretation of the relevant laws.

Additionally, yes, a constitutional amendment could very well be created that would ban same sex marriage. Thanks to the wisdom of the drafters of the constitution, however, it is quite difficult to pass an amendment to the constitution. The drafters made the process quite complex and the burden for passage very high, ostesibly for a reason such as an issue such as this.

Answer 3

I couldn't agree more. Although it's true that most people in Occidental countries are Christians, it is a fact that these countries grant you the right to choose your religion (or none at all). And embracing a religion is not just doing the rituals that that religion demands. It's actually living according to the deep values, that this religion implies. Also, living without a religion (which, again, is a right in western countries) implies living on principles and values that are to be respected.

Not letting an atheist gay get married to another atheist gay, for example, or not letting an atheist woman abort, is an unfair imposition of the Church in people's individual rights to live according to values that state that nothing is wrong with this.

I totally agree to respect the law, but the law should be based entirely on ethical and philosophical matters, never on religious ones, which I, as a non-believer, have chosen not to adopt for myself. And the Constitution of my western country grants me the right to live that way.

Answer 4

Go do some homework. We are still a secular nation.
Read the constituion. Religion was a guiding factor in how the founding fathers shaped the country BUT the pillars are secular.
To me the slipperly slope is not so much the moral issue but the federal govt dictating to the states. Get more federalist and let EACH state decide.
Remember the civil war? Part of that came from the feds getting to big.

Answer 5

Simple. You live on earth. For all the 'religion' people talk you or government - you also know words like ' scam.' That'll provide something of a barometer. Church? Christian? Religion?

Just because a mouse lives in a cookie jar, doesn't make him a cookie, now does it?

The fact you have some form of dissension within yourself indicates you are able to apply some reason which to a degree must be contingent on truth.

Let the truth be your guide. It's supposed to be the basis of true religion anyway.

Answer 6

A self-righteous, blind, and ignorant one can certainly enact whatever it wants, as long as it controls the majority of votes. However, if the government really adheres to our separation of Church and State fundamental constitutional principal, this should never happen. So, it is certainly NOT fair to force ANY religious views of ANY kind onto ANY people of other religions, period.

Answer 7

Supposedly, no. But, theystill do. Although they're battling over same-sex marriage, as you probably know, the FMA (Federal Marriage Amendment) was defeated in Congress. Separation of Church and State is supposed to be important in our country, but the current administration is inching its way toward more and more religion-based laws and trying to write discrimination into the Constitution (i.e. the FMA)

Answer 8

Unfortunatly, as with everywhere in the world, organized religion is a force that is hard to stop once it gains power.

And a sad fact, is that most who are devout, don't even realize just how blindly they are following behind those who may or may not have their best interests in mind. Nor can they remove their self imposed blinders to see that as a nation we have become no better than the foriegn nations "we try to librate from the oppressive religion-based dictatorships."

Tis a very sad state of affairs.....

Answer 9

Religion has nothing to do with it. It is monetary, companies would have to furnish benefits for a group that has never been included under the law. My religious views have nothing to do with my not wanting laws changed for special interest groups, same sex marriage or illegal aliens - no new laws.

Answer 10

Not in the US. At least not without a challenge. The debate you refer to is not really religious, it's cutural. It's just that the religious right is most vocal. Marriage is not religious it is a legal-social contract, that only within the last 1000yrs became blessed by religion.