Laws based on religion should be destroyed!?

Question

MAny "pro-choice" advocates have expressed this opinion to me. But how far should we take this train of thought? Should we eliminate laws against stealing, too? What do you think?

Answer 1

As phrased, you seem to be asking whether activities that are against religious dogma should always be legal. Of course not, because religions are not inherently wrong. In other words, just because religion says some activity is wrong doesn't mean that the activity should automatically be legal.

But laws should not be based SOLELY on religious grounds. In other words, just because religion says something is wrong doesn't automatically mean that is is wrong, from a legal perspective. For a secular law to be valid, it needs to serve some secular purpose. And that means an objective, material, non-religious purpose.

Example: Perjury is wrong, because it interferes with the proper administration of justice. It doesn't matter that the 10 Commandments say "Thou Shalt Not Bear False Witness". Independent of what religion says, perjury is also bad for purely secular reasons. So, the law against perjury isn't based solely on religious dogma/morality, even if there happens to also be a matching religious prohibition.

Stealing is bad because it deprives people of property rights, and interferes with day-to-day business and person activities. If someone steals your car, you can't drive to work or school, can't run errands, etc. Murder is bad because it causes pain, and deprives people of their life and ability to interact with society. So, even though the 10 Commandments say thou shalt not steal and thou shalt nor murder, it's not purely for religious reasons that these laws exist.

Let's take another one. Thou shalt not covet thy neighbors wife nor property. How can we prove "coveting" in a court of law? And do we really want to start putting people in jail merely because they experienced lust or envy? Are those emotions sins? Yes, according to some religions. No according to others.

But should they be illegal? Absolutely not. Because simply feeling an emotion, WITHOUT any corresponding criminal activity, isn't a harm to society and thus should be the subject of secular law.

That's the real issue. Does the activity cause measurable harm to society. What's measurable? Property damage. Economic damage. Personal injury. Personal pain and suffering. Those are measurable, and those are proper to protect with laws.

But religious and moral disapproval is not sufficient grounds for law. Nor can the law mandate actions based solely on religious grounds. If it were, then the majority would be able to effectively establish a state religion by proxy, simply by prohibiting the things the religion prohibits and requiring the things the religion requires. The end result, if we allowed religious justification for laws, is that everyone who have to obey the religious rules, whether they believe in the religion or not.

And that's the whole point of the 1st Amendment protection, and why this country was founded in the first place.

Answer 2

Most laws are based on Biblical principles, but not the Bible directly. Some are "injury" based. Stealing for example, is injurious to the party being stolen from.
Some are based on the increased "chance" of injury, like speeding or running a red light.

Is abortion "injurious" to another individual? That depends on your definition of "individual". Is a fetus to be considered "a human regarded as a unique personality", like the American Heritage Dictionary defines it? In order to be human, one must have the capacity to feel pain and experience emotions. At what stage of development does a fetus become "human"?

For many years, male babies were circumcised very shortly after birth because it was though that they "felt no pain" this early in life. This has been proven false. Babies in utero experience emotions, too, although the "age" at which this starts is unknown.

I am pro-life personally, but lean towards pro-choice politically. Laws based strictly on the Bible, and not on "the greater good", serve little to no purpose other than to drive us down the road to a theocracy.

Answer 3

Some would argue that seperate from religious laws or the ten commandments there is natural law which stands on it's own and requires no Biblical authority and yet still prohibits murder, stealing, etc. It is more instinctive and the prohibitions should be understood by all regardless of their religous beliefs. However in your example you mentioned "pro-choice". I happen to believe that even under natural law, even without Biblical authority that abortion is wrong. That human life once conceived has a right to survive and deserves protection under the law...I'm sure others agree with me but others don't....so we still have a problem.

Answer 4

What in the world?

It may say in the Bible that one should not steal, but that doesn't mean laws against stealing are based on religion. It just means that religion and secular society agree on that point.

Laws against theft are, of course, essential to the underpinnings of a free, capitalistic society. There's no reason to earn money if one's possessions can just be stolen. Allowing theft would also create grave physical risks to the thief and the owner when one is moved to violently protect his interests.

All in all, your question is nonsense. Worst of all, you know it.

Answer 5

Why should they be just because they're based on religion? Most of society's laws are based on some set of morals which mostly begin from some religion.
Without morals, we'd have anarchy.
Pro-abortionists advocate anarchy when they say if abortion is outlawed, they'll still do it in the alley. Disregard a law just because you don't like it? I don't like tax laws, should I stop paying them?

Answer 6

I would agree that we need to get rid of any laws that advocate one religion over the other, but there are some laws that go above and beyond religion. I don't know of any culture that doesn't forbid murder, theft, etc., and many of the others are simply respecting the rights of others.

Answer 7

If a law is ONLY based on a religious belief, then it isn't a fair law. Most laws that SEEM to be based on a religious belief are really based on common sense and popular concerns. It makes sense to have laws against stealing, perjury (false witness), and murder, or we wouldn't have any order in society. To try to make laws that would force everyone to conform to 1 religious belief is not only not fair, but not workable.

Answer 8

Yes, I believe laws based on religion should be destroyed and here's why: There is supposed to be a separation between church and state...However, controversial topics such as gay marriage or abortion are controversial mainly because of what the Christian religion believes...They argue that it is against God and the bible...

Stealing is wrong and is not based solely on religion...

Answer 9

Yes, absolutely. But you would have to stop the religious right from financing political campaigns of our congress which usurps and corrupts our democracy. Stealing isn't religious dogma but social ethics falling outside of religion. Social ethics keeps people from killing each other and our society sane. That's why invading another country and killing innocent people needs the religious overtone about the US being God's chosen country who can do no wrong, because killing other people is obviously wrong just as stealilng is.

Answer 10

Well, the hard-core Muslims believe that women should not be educated, should be covered from head to toe, not drive, and not appear in public alone. It is called shiria law. So I guess it depends on your religion. Personally, if it is against your religion (dancing, drinking, etc), then don't do it. But don't impose your religion on me.