Should the religious right be banned from politics?

Question

The separation of church and state seems to have been stripped away by organizations like the Christian Coalition and the Moral Majority who use their religious views and strong support from like minded people to influence politics.They influence elections and influence bills.The idea that our nation has protection from and of religion is no longer accurate.We are, I fear, moving more and more closer to a theocracy.The more people embrace the ideology of a religious groups like The Christian Coalition, The Moral Majority, Focus on the Family, and the many other fundamentalists groups, the more our nation will have them influencing our politics and elections and even our laws.

Should they be prevented from having this kind of influence?And if not, should they be taxed?

As a Christian I think religion has it's place and time.I don't believe in governing by the Bible or any other religious doctrines.I believe in humanity and freedom.Do you?

Now, I am not saying "ban religion".I am saying ban it from having power in politics.The Christian Coalition and Moral Majority are nothing more then political parties that have a 100% religious agenda that they use to influence the law of the land for all Americans.That is against the spirit of what our nation was founded on.

Seperation of church and state is included in the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.

Amendment I - Freedom of Religion, Press, Expression. Ratified 12/15/1791. Note

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Source:
http://www.usconstitution.net/const.html#Am1

Answer 1

Yes, yes and yes. Religion has no place in government. It has no place in public schools and has no place in law. But, we both know that, that will never happen in our lifetimes. Perhaps, when the religious powers that be, stop trying to force their views upon people and leave it in their church, we can move ahead and make this country better.

Answer 2

I think if you're going to ban the religious right then ban the religious left and also ban corporate executives and adulterers and former criminals... Do you see what I am saying?

I am Christian and I do not believe that the religious right is actually the problem; Bush appears to be someone who is amoral and masquerading as a "religious man"; his actions do not fit his words.

The problem is that religious people are gullible and have completely accepted his testimony - - I'd say he is the "wolf in sheep's clothing" - just like those religious types who put on white robes and masks then marched to introduce terror and tyranny to innocent people.

Freedom must be for all, even the "wingnuts"; what is needed is a surer way of accountability; don't allow a liar to remain in office, even if it means sending a militia in with an arrest warrant.

There should not be a "Bush" in office today. Once a person has served, that should not be "carte blanche" for all the relatives to line up at the trough.

Answer 3

Religion as a whole should be banned from politics. Neither Christians, atheists, pagans, *anyones* religion or lack thereof should have an effect on our political or legal system. It was supposed to be a religion-free area. The separation of church and state was instituted for a reason; to keep religion from trampling all over peoples' rights. It's seeped back in, and guess what? Rights and freedoms are being slowly written out just because some people hold archaic, bigoted beliefs and are trying to force them on everyone.

Answer 4

Ah we have the mess we deserve. I don't like it when people get organized and lobby their political leaders for what they want but that's their Democratic right.

I would like to be left alone, do nothing get paid and enjoy my life. That probably will not happen. If I have an itch I'll have to scratch it myself.

If everybody voted, lobbied their political leaders, then democracy might just work to give the most people the best outcome. If only a few vote, only their needs will be met.

You can't start banning people from the political process, without endangering all the fundamental freedoms you enjoy. Individuals come together for protection, for sharing and planning. Your secular, non connected ideals for society, are empty and lazy. Put up an opposition, gather a party, develop beliefs and policies that attract others, belong, be part of something greater than your own whims, or be pushed around by those who do.

Answer 5

The rights were not stripped away by the religious groups or moral majority. What rights that have been given are because someone decided to lay them down and do nothing about them. The major political groups saw them just laying there, knew they were a good tool they could use to get elected. They were used just like the rest of the people and didn't even realize it was happening to them. No one saw it coming because everyone was too busy worrying what can I do for me, instead of what can I do for my country.

Answer 6

I'm an atheist and a strong believer in separation of church & state, but what kind of plan do you have for this without stripping rights from the religious citizens?

I do think that religions should be taxed for money they take in, just like any business (give Caesar his due & all), but I do not think that they should be eliminated from politics.

Your idea is too unwieldy to put into practice.

Answer 7

I don't favor banning any group from politics unless they are advocating treason, sedition or other illegal activities.

That said, I too am a Christian. I believe Christian conservatives--for the most part--are trying to practice what they preach and to press government to practice what they believe is right in the eyes of God.

I know of no Christian group that advocates disenfranchising any other group on religious issues. I believe Christian groups correctly oppose abortion on demand. I do not believe our country is anywhere close to becoming a theocracy.

We do not govern by the Bible. Some of our principles may have originated in Judeo-Christian principles, but would you oppose such "theocratic" tenets as "Thou shalt not kill?" simply because it appears in the Bible?

Anyone with a sound belief has the right to influence an election and influence bills. This has included Christians, Jews, atheists and Marxists in the history of our country. As long as people have a vote and as long as we are a representative democracy, sir, this system will work.

What you propose is no more reasonable than electing the Pope president would be.

All Americans, whether elected officials or ordinary citizens, have the right to choose and practice--or not practice--the religion of their choice.

And there is no Constitutional separation of church and state. That phrase appeared in a private letter written by Jefferson.

Answer 8

We definitely need to ban them from the government. The first amendment is clear when it says that government should make no law respecting religion, which means that religion as a reason for law should never be used. CC and MM both threaten the constitution because they want to trump it with the bible.

Answer 9

All forms of religion should be banned from politics and law making. Religion is and should remain a personal choice. If we governed by the bible we would have to stone 1/2 the population and burn half of the ones who would be left. Unfortunately you are right in your theory and we are headed for a theocracy. I wonder how many christians will appreciate being told what brand of christianity to follow. For example here is what Pat Robertson the leader of the christian coalition had to say about his fellow christians:

"You say you're supposed to be nice to the Episcopalians and the Presbyterians and the Methodists and this, that, and the other thing. Nonsense. I don't have to be nice to the spirit of the Antichrist." -Pat Robertson, The 700 Club, January 14, 1991

Nice huh? We should all be very afraid....regardless of our paths. Everyone's rights will be taken. Everyone will bow...but not before god.

Some say....well they teach our children evolution in the public schools.....I say take responsibility for your children's education AT HOME. Teach them that other's beliefs are not yours. Some say.....well the gay's want to get married....I say so what quit worrying about them and make your marriage fantastic. Some say but abortion is wrong....I say unless it is underage, leave it in god's hands to handle and judge. Some say...well we were founded as a christian nation.....I say NO we weren't. Read your history and realize that most of our founding fathers were not christian and wanted religious freedom FOR ALL.

I say follow the teachings of your chosen faith with all your heart and fight to keep religious freedom for all without getting sidetracked by the ones with an agenda who will bring up emotionally charged issues to keep us from seeing what is really going on. (is that a run on sentence or what...LOL) Be what you must be and allow others to be what they must be. Providing that they are harming no one. Theocracy never works, but I'm scared that democracy is dying.

Your agnostic friend, J

As for "WarrenD" have you read the constitution? Excuse me? You are trying to confuse people for your own purposes or either are ignorant of the constitution. Here for all to read about the separation of church and state:

The establishment clause of the First Amendment:
The first phrase in the First Amendment states: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion..." is called the establishment clause.

The courts have the responsibility to interpret the U.S. Constitution in specific instances. In their ruling in 1947 of Everson v. Board of Education of Ewing Tp", the U.S. Supreme Court ruled:

"The 'establishment of religion' clause of the First Amendment means at least this: Neither a state nor the Federal Government can set up a church. Neither can pass laws which aid one religion, aid all religions, or prefer one religion over another. Neither can force nor influence a person to go to or to remain away from church against his will or force him to profess a belief or disbelief in any religion. No person can be punished for entertaining or professing religious beliefs or disbeliefs, for church attendance or non-attendance. No tax in any amount, large or small, can be levied to support any religious activities or institutions, whatever they may be called, or whatever from they may adopt to teach or practice religion. Neither a state nor the Federal Government can, openly or secretly, participate in the affairs of any religious organizations or groups and vice versa. In the words of Jefferson, the clause against establishment of religion by law was intended to erect 'a wall of separation between Church and State'."

BTW president bush has done away with parts of this already with the 'faith based initative. Scary stuff folks!

Answer 10

also, that would be, in fact, a religious bias on the part of the person doing the banning. you are banning someone from participating in politics because of their religion, thus inflicting upon your beloved seperation of church and state (which you ever-so blithely misinterpreted...).

where do you stop? would you stop muslims from voting because of the radical extremists? i'm pretty sure hitler tried something similar to what you're suggesting.

also - about governing by scriptures: the ten commandments are in no way bad suggestions. they tell you not to kill people and such. i'm pretty sure that we perceive murder as condemnable because of these ancient traditions.