Would you like a government that supports religion in politics and is extremely conservative?

Question

Move to the middle east.

Even Ben Franklin (a deist) said that if this is the society WITH god, imagine it WITHOUT god. i agree with this, in that a MORAL code is needed to teach us the best way to interact with each other...be it religiously founded or not. Personally my religion is very important to me, and I will protect my right to practice it...as I will protect EVERYONE's right to do the same.

Answer 1

No I would not.
& Hahahahaha.

Answer 2

No, I would not.

I would not because such a government would operate in a way that goes against the principles that this country was founded on. The Framers intended for America to cherish a notion of religious pluralism. Of course, all of this is with the understanding of what a "government that supports religion in politics" would do.

As of today, I would assume that such a government would make laws strictly and solely based on teachings derived from a holy book. Such a thing would be unconstitutional and anti-American. Simply having political leaders who were/are very religious is fine of course, as long as they understand that the country itself is a secular one, made up of citizens of many different religious beliefs. It is therefore perfectly fine in my eyes, to push a certain policy that is motivated by a religious belief, provided that there is some other secular motivation to accompany it. It can't JUST be because you think the bible said so.

Answer 3

I bet this is in response to another question on here. Just a hunch.

But it's lunchtime, so here goes:

People much more educated than I am have outlined the philosophies and achievements (intellectual, political and otherwise) for which the the Greco-Roman tradition, as modified and shaped by the Judeo-Chirstian tradition, is responsible. Simply put, many believe that our society would not be the way it is without the principles of the Judeo-Christian tradition - there's no way to remove that influence totally.

But I would defy anyone whose life is empty enough to read all of my questions or answers here to find ONE in which I say that abortion should be limited, same-sex marriage should not be recognized or embryonic stem cell research should not be conducted "because God says so." I understand the frustration of people tired of those arguments.

But religion and/or morality in government could mean many things. Abolitionists, prohibitionists, civil rights workers, etc. ALL used religious and moral teachings to inform their opinions on public issues. Some issues were good; others bad. I hope people would allow me my OWN frustration at what I see as "Christian-bashing" on this site. I know people are interested in discussing the three issues I mentioned above "without bringing religion into it." But again we have made religious/moral judgments on many issues - we just don't recognize them as such because they are settled. One could just as well ask, in my opinion, "without bringing religion into it, why is racial discrimination wrong?" Wait until the geneticists start down the road of a Gattica-style society (interesting flick!). At that time, the idea of our rights being inalienable and us all being created equal will be pretty handy!

I'm not a "bible-thumper" but I'm not a "Xtian basher" either. If people have debates on the "big three" issues I mentioned, I wish they would bash their opponents on those and not trash religion as a whole. I am certainly not saying you are bashing at all, but your question sparked a thought or two about this site.

Also, I tend to burn, not tan. So Tehran's not good for me. I'm stayin' here!

ta-ta, for now :)

Answer 4

It is true, that Republican rank and file have been greatly influenced by the evangelical christian political movement this past 30 years in America. Really, they bring up the same sort of rumblings that are almost boorish in their familiarity; gay bashing, flag burning, abortion, pledge of allegiance, and other matters.

While a belief in God inspired our founding fathers, our constitution separated church and state, and, few people would charge ahead and say this was incorrect.

We are lucky to have the constitution, and seeing middle east nations struggle as they do over their own governance, it is a reminder to me that freedoms derived from a bunch of radical liberal minded revolutionaries - the founding fathers of America, had it right.

Answer 5

I do not think religion has any place in politics and the other way around.. there should be separation of church and state.

There are just Io many born again so called Christians that use the bible to preach from , then get elected and forget who God is.

Like the president we have now for example.

Answer 6

Yes, many conservatives will like religion to be mixed with politics and to see clergymen in public offices. They shoud move to the Middle East to see how living in a theocracy has worked for those people. I can't believe they have the same values as those Islamic fundamentalists that are terrorists.

Answer 7

Define "supports religion in politics". If you're talking about a theocracy, I'm against it. If you're talking about recognizing the fact that our society is greatly influenced by religion and that many religious bodies constitute wonderful partners with whom the government can work on social programs, then I'm completely in favor of it.

Answer 8

I comprehend the fascist economics in the back of the american economic equipment and how this is easy to whine to and relating to the impersonal entity you call your government once you sense uncomfortable approximately some thing being outfitted. yet incredibly, who cares? i in my opinion, sense uncomfortable approximately any religious development being erected everywhere, yet i do no longer rally human beings and get them stirred up approximately it, through fact there's a call for for the irrationality that a church or mosque or in spite of provides. i'll supply my objections yet I won't goto enormous daddy government and demand that they do the only concern they might do (start up rigidity) to provide up the development from being outfitted. What i'm against right it fairly is human beings stressful action out of government whilst it comprises something. this might in simple terms convey approximately a extra totalitarian state. as long as those Muslims gained the land with legitimacy then there is not any longer something incorrect right here. they could be doing it in adverse flavor, and if so it fairly is the reaction they are after. no count if this is stopped it then they are going to in all hazard attempt to make this look like they have been victimized and in simple terms further get worse family between the west and Islam. i think of a thank you to techniques-set it fairly is to chop back the call for for irrationally that faith components by potential of thinking each thing approximately their specific faith, no longer shunning them. No call for for faith, no mosque being outfitted. it's going to be an quite long technique nonetheless.

Answer 9

Your comparison is ridiculous and extreme.


In the Middle East, a nation's laws are based on the Quran, a religious book. No one in the United States has even suggested that American law be tossed out and substitute the Bible!

Answer 10

Actually, I'd like a government that OPPOSES religion in politics and is extremely conservative. I get awfully sick and tired of liberals telling us that God is against retributive justice and the death penalty.

Answer 11

Do you want a government that will decide what doctor and what health services you are going to receive, raise taxes to support the welfare programs for illegals and the so called helpless, demilitarizing the country, tell you what you can and can't do according to their one and only believe system, basically a complete and utter Big Brother mentality? Then vote democrat.