English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

17 answers

Because no religion should every be forced on anyone. It should be a personal choice.

How would you feel if someone elses religion was forced on you simply because you lived in their geographical area as a part of the politics of the region. Would you want to wear head coverings? or recite their creeds?

Freedom of religion, not forced religion was a founding principle of our county. If religion permeates politics it becomes forced. God lets us have freewill so should our government.

2007-03-06 09:07:34 · answer #1 · answered by G's Random Thoughts 5 · 2 0

Of course in many nations they are not separate. The UK for example has an established Church, which costs a bit of money but doesn't otherwise do much harm, as you are freely allowed to make fun of it if you choose. This is a liberty you would be wise to avoid in Saudi Arabia.

The United States, however, was founded by people who believed religion was a private matter, and that the Government had no business meddling with it. That has worked out pretty well for a couple of centuries, and I don't think we should consider changing our attitude. All I can add is that I believe church assets and incomes ought to be taxable, if only for the sake of consistency.

2007-03-06 17:19:03 · answer #2 · answered by obelix 6 · 2 0

BECAUSE, there are different Church denominations who will disagree with the ruling party's doctrine. This will cause turmoil.

There are people who don't believe in religion which will cause turmoil.

There are other religions that will not like the doctrines of the ruling party which will cause turmoil.

Theocracy is a BAD idea, we'd be in a constant state of civil war. That is why this country was founded, so people could choose to practice or not practice the religion of their choice.

Look at it this way, as a Christian I would be highly upset if the ruling party of the country was Muslim, WHY because we don't believe the way they do. If they tried to implement sharia law there would be an out right civil war.

2007-03-06 17:20:54 · answer #3 · answered by ViolationsRus 4 · 1 0

Freedom of religion. In nations where religion is intrinsic to government, there is no (or little) freedom of religion. Sure, individuals may practice whatever religion they choose, but religious organizations and events that are affiliated with a religion other than the state religion will be at a disadvantage. We in the West long ago took a societal decision that we'd all be free to practice whatever religion we choose, even if that religion is to have no religion. Associating church and state makes this impossible.

2007-03-06 17:11:55 · answer #4 · answered by Dim 2 · 1 0

ooooohhh I don't know, maybe because state sanctioned religion would lead to laws that would put you in Jail or even to death if you disagreed with said religion.

For instance, I don't agree with what the government does with my taxes. I still pay them though, because if I don't I will end up in Prison. If there was no separation of Church and state then who knows what sort of bureaucratic religion we would all have to follow. What if the Government decided that tithing was mandatory and would be set at 50%.

There are millions of great reasons for separating religion and government, they all have to do with personal freedom

2007-03-06 17:09:54 · answer #5 · answered by ɹɐǝɟsuɐs Blessed Cheese Maker 7 · 2 0

Church doesn't know what is right for the state. And vice versa, I suppose. Since the state governs people, if the two mixed, the church would then govern people, including those who are not of that particular church's faith, putting pointless restrictions on them, including restrictions on things that cause no harm.

I would be forced to follow something I don't believe in, infringing on my constitutional right to liberty.

2007-03-06 17:08:51 · answer #6 · answered by juhsayngul 4 · 1 0

So religion doesn't influence what decisions people who govern the state/country make. It could affect people not of that religion a lot, and not in a good way. Besides, do you really want someone telling you "Ok, so this is the right religion. Everyone in the gov. follows it, so you have to. Church and state, you know!"

2007-03-06 17:08:19 · answer #7 · answered by Blackbird 5 · 1 0

Because the church as no place in politics.

If they weren't separate we'd have people in jail for have premarital sex...or just "sinning" in general. It would never end.

And why should the law be able to say what religion, if any, is the right one? I already get enough grief for not believing, I really don't need anymore.

2007-03-06 17:08:00 · answer #8 · answered by photogrl262000 5 · 1 0

Once a nation becomes a theocracy - where one religion is deemed by the government to be the 'correct' one - those who disagree become forced to live by a faith not their own.

Religion is a very personal choice and the government should have no say or interest in what people choose to believe.

2007-03-06 17:14:40 · answer #9 · answered by Sun: supporting gay rights 7 · 1 0

I don't want somebody else's religion making my personal decisions.

For example: Jehovah's Witnesses don't believe in blood transfusions. Well, sorry, JWs, but if you ever take over the gov't and make transfusions illegal, I'm going to find some doctors who would be willing to perform one illegally....just in case I ever need one.

2007-03-06 17:10:33 · answer #10 · answered by catrionn 6 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers