Should religious organisations hold power in law making?

Question

I say no. My reason? It's fine if religious people want to follow their faith but for them to be able to have a say in laws that affect the rest of us is unfair.

The only law that should involve religious organisations is to allow the believers to practise their faith freely. Apart from that, they have no right to interfere with laws that affect a whole Nation.

Answer 1

I think that religion should not sway the law, however, I think law needs to be in place to protect religious freedom. I think one common law/rule found in most religions is "as it harm non do as ye will." ; "do onto others as you want done onto you."; a basic law of fellowship. If we all followed our beliefs, there would be less violence, illness, suffering, prejudice, and persicution. BB Sdw

Answer 2

Only if ALL religious organizations hold power and it must be equally. This would mean that Islam would have an equal say in the making of laws with Judaism and Christianity along with Hindu, Amerian Indian Religious Organizations and of course the Satanists and Pagans as well. I seriously doubt that people will ever agree to this, so in that case NONE of them should hold any power. Do you think this is why "Separation of Church and State" is a principal of our government?

Answer 3

No, you are right here, However they should have the right to persuade their followers to vote for what is right.

Our so-called "separation of church and state" clause actually says that..." the government shall make no law with respect to the institution of religion or the free exercise thereof".

That also means that a Christian is "protected" from the government or anyone else should he or she decide to run and hold a political or public office, whether it be judge, mayor, senator, or president.

Actually the very opposite is whats taking place today.

Answer 4

you're entering into some somewhat technical aspects of regulation that have not been desperate yet. in the event that they ban possession of a weapon you already very own, then you somewhat could be breaking the regulation by possessing it. even nevertheless, you have some constitutional protections from having your possessions taken from you by the government, so the regulation could probable be written with a grandfather clause so as that the regulation does no longer be challenged as unconstitutional on that foundation. even nevertheless, if a legislature made it unlawful to pass possession or very own the firearm, then your inactiveness would desire to excuse you--in case you already very own the weapon, you're able to have not have been given any selection yet to the two pass it or very own it, which might make the regulation impossible to conform with. extremely, you will desire to jot down the regulation and then we are able to tell you no count if it may be felony or no longer. this would't be replied hypothetically.

Answer 5

No, they should not hold power in lawmaking, for the following reasons:

http://www.holysmoke.org/wicca/anti-wic.htm

http://www.holysmoke.org/wicca/lothlor.htm

http://www.holysmoke.org/wicca/iron-oak.htm

http://www.holysmoke.org/wicca/fire01.htm

http://www.holysmoke.org/wicca/antipagn.htm

All fine examples of the attack-dog mentality some fundamentalists -- and even mainstreamers -- have in any faith. Bias would be impossible to avoid, and someone of a different religion would end up getting the short end of the stick.

Answer 6

So are you telling me that you don't believe in anything so you are perfect to make laws.

Only two religions my friend - God and man. You are serving man as your religion.

Answer 7

"And Jesus answering said unto them, Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's. And they marvelled at him." (Mark 12: 17) John

Answer 8

A thousand times, no.

Answer 9

no

Answer 10

Hell no!