What should the role of any religion be in politics?

Question

The Bill of Rights in the US states we have freedom of religion, meaning we are free to worship as we see fit. That includes, in my opinion, a religiously separated government, otherwise we risk tainting laws and regulation with religious bias. Forcing belief and ritual on those who believe differently. Obviously religious morality of any leader will influence his decisions, but that isn't to say he should support laws deemed fit by the church. Gay marriage, stem cell research, Sunday sales, etc.

I've noticed several people mention a "Christian State" and so on, and it seems many people (some here, some not) think religion should dictate politics. Yet if another religion were to do so, they would view it as unfair...so how can that be justified for their particular religion?

What are your thoughts/opinions?

I was hoping to also see a response from one of those who supported a christian state....ah well.

Answer 1

Thanks for your very important questions. Also, thank you, for you apparently are sincerely looking for answers from both sides of this issue, in order to come to better understanding to make more stealthy conclusions out of all of this for yourself. I admire that.

Now, may I start out by saying that a major part of your questions and my responses are based on the apriori assumptions on both your part and mine, which are two contrasting world and life views, combatting for predominance in our American culture and societies. You apparently hold to a secularist view of life, seeing that any religious philosophy of life should be compartmentalized to issues around personal religious practices of worship and church, and should not interfere with public life (such as government, schools, and one's place of employment). My
philosophic world view of life is that all aspects of life, including the purpose and function of government, schools, recreation and work have a religious meaning to them, since God is not "god", but "God", Who's involved with all aspects of human life. So religion should not be divorced from culture and society as secularists apparently believe.

Having said this, I believe it is also important for you to understand that the majority of cultures and nations around the globe do still believe that the underlying and predominant religious convictions of that culture and public aspects of life should not be separated, and that there isn't any conflict in being able to uphold both together, let alone believing that religion is critically necessary for keeping order and justice in that society. However, the difference in the 18th century American experiment to other governmental bodies and states throughout history before this time was that any religious institution and/or denomination would dictate law, policies and social mores and issues, rather than by the majority of its aggregate voters via their governmental representatives. Yes, we evangelicals do believe in the separation of church and state, contrary to what was practiced in monarchal and ecclesiastical (church)government of England at the time. This is why we even declared our independence from them in 1776, right?

The problem with the secularists understanding of what this means is quite distorted to its original intent by Thomas
Jefferson's letter to a Baptist denomination. Remember, you won't find this statement at all in the US Constitution nor the Declaration of Independence! And, it was not separation of religion (personal convictions and life conduct of the people) and state, but church (the institution and/or a particular denomination) and state! This is why this one Jeffersonian quote from a previous responder is so misunderstood, "In every country and in every age, the priest has been hostile to liberty." A "priest" represented the church instutition, as the bishops in the Church of England, not religious people! No, Jefferson meant just the inverse in this letter. The state was not to interfere with church polity and expression, not that religious mores and ideals of the church should have no bearing on government laws, policies, public education and sociocultural issues. To him, that would've been silly! This following Jeffersonian quote proves it, "The only foundation for useful education in a republic is to be laid in religion."

This noble Jeffersonian prescription, was actually based on a plain and simple observation fro him of what had already been put into action by those Americans dedicated to the pursuit and advancement of education. 88 of the first 100 colleges were established to prepare men for the ministry. The first Bible printed in the USA was for public schools, and first graders learned a verse in the book of Proverbs for every letter of the alphabet. Lastly, the Supreme Court of the USA commonly used the Word of God to justify their decisions.

The question really comes down to is this, in a democracy, the majority vote always should have predominance about establishment and enforcement law, no matter what human philosophical system of thinking is behind it all! Else, wouldn't that be inconsistent with its tenets? And, on the contrary, American evangelical Christians are totally in favor of having and keeping this kind of government that you apparently desire, that being that this practical form of governing highlights the rights of each individual to vote, speak about what he or she believes, and freedom to worship, or not to,
any religious deity. And, concerning American law,
since personal values will differ, the rule of the
majority of our representatives in government must be
upheld and obeyed. Btw, do you believe that this is
the best form of government, or it is only conditioned
upon whether the rule of the majority agree with you?
Otherwise, wouldn't calling religion being "forced" upon
government and your public life, rather than you being in agreement to its enforcement despite your disagreement as a voter in the minority, anti-democratic in some fashion, maybe even fascist (i.e., such as what's the underlying
philosophy of the hate crimes legislation of today
(the thought police) is to push its legislation, no matter what the majority thinks, because it's only important what a minority thinks?) If its the latter, then you are not really for democracy, are you?

Given the aforesaid, evangelical Christianity is drastically different from say, Talibanism, rather than in any way similar, n'est pas? By the way, this aforesaid form of American government has been in practice, to the envy of the world, from the late 18th century until just recently, starting in 1948. Contrary to what is being taught today about American
history in the public schools, even the basis of
establishing the American federal government was found
in the Word of God, according to Alexander Hamilton,
who made the proposal. He cited Isaiah 33:22, "For the
Lord is our Judge, the Lord is our lawgiver, and the Lord is our King. He will save us." Thus, in this verse we find the basis for the establishment of the greatest governmental system the world has ever known, that being its three branches: the judicial, the legislative and the executive.
It was only when the US Supreme Court in 1948 chose to reinterpret to their own liking the intent of that letter of Thomas Jefferson to the Baptists, with a foolish meaning that this Jeffersonian doctrine of the separation of church and state means to protect the public from the influence of religious values and practices. What? This 1948 judicial understanding of this doctrine ignores almost 200 years of how it was indeed practiced, and successfully at that! It has only been since 1948, less than 60 years of governing, has your view been predominant due to judicial decisions, not popular vote. The US Supreme Court Justice Reinquist, before he retired, stated that this 1948 ruling has made this Jeffersonian doctrine absolutely meaningless, leaving it to be reinterpreted in any capricious way that the US courts of tomorrow choose.

And, its ruling as it is today compels us evangelical Christians to abide by its unfortunate reinforcement, which again was not done by popular vote, but by judicial fiat. Now, fiat does mean "being forced". Therefore, a secularist view unfairly is only represented in our public schools, still today. Why not both? Where's the freedom of the majority to make a decision about this, even if the majority would vote for just a secularist view to still be represented? Btw, all our presidential forefathers and most prominent political figures throughout the 18th, 19th, and early 20th centuries were known to be religious, upholding a Judeo-Christian ethic of American life and cultural expression, even Thomas Jefferson himself, who was a deist. If you doubt me about this, I'll be more than glad to send you quotes from all of our presidential forefathers indicating this to be true. Here are just a few from every century since the beginning of America. Those before 1948 were not at all familiar with the secularist view of American life and world view to which you apparently ascribe.

20th Century

"If we ever forget that we're One Nation Under God,
then we will be a nation gone under." -- Ronald Reagan

"Democracy is the outgrowth of the religious
conviction of the sacredness of every human life."
-- President Herbert Hoover, 1943

19th Century

"All must admit that the reception of the teachings of
Christ results in the purest patriotism, in the most
scrupulous fidelity to public trust, and in the best
type of citizenship."
– President Grover Cleveland

"My prayer to God is that He would preserve the
Constitution and the Union throughout all generations." -- President James Buchanan, message to Congress, Dec.
3, 1860

"If we and our posterity reject religious instruction and authority, violate the rules of eternal justice, trifle with the injunctions of morality, and recklessly destroy the political constitution which holds us together, no man can tell how sudden a catastrophe may overwhelm us that shall bury all our
glory in profound obscurity."
– Daniel Webster, Feb. 23, 1852

"Our prayers should evermore be offered up to the
Father of the Universe for His wisdom to direct us in
the path of our duty so as to enable us to consummate
these high purposes."
-- President John Tyler, Dec. 3, 1844

18th Century

"With true repentance and contrition of Heart, we may
unitedly implore the forgiveness of our Sins, through
the merits of Jesus Christ, and humbly supplicate our
Heavenly Father, to grant us the aids of his Grace,
for the amendment of our Hearts and Lives, and
vouchsafe his smiles upon our temporal concerns."
--Samuel Adams, Feb. 28, 1795, proclamation,
issued while he was Massachusetts governor

"Without religion, I believe that learning does real
mischief to the morals and principles of mankind."
--Benjamin Rush, letter to John Armstrong, 1783

Answer 2

Politicians don't have a conscience, nor do they have moral values, therefore, religion plays absolutely no part in politics. Politics is nothing more than a constant battle for power and control, filled with the greediest and most corrupt people your mind could imagine. If religion played a part in politics, abortion would not be legal and neither would gay marriage in some states. ;-)

Answer 3

How many ATHEISTS were FOR the ATOMIC BOMB

If it got PUT to a VOTE would it have passed!

I mean it

We are going to spends BILLIONS to devise an ULTIMATE WEAPON that WIPES OUT A CITY and ONCE WE USE IT the WHOLE WORLD WILL KNOW and they can DUPLICATE IT IN TIME, becasue the scientific foundations are welll known.

NOW

Who votes for that one!

Were we given a say

Religion is about a MORAL CONSCIENCE

In the view of ATOMIC BOMBS I think most Atheists and Religious people who vote togther on THAT MORAL ISSUE

I can't believe for a moment ATHEISTS and THEISTS would APPROVE of a WEAPON of MASS DESTRIUCTION that could ONE DAY be TURNED ON THEM

Ignorance is bliss.

Pandora's box.

Atheists APPROVE of opening PANDORA'S BOX

Then maybe they'll approve when SCIENCE accidentally makes HIV airborne and WE CAN ALL GET IT BY BREATHING THE AIR NEAR SOMEONE with the new strain!

Answer 4

Religion should not be in government. For those that say it should, which one do we pick? Christians - would you be ok if Scientology was the national religion? or Islam? or Atheism?

However, there are fundamental values of most mainstream religions that should be incorporated - integrity, honesty, value for human life, no stealing, etc.

No sane person could argue that these values shouldn't be held dearly by our government.

For those pushing religion on government - stop asking someone else to do your personal calling. If you want to help the poor, go help them. If you want to help unwed mothers, go help them. The government proves everyday that its incapable of performing these duties effectively.

No one has ever felt the hand of Christ through a government-issued welfare check....

We are supposed to do this personally....

Answer 5

Isn't there some document that talks about how in the US there will be separation of church and state? I do need to say how pissed off I am when there is not alcohol sales on Sunday in my state because of religious influence.

Answer 6

We can't control why people want what they do. Allowing them to peruse there gaols is just exactly what we mean with the word freedom.

Frankly, the Christian right scares me, but I won't take away there freedoms out of fear!

Answer 7

Religion shouldnt be in politics if we want TRUE freedom of religion. The country is based on HUMANISM, not Christianity.

Answer 8

Politics and religion should never mix.

Answer 9

Religion has no place in politics!

Answer 10

"In every country and in every age, the priest has been hostile to liberty." ~ Thomas Jefferson

Answer 11

Religion has, or should have, NO role in politics. EVER.