True or false: The less religion in government the better.?

Question

What the government does not legislate, the church will.

Answer 1

True. The government is supposed to make laws that take into account ALL of its citizens, of whatever race, creed, religion, etc.

This will not happen if the government is a religious government. If it were a Christian government, for instance, it would institute laws that would further the Christian religious agenda -- much like the Religious Right has been doing since it became involved politically with the White House in the 1980's and ever since.

So yes. True.

Answer 2

The church legislates the spirit, and the government legislates the body.

Answer 3

This is almost universally the case. If government does not secure private liberties, then other sources of authority (like religion -- much less open to criticism) will.

The opposite case, of course, is communism -- where religion becomes the state. I support a separation of church and state that allows for complete freedom of speech and dissent.

Answer 4

Separation of Church and State is the basis of all rational Democracy. States should have no right to establish over the people a theocracy. Not that believing in a higher power and gathering by free will to celebrate with others that belief is wrong, though ultra rightists try to say moderates believe it is.

Answer 5

That depends on how you define "in government." If our leaders are sincerely religious people and seek to implement laws that are fair and moral, and can do so within the framework of a secular government, it is a very good thing. A theocracy would not be a good thing, neither would an atheistic government. Both reflect the beliefs of their adherents.

Answer 6

To remove religion completely from government you would have to have a government entirely of atheist. One can not remove their beliefs from who they are. Should the church run the government absolutely not.

Answer 7

True. Also true: The less government in government, the better.

Answer 8

"The Church" can legislate nothing. As for religion in government, the government is made up of human beings, and most of them have some sort of religious belief system that they embrace and practise personally. When a person becomes an elected government official, you can hardly tell him that he cannot continue to belong to any particular religious group, because he continues to have the same constitutional rights as any other citizen.

I don't care what a Politician privately believes in, just as long as he checks it at the door when he goes to his job as a representative of the People. That's the whole point, his job is to represent ALL the people, and never allow his own personal religious beliefs to dictate his decision-making when it comes to the passage of bills that might impact the behaviours and practises of others who do not share the tenets of his personal faith.

A good example of this is the ever-contentious issue of abortion rights for women. The argument about whether it is sanctioned "murder" is purely religion-based, and it's especially ridiculous to suggest that those bundle of living cells have the exact same definition of "person" as the mother, who has been alive for several years, and has a life history and an actual recogniseable identity. That's the problem with these "Religion slash Morality" issues. You cannot legislate a code of behaviour relating to either one of these unless you can clearly demonstrate, and argue, that any kind of alternative behaviour is physically and emotionally damaging to another human being. To be able to argue this, in relation to abortion, you would have to be able to show, clearly and beyond all shadow of doubt that this foetus was fully aware that it was being aborted, understood it, and was emotionally harmed by it. I contend that NObody has ever been able to demonstrate any such thing. This, accordingly, makes the abortion issue one for individual opinion because, in the absence of clear proof, one person's point of view is as valid as any other person's. That's why I think it is a subject that no Politician should take a stand on, and attempt to overthrow the very clear and understandable right of a woman to have control over her own body.

We see Politicians being ever so careful about taking a firm stand for or against things like permitting homosexuals to have the same marital status as heterosexual couples. They pussyfoot around the issue, trying hard not to offend potential supporters in both camps. But again, most of the furore seems to be fuelled by religious beliefs. We do not live in a Theocracy where the Government and the Official religion of the country are one and the same. This can never be, because the nation is representative of just about every religious designation anybody ever invented. We have to make decisions and pass laws, governed by good sense, and non-religious practicalities, and for that reason, I thoroughly dislike it when our Politicians attempt to gain favor with a particular voting faction, by bending over back'ards to show what diligent and devout practitioners they are of whatever religious belief system they happen to subscribe to. I don't want to know. I just want them to do their job.

Answer 9

True but let us legislate what is right for the majority of the people.

Answer 10

True... oh so true. Why do you think the puritans left England... because the government was trying to legislate belief, force everyone to believe as they wanted them to believe.

The church has no business legislating anything. They are there to facilitate praise, not legislate laws.