Why is it bad for religion to be part of government?

Question

I fully understand that religion shouldn't be part of the government because people are persecuted and life just isn't fair anymore. Because of this we have seperation of church and state. My SS teacher wants us to write an essay on this, I can only come up with two reasons:

-if a certain religious group gains power and gains control of the government, it leads to various conflicts among the people and the government.
-religious ideas conflict with what is truly right for the nation, colony, etc.

I need one more reason, please help!

Answer 1

As it is, I am not sure about your second reason. You might have to develop it a bit more clearly. Certainly, many people have religious beliefs which support government actions that would also be beneficial. I think you need to point out that it is not the religious ideas which make them right, and support that by observing that many other people might well hold conflicting religious beliefs.

Your first reason (religious conflict) is so good that it was directly cited by the founders as a reason for prohibiting an "establishment of religion." (That's the First Amendment language; Thomas Jefferson, while President, wrote a letter about that clause which introduced the "separation of church and state" description.) But it's not only a domestic issue; Europeans had had wars between nations which were founded in religious differences.

For a third reason, you might consider this one: individuals have "inalienable" rights (Jefferson again), and governments exist to secure those rights (according to the Declaration of Independence). The proper scope of the government's interference in individual liberty is therefore subject to limits, primarily founded in the protection of the liberty of other individuals.

Religions don't work that way. Any aspect of a person's life is fair game for examination and potential control under any system of religious beliefs, because they cover ALL aspects of how a life ought to be lived. This is tolerable only because submission to the restrictions imposed by religion is entirely voluntary, whereas governments have the power to impose their laws by force.

Religions are therefore properly limited by their inability to compel, as governments are properly limited as to the scope of their compulsion. Put the two together and you get a monster capable of exceeding both limits. It may use compulsion with respect to any aspect of life. It can (and therefore, eventually will) eliminate those rights we hold to be inalienable.

Please, before you write about this, think about it carefully. For one thing, if you can't agree with this notion, I doubt you can propound it successfully. But you're welcome to consider it and support it if you wish.

Answer 2

I'm the first to admit that many christians go to great lengths to make the world a better place. But my problem with christianity is that some christians seek to impose their faith on others through legislation. They also believe some pretty immoral things (such as humans deserving to be burned for eternity just because they do not believe in god). If I take a glass of clean water, and put it on a table, everyone can see that it's clean water, and might want to drink it. But if I contaminate it with a small piece of dog poo, it's no longer clean water. Christianity is like that. Yes, it does much good. But as an escaped christian, now an atheist, I can vouch for the fact that it does even more damage. We focus on the bad stuff because the bad stuff is just so bad. And it's been covered up or ignored for so long. If christianity can't stand scrutiny, what use is it?

Answer 3

I don't know if it's bad for the Government at first, but it does taint the purity of the religion. When worshiping God becomes political and complicated, which sadly it can be even in many religious institutions, that's where real believers will find real persecution.

On the flip side, we live in a wussified "Lets everybody not offend anyone else, ploitcally correct country." If the governement were to side with any one religion things would start getting really hairy. It's better to stay nuetral than ruffle citizen's feathers and suicide bombings to be going off everywhere.

Answer 4

I don't think it's necessarily a bad thing to have some faith in government. Religion doesn't have a large role in government because church and state should be separate. Religion is not a bad thing, but it shouldn't divide people and change how you look at them. When it becomes bad is when a government tries to force beliefs on people. That's why freedom of religion is so valued in America.

Answer 5

You would limit new ideas that could be brought up by other groups beside the one in power. Some religious groups don't share common values but it doesn't mean the values of the other group are bad... in fact those values could help out others but if one group is in power those ideas might be stiffled.

Answer 6

Government is for all the people; not just for a select group who forces their beliefs on others. Our tax dollars should not go to support one belief over another, at the expense of other citizens who have a different view.

Answer 7

Because if one religious group gains power, they may persecute others whose beliefs conflict.

Also because if religion is a part of the government, then the government may assume some of the traits of religion, like infalibility, divine right, those kinds of things.

Answer 8

Jefferson's Letter to the Danbury Baptists

The Final Letter, as Sent
To messers. Nehemiah Dodge, Ephraim Robbins, & Stephen S. Nelson, a committee of the Danbury Baptist association in the state of Connecticut.

Gentlemen

The affectionate sentiments of esteem and approbation which you are so good as to express towards me, on behalf of the Danbury Baptist association, give me the highest satisfaction. my duties dictate a faithful and zealous pursuit of the interests of my constituents, & in proportion as they are persuaded of my fidelity to those duties, the discharge of them becomes more and more pleasing.

Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," thus building a wall of separation between Church & State. Adhering to this expression of the supreme will of the nation in behalf of the rights of conscience, I shall see with sincere satisfaction the progress of those sentiments which tend to restore to man all his natural rights, convinced he has no natural right in opposition to his social duties.

I reciprocate your kind prayers for the protection & blessing of the common father and creator of man, and tender you for yourselves & your religious association, assurances of my high respect & esteem.

Th Jefferson
Jan. 1. 1802.

Back to June 1998 - Vol 57, No. 6

Answer 9

One thing you must also consider is that although the US does not want one religion to control the country, it wants all religions to flourish. Recently the 2nd part of this has been forgotten in various areas. Examples are the elimination of prayer in school and disputes over nativity scenes, etc. This is not what the founding fathers wanted, they wanted totally free expression of religious faith, just not one to dominate.

Answer 10

Because the United States is all about freedom. Freedom of religion included. Too much religious persuation one way or another would go against this freedom that the US stands for in the first place.