Amazon.com Widgets

Is there any way to be fair to all religions if religion is included in Government?

  • When using Religion as a blanket statement, yes.

    Since no specific religion is specified, yes. Theoretically, there could be a religion that is simply a practice of tolerance or fairness. Or a religion that believes in an entity of government and worships government. Or even a religion that believes in ALL religions. Those kinds of religions would very likely be fair to all other religions. People have very narrow minded views of Religion and what it means. When some people think of religion they are only capable of thinking of aggressive nutheads who can't think for themselves.

  • The government is not including religion, it's the other way around.

    The main basis of a Government, Law and Order, and politics, derives from Religion itself. The ten commandments were the first major laws ever set, and they all still stand now. So as long as we have a source of power, Religion will take their say in a part of it. However the one major issue is that firstly, there are thousands of different Religions, all with varying beliefs, so a superior belief would have to take hold if everything was fair, but making every single person happy living in a fair world is like trying to make a group of seven-year-olds eat carrots instead of turkey dinosaurs. The only key to a fair non-aggressive and peaceful world is to divide every single group into a certain corner of the world and keep them there.

  • Establishment Clause prevents this anyway.

    The Constitution gives us a separation of church and state for a reason- to protect each from the other. There is no real way to involve religion in the government without endorsing said religion, which is prohibited in the Establishment Clause. It would also allow the majority religion to run roughshod (more than usual, anyway) over the rest.

  • It wouldn't work!

    Allowing one religion to stand above all others in a government will only allow for those who hold opposite opinions to be suppressed, therefore we have no right to think such a position would merit anything good. This was the intent of our founding fathers by putting up a WALL of separation between church and government.

  • Nope, separation is key

    We can't prevent members of legislative bodies and judicial courts from letting their personal moral and religious codes from influencing their agendas and policy, but we must try. We don't Sharia'H law or the fundamentalist Christian equivalent . No fatwahs please , thanks, no cutting off of hands for petty theft

  • Ideologically flawed and impossible to implement.

    Any religion espouses beliefs; beliefs which are often subjective and baseless. Giving these illogical beliefs a home in the public sphere is not in the best interest of the population. Ideas that are illogical or dangerous should be legislated out of government, not forever provided public protection under a national flag. It would also impossible to implement. The argument as to what is or isn't a religion and what is or isn't religiously offensive, should or shouldn't be allowed aren't arguments we need to be having in government.


Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.