Amazon.com Widgets

We should take religion out of the government (specifically America).

Asked by: CalinMarie
  • A secular, non-partisan, non-preferential, minimal gov't

    To my understanding, the original intention of the founding fathers of the US was for a nation where the government feared the people, and was a minimal part of daily life as described above in bold. Their ideas were far more non-authoritarian that what we have in place today.

    I think we can start by removing some of the subtle references to any type of religious entity - "One nation under God/In God we trust" on the currency and in in the pledge of allegiance. A lot of this was implemented under Eisenhower's presidency, and was not always part of the US since the birth of the nation. It's unfortunate that a 1970 court case sided against the removal of the phrase on the currency, claiming that this phrase showed no partiality to the establishment religion, because I find this to be the complete opposite.

    First, any use of the word god at all immediately notions towards an idea of a supernatural deity, albeit not necessarily a dogmatic ideology based around this. This is already in violation of the first amendment "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion".

    Second, the fact that the word god is capitalized in the phrase, which is a reference to any Abrahamic religion. In these, it dictates that there is only one God, the creator of the universe. This excludes many other religions that offer an idea of polytheism, of having multiple gods, or other religions that focus on no supernatural deity at all. This is a bit more nuanced, however, as generally the phrase is published in all capital letters, so one could potentially argue that this point is null. However I believe the phrase can be found in other places with the capital 'G'.

    To go back to the main point, I think that any type of religious partiality clouds judgement. The government should exist to serve the people in a limited number of ways, adopting law that can be supported by utilizing vigorously tested scientific evidence. Religion, especially Christianity (the most popular in the US), is an ideology that does not promote this type of thinking.

  • Secular state represents everyone

    A secular state is just and represents everyone rather than just those of the majority religion. We must protect the individual from persecution because of their religion. While certain religious values are very honorable, we should not use those to decide policy. Freedom of Religion implies that a law cannot persecute based off religion. Keep it that way

  • People control the government, not the other way around

    Religion helps a person tell right from wrong, and the government enforces the right from wrong, so it makes sense for the two to overlap. If a majority of the people share a religion, it should be represented in the government of the people. Don't mistake government with religion. They are two parts working together, you can't switch one for the other

  • A secular, non-partisan, non-preferential, minimal gov't

    To my understanding, the original intention of the founding fathers of the US was for a nation where the government feared the people, and was a minimal part of daily life as described above in bold. Their ideas were far more non-authoritarian that what we have in place today.

    I think we can start by removing some of the subtle references to any type of religious entity - "One nation under God/In God we trust" on the currency and in in the pledge of allegiance. A lot of this was implemented under Eisenhower's presidency, and was not always part of the US since the birth of the nation. It's unfortunate that a 1970 court case sided against the removal of the phrase on the currency, claiming that this phrase showed no partiality to the establishment religion, because I find this to be the complete opposite.

    First, any use of the word god at all immediately notions towards an idea of a supernatural deity, albeit not necessarily a dogmatic ideology based around this. This is already in violation of the first amendment "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion".

    Second, the fact that the word god is capitalized in the phrase, which is a reference to any Abrahamic religion. In these, it dictates that there is only one God, the creator of the universe. This excludes many other religions that offer an idea of polytheism, of having multiple gods, or other religions that focus on no supernatural deity at all. This is a bit more nuanced, however, as generally the phrase is published in all capital letters, so one could potentially argue that this point is null. However I believe the phrase can be found in other places with the capital 'G'.

    To go back to the main point, I think that any type of religious partiality clouds judgement. The government should exist to serve the people in a limited number of ways, adopting law that can be supported by utilizing vigorously tested scientific evidence. Religion, especially Christianity (the most popular in the US), is an ideology that does not promote this type of thinking.


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