See above you must take other religious views into consideration.
In a representative form of government, if the people of that society have strong faith based convictions then laws should reflect those convictions.
I also happen to personally think the Judeo/Christian value system serves any society well including the heritage of America IF AND WHEN it has been truly followed and not replaced with something else while only keeping the Christian name. Counterfeit Christianity has been both unfortunate and a paradoxical blessing at the same time. On the unfortunate side, much wrong has been done in the name of Christianity when God had nothing to do with it and in many cases the Bible condemns it but causing many who are unfamiliar with the Bible to erroneously think whatever wrong there was must be what true Christianity is about.
No you don't, you can respect someone else's religious views but you don't have to take them into consideration when you make up your own mind about an issue or when you vote. I'm not Hindu, I can respect someone's Hindu faith but I'm not going to let a faith that I do not believe is true shape my personal beliefs, votes, and decisions when politics is concerned.
That's fine but you live a society where people do not believe the same things you do, you have to forget your own religious ideals and think about society, abortion is an example of this. You may be against abortion for religious reasons but you still vote for it because you think about the greater society and the people you represent.
You cannot make laws because you think that all of society should follow your religious values. You have to consider what it said in the quote. Pierre Trudeau was a religious person, educated at religious schools, and went to church but he did not let it influence his governing.
I'm not accepting that rationale. He may not have made a religious argument, but what he saw as proper, valid, where he should lead had to be influenced by his religious beliefs. I'm questioning whether it is possible to separate belief from the person.
It is not possible to separate belief from the person but is possible for a person to separate belief form legislation.
In a representative form of government, if the people of that society have strong faith based convictions then laws should reflect those convictions.
I also happen to personally think the Judeo/Christian value system serves any society well including the heritage of America IF AND WHEN it has been truly followed and not replaced with something else while only keeping the Christian name. Counterfeit Christianity has been both unfortunate and a paradoxical blessing at the same time. On the unfortunate side, much wrong has been done in the name of Christianity when God had nothing to do with it and in many cases the Bible condemns it but causing many who are unfamiliar with the Bible to erroneously think whatever wrong there was must be what true Christianity is about.
And laws made by our legislature should be based on objective evidence and rational argument. Religion offers neither. No amount of faith will make a law banning the mixing of wool and linen a law that the US can pass. It's fine if your morality comes from religion, but ideas about morality aren't enough to be the basis for a law in this country.
That is simply not true because the "basic moral beliefs" of individuals within those various groups varies widely.If a politician states he is a Muslim or a Christian or a Jew or whatever, he is presenting a platform of his basic moral beliefs.
That may work if you are a Christian. It is or can be oppressive to some degree if you are not a Christian.
A few examples? I already understand the gay rights argument so maybe other examples.
If a politician states he is a Muslim or a Christian or a Jew or whatever, he is presenting a platform of his basic moral beliefs. If he is devoutly any religion, he betrays his susceptibility to brainwashing and is instantly an unsuitable candidate. Good morals would be wonderful in politicians, but that has to be an oxymoron.
Cardinal Rouen observing to me that the Italians did not understand war, I replied to him that the French did not understand statecraft, meaning that otherwise they would not have allowed the Church to reach such greatness.-Niccolo Machiavelli
I have no problem with persons in politics following their religion, but I do have a problem with them if they try to force their religion on others.
Everyone, atheist included, have a religious choice. So, there is no way to have a religious free government. We just have to be sure it favors no particular religion.
Instead of bowing down to the atheist religion by taking symbols, prayer, etc. out of public/government owned places, we should be offering equal time and space to all religions, including the atheist.
Separation of Church and State was supposed to allow no one religion to force it's religious views through government, not that religion should not exist in government.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?