Religion And Government Should Be Kept Separated From Religion

History shows a pattern of change in relation to religious involvement of governmental affairs. As religion becomes less a part of American life, the court develops new laws to accommodate our new society. Look to the communities we live in presently and ask yourself if the American people are facing oppression of religious freedom, a freedom listed in our Constitution under the First Amendment. This spirals into an abyss of politics. Is same-sex marriage a personal matter or a public one? Is the Republican Party fair in opting to end abortion? Should a woman have contraceptive included in her health insurance plan despite the religious views of her employer? This is one of the areas in which

First, a short recap on American history. During the 17th century, in England the official religion was Anglican, there were few who opposed his majesty and practiced other religions as there were punishments to these actions. Later on, these religious groups were given the opportunity to practice their faith in the New World as colonies of England. Finally, the pilgrims, puritans, Lutherans, and even Catholics had escaped religious persecution they faced in England; in the new found land they could freely practice their beliefs. Therefore, when declaring independence from England, the founding fathers wrote “freedom of religion” in the Bill of Rights and implemented a separation of church and state in order to avoid the government to influence the country based on religious convictions. In an article by Doug Weaver, Weaver references a book by Frank Lambert entitled “Separation of Church and State:

For most of my life I have not had a relationship with religion. I did not grow up where going to church was a priority. I knew my parents were Catholics, but they were not practicing Catholics. I would say I was forced to attend CCD (Continuing Catholic Development) every day after school and make my first communion, but I have always respected its practice and learned about its history. Since I enjoy history, I have known how religion was one of the big factors in our country’s history. When kids say the pledge of allegiance and say “One Nation under God” I don’t get insulted or offended, I simply understand that is the heritage of this nation. That is why I am going to argue that faith groups and institutions should be allowed to form political parties and gain influence in the workings of government. Whether I classify myself as Atheist (believe in no god) or Agnostic (claims neither faith nor disbelief in God) it doesn’t change the fact that a great majority of this country and billions across the planet have deep religious faiths that help guide them through

In recent discussions of religion and politics, a controversial issue has been whether or not religion has a place in our political decision-making. On the one hand, some argue that religion and politics should coexist for the greater good. From this perspective, the United States government should implement religious beliefs into all of their decision-making, because it is the right thing to do. On the other hand, however, others argue that religion has no place in politics, it clouds judgment, creates unfair separation against opposing beliefs, and does more harm than good. Religion has had its effect on politics since Jesus Christ was created. Laws have passed that are heavily influenced by the good book. In the words

America is a home for people to be free from religious persecution; or at least that is what the nation was found on. As time goes on, it seem as if the foundation of religious freedom that the United States of America was found has been forgotten. The United States government at its earliest establishment had set forth a set of freedoms for all people to feel safe from any persecution. In order to make these a set of established rights, the founding fathers created the U.S. Constitution that holds within itself the Bill of Rights. The Bill of Rights was a call for greater constitutional protection for each citizens, or immigrants, individual civil liberties. During the twentieth century, The United States Supreme Court had a very

One of the main issues raised by the case commonly known as the Everson vs board of education case is whether or not the separation of church and state is a good thing. Me personally, I only agree partially with the idea that religious groups ought to have their own political parties not because I am against government officials using their own religious perspectives and values to impact the political domain and rule the country; however, keeping the religion separated from the government ensures the vitality of the religion itself and fosters the cohabitation of multiple religious confessions, each one with its own views and beliefs, within the same environment especially in a democratic society as in America. While there are strong arguments on both sides, I have noticed that the major element in understanding this issue is the interpretation of the concept itself.

The United States is a place where different types of people live together and gradually create one community. Within these communities are those who hold different faiths and beliefs. Right from the start of time we have begun as an assembly of societies that understood our religious differences. Spiritual acceptance among Americans is as strong now as it was once the Declaration of Independence was written by our forefathers. Nevertheless, the concepts of religion and government that they put in place by means of the Constitution of the United States and its Amendments no longer provides the freedoms of religion that they had in mind. The concern of our forefathers was to allow individuals to worship as they desire. The First Amendment of the United States addressed how our new government and religion would work stating: “Congress shall

Robert Audi argues that citizens in a free democracy should make a difference between religion and between secular aspects or state and give them two separate domains. The one has nothing to do with the other and for each to be functioning well and for the state to be functioning effectively; religious convictions should be separated from political debate.

Since the beginning of human civilization, there continues to be a strong relationship between the state and their chosen religious institution. According to an interpretation of an anecdote of Thomas Jefferson, “He didn’t say he say he believed in the Christian God; he evaded that point. But Jefferson did agree with what all his colleagues in the founding thought that a people cannot maintain liberty without religion” (Novak, M., 2006). While the relationship is inevitable as it is used to unify a population, true government should seek as diminished a relationship as possible. While religious freedom is essential to what America was founded on, it cannot infiltrate our governmental systems

When United States was founded, it was signified as the most progressive and political movement in Western Civilization, which has continued to change and form from all the racial, ethnic, and religious diversities within society. Through the freedom that was first generated from the separation of the church and state to the manifestation of the Constitution on December 15, 1791, it has changed the course of history forever. The expression of the people’s legal rights was the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, which was adopted and later put into action in the 17th century. “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion...” This bill gave people a chance to express their boundless desires, simple freedoms and more notably religious actions in America. American Christianity has deteriorating moral standards and blindly accepts everything within society.

For years the constitutionality of the separation of church and state has been debated, many people have analyzed and reanalyzed Thomas Jefferson’s famous saying “A Wall of Separation” in his letter to the Danbury Baptist. Many religious people believe that the government is slowly taking our right to freedom of religion, the reason our country was founded, away. The government’s stance on the issue has widely impacted the way America as a whole practices

Over the years many things have changed, the clothes people wear, the music they listen to and the cars the drive. We live in a society where things can change in the blink of an eye, but is change always good? Could things change because things have been taken out of context? That is just what has happened to Thomas Jefferson. Has the true meaning of Thomas Jefferson’s “Separation between Church and State” taken out of context today?

While the idea of a democracy in which religion and politics both compromise and provide input in the public square seems amenable to both religious and secular Americans, and the possibility of finding such a compromise is an attractive premise for Obama, and for any politician wishing to reach as wide an audience as possible, Obama's speech includes some unavoidable contradictions that prevents his idea from working in practice. Most noticeably, Obama admits that “religion does not allow for compromise” (7), while suggesting that “any reconciliation between faith and democratic pluralism requires some sense of proportion” (8). Most importantly, he says that “this goes for both sides” (8). The idea that both the religious and the secular must “persuade each other of common aims based on a common reality” (7) is central to his vision of a connection between religion and politics, and these common terms of argument are impossible if one side is inherently based on uncompromising commitments.

America wastes a lot of time trying to create a democracy completely absent of the moral expectations that our ancestors have put into place. Our founding fathers’ dream of establishing a country in which all people would be accepted has begun to fall. In our attempt to rid our country of a democracy contaminated with any belief in a supreme power, we have rid ourselves of many of our values and morals. Perhaps it is impossible for religion to dominate our political country, but we have misinterpreted the original intent of “separation of church and state” and taken this concept too far.

Although the connections between religion and politics may be controversial to some, it really isn’t surprising that they overlap. For many people, religion and politics are significant parts of their ideology and morals; they both shape ethical decisions and certainly influence how we view society and the interactions within it. Politics and religion, along with ethnicity, gender and sexual orientation, are important identities that shape how others see us, and how we see ourselves. Thus, it makes sense that religious beliefs may influence a person’s politics or vice versa. While I believe a mix of these identities, and thus personal experiences, has the greatest impact on politics, religion clearly is a significant influence