Why is there a separation between religion and state?
posted on Fri, 01/14/2011 - 17:39 by theshadow
First I will ask my reader(s) to visit and read this article.
Now, I'm sure that many would be willing to jump into the foray and provide their two cents. I'm going to attempt to stand a neutral ground and explain why any sufficiently advanced civilization declares a separation between religion and state. If you don't agree with the ideas posed here you are entitled to your opinion but seeing as this is my personal website I don't really have to listen.
Before we begin I want to make sure I declare a couple of things. First, the definition of government I'll be using in this article is:
A Governing Body; A group of people who represent the will of all people in which they govern.
First, why has religion played any sort of role in government? This is because religion at in its most basic forms provides structure and guidance, rules and regulations. So logically when societies began to develop and evolve they would look to the logical place for ideas and guidance. As a matter of fact many of our most basic laws are derivatives of religious doctrine. This holds true for all civilizations across our planet, what also holds true is that once a government grows to a certain point the views of a single doctrine rarely represent the views of all it's people.
As such, once the population and size of a government reaches this critical point we always see a divergence from the source doctrine. But why? The point is relatively simple when looked at. If your country encompasses a variety of people of all walks of life and beliefs than it would make sense that the religious views of one would not be shared with all. How can any just government rule over it's people if it isolates the beliefs of another? The fact is they can't and if they tried it would lead to revolution and war.
If you don't believe this look at the governing bodies of the middle East. Almost all of those countries are ruled by a fractured religious beliefs. Most notably you have the more aggressive individuals who make declarations that any person, group, or nation which is marked as an infidel must die. Notably that this isn't the view of all people of this religion but representative of a small -- yet influential -- sect of people. Do you see the problem here? They are declaring war not for survivability or even military threat but merely because someone has a differing view point!
Does this come off as logical? But as we can observe through the various nations around the world those that have thrived most are those that have found a way to break themselves free of the strict heritage of their religious doctrine. They found a way to represent all people, this is the very principal of Democracy. That a Muslim, Catholic, Protestant, and Druid all have the same right and level of influence as any other person. Of course, this varies based on the size of a group of people. This was in turn resolved through our use of Senators. Each state has the same amount of senators which leveled the playing field. Now even if all people of a particular view point and/or religion congregated in a single state they would not be able to sway ridiculous amounts influence in the government.
So what is the point of this post? It's a rant and a plea. I understand that people have differing view points, that people have different religions. I'm not even calling for the abolishment of religion even though I'm of the agnostic category. I'm asking that you understand that we separate religion from government to protect the sovereignty of all people within our nation. Not because there is a conspiracy to eliminate religion.
Tags: