Thursday, October 6, 2016
Weekly Essay H1
The idea that if a person is religious then they are inherently moral, seems absurd to me, mostly because it implies that if someone isn't religious then they are inherently immoral. Religion may have a guideline of moral ideals, but people are not bound by that. Religious individuals can be immoral, and just the same, nonreligious beings can be moral and vice versa. Because of this thought process of mine, I've always supported the separation of church and state.
Religion has its place in society, and it has for most of the time of humans. But it doesn't have a place in our government. I believe that everyone can have their own ideals, but when they force those ideals, especially on the basis of religion, onto other people, they have effectively crossed a line. I believe Locke said it well, "Nobody, therefore, in fine, neither single persons nor churches, nay, nor even commonwealths, have any just title to invade the civil rights and worldly goods of each other upon pretense of religion." People shouldn't ignore basic civil rights because their religion tells them to.
America is meant to be one big melting pot of ideas and people and religion. When one religion is dominant in government, we ignore all of the ideals of other religious individuals. If there is such a strong argument against separation, I ponder this: Why is Christianity the only religion that is held in high esteem in our government? Why can't we represent all religions in our system, rather than just different sects of one?