Religious Values v Religious Dogma in PoliticsI think there’s an important distinction to be made about the “separation of church and state” relative to religious values versus dogma. Religious values can enhance our lives and should have an important place in our societal norms and governmental approaches. Religious dogmas are frequently divisive and have no place in governmental policy or practice. To quickly clarify; there is no phrase “separation of church and state” within the Constitution. The 1st amendment reads: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free practice thereof.” The common perceptions on separation of church and state seem to stem from various writings of the founding fathers and a few court cases. I found the website authored by Jim Allison and Susan Batte to be very informative, but I’m sure other references will be offered. My point is this: Most faiths share some underlying concepts of good; “do unto others as you would have done unto you” is a component of nearly every faith. Many people derive their personal morality from a religious framework, and if they bring their concepts of charity and goodwill to their civic involvement, great. These general values are an attribute. But most religions also have a variety of dogmas that are too specific to be applied to unwilling recipients without violating their rights. It’s nobody’s business but your own if you want to eat pork, go vegetarian, or eat fish on Fridays. It should be a matter of conscience whether you use birth control – although not using a condom might even threaten your health. It should make no difference to the government whether you believe in evolution, reincarnation, Immaculate Conception, or Frodo’s magic ring. Dogma has no place in government. In “making no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free practice thereof,” government needs to carefully avoid any preferential treatment of religion while treating all faiths with equal indifference. That may appear to favor atheism, but it’s misleading to interpret non-religious attitudes as anti-religious. Prohibitions against nativity scenes on public property do not negatively affect the “free practice” of faith; they simply remove it from the public space. But conversely, a conspicuous display of the Ten Commandments at the local courthouse suggests that biblical law is honored over statute, and implies to any non-Judeo/Christian that his values may get short shrift. Some so-called conservatives argue that all morality is derived from God. In fact, they frequently cite the phrase “endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights” as proof that the founding fathers recognized the Creator as the source of moral authority. This argument is flawed on several counts. First, the phrase is taken from the Declaration of Independence, which was designed as a repudiation of the God-given birthright of the Monarchy; a rejection of monarchist dogma and theocracy. Second, since the phrase is not from our Constitution it does not carry the carefully deliberated legal weight of Constitutional logic. It is rousing rhetoric, but not a legal underpinning of United States law. Finally, perhaps more open to interpretation; I find it noteworthy that Thomas Jefferson says “their Creator,” rather than “the” Creator, or even “our” Creator. This suggests to me that Jefferson recognized a pluralistic view that each of us might perceive his own Creator, independent of religious dogma and convention. So bring your religious values to the table. I welcome “judge not lest ye be judged” and “do unto others as you would have done unto you.” I find “let he without sin cast the first stone” to be fabulous guidance. But biblical assessments of social norms are as antiquated as ark construction techniques and strategies for defeating Philistines. The founding fathers had no intention to establish a Christian theocracy and Republican adoption of dogmatic religious principles only serves to alienate large portions of the electorate. The founding fathers held religious values, but they founded this nation on the principles of the Magna Carta and contemporary philosophies of human equality and rights, not specific biblical dogma. Michael Previous: Free Speech OK, But OJ Simpson? -- Next: Republicans for 2008; not promising. Comment from CAcorn4: I know of a couple of theologians whom you could challenge in order to really take your message to the American people: Dennis Prager and Albert Mohler. As I have indicated before, I ardently support Judeo-Christianity as a way to clarify the moral stakes in major foreign and domestic issues… especially applying Judeo-Christianity to improve civil society and build trusting relationships between otherwise distrustful people, as Professors Samuel P. Huntington and Allen D. Hertzke argue. With the 2008 presidential election cycle starting up, you admittedly have a decisive opportunity to jump into the debate with your opinions about the true role of religion in governmental decisions… starting with Thanksgiving. I will find fascinating a vigorous yet thoughtful debate between you and either Judeo-Christian conservative theologian on that issue. Posted by CAcorn4 Nov 16, 04:35 PM # Comment from Paul Davis: I like to sum it up this way in debates. Separation of church and state ensures freedom of religion. Notice those wanting religion in govt want “their” religion in govt. Could you imagine what the so called religious right’s reaction if we decided to teach that Brahma created the world in school? Lets keep them apart so that EVERYONE is free to worship how/if they choose. Many like to debate about the religion of the founding fathers or mention how the pilgrims were escaping religious persecution. Well, lets not forget that they were escaping a govt where there was no separation of church and state. The king was the head of the Church of England. If we start mixing them up, we’ll be repeating history. Besides, I don’t think there is a republican alive who wants to see Hillary as head of the Church of America. Posted by Paul Davis Nov 27, 06:36 PM # |
Favorite Posts:
Other Blogs:Links:
Feeds - SFP updates for your homepage:Previous Posts: |
