Seperation; Religion and Government.

[HBK-aholic]

As a proud athiest, I am sick to death of certain people using god and religion as reasons I cannot do something. And I know it isn't everyone that does this. But do those that do not realise they can't force something they believe in due to god down my throat every 5 seconds?

If I want an abortion, I'll have one, regardless of what god says. If I wanted a gay marriage, I'd have one, regardless of what god says. If I want to test on stem cells, I will do, regardless of what god says.

You CANNOT use religion, and YOUR views, to control peoples lives, and stop them doing something. It's fine to say "I wouldn't have an abortion because I believe in god and he says it's wrong", but how can you justify illegalizing abortion because the god I don't believe in thinks its wrong?

Religion should be kept out of things the Government controls. There's no 2 ways about it.

 

[klunderbunker]

As a Christian, I more than agree with you. Religion is a very important thing to me, but it definitely shouldn't be involved with government. I have no problem with a politician or a leader using his or her religious values when making a decision, but to make decisions based on religion isn't fair to people who don't subscribe to it. Seperation of church and state is a must. Without freedom of religion, you're almost taking away the beliefs themselves. Can't be allowed.

 

[jmt225]

As a Christian, I more than agree with you. Religion is a very important thing to me, but it definitely shouldn't be involved with government. I have no problem with a politician or a leader using his or her religious values when making a decision, but to make decisions based on religion isn't fair to people who don't subscribe to it. Seperation of church and state is a must. Without freedom of religion, you're almost taking away the beliefs themselves. Can't be allowed.

Very well said. I'm in the same boat as this dude: Christian, but I don't go along with most of the church's beliefs when it comes to today's society.

I'm very much pro-choice, and I also don't believe being gay is a choice. I also don't believe religion should be in public schools. There are more than enough Christian and Catholic schools out there for parents to send their kids to, so there's no reason for anyone to bitch that God should be taught or prayed to in a public school.

 

[Danmen001]

I am also a christian and I agree that the government shouldn't try to shove hese things down out throat. Religion should be a different issue from everything else and it should be given as an optional thing. I understand the church is trying to be helpful but they don't do it in the right way all the time.

 

[Father:_Polley]

i know it's going to fly in the face of what everyone has said here, but isn't the purpose of a democracy that all opinions are taken into consideration. i mean all those issues are voted on and have to have a majority before they're passed. that's why i don't think it's fair to say it's religion that's to blame for what laws are in place in the country - because it's the people we vote into authority who decide, it's not based on what one person feels, at least not in the UK

If it were only the deeply religious who objected to the issues raised, i doubt that they would fail to get through parliaments. others clearly object on grounds which may not be religion based.

I'm not ashamed to say i'm a christian because it's part of my life, but that doesn't mean if i were in charge i'd say all abortions are wrong and shouldnt take place. But to paraphrase your sig...we all have choices and opinions and trying to say someone in authority and voting should change their beliefs is just as wrong as them making a blanket ruling based on what they think.

this is my opinion and if nothing i've said is designed to be a shot at what is posted above. i'm merely stating my side of the argument

 

[Slyfox696]

i know it's going to fly in the face of what everyone has said here, but isn't the purpose of a democracy that all opinions are taken into consideration. i mean all those issues are voted on and have to have a majority before they're passed. that's why i don't think it's fair to say it's religion that's to blame for what laws are in place in the country - because it's the people we vote into authority who decide, it's not based on what one person feels, at least not in the UK

You are absolutely right, the point of a democracy is majority rules. Not only that, but the majority of governments are actually founded upon religious principles.

HOWEVER, the problem with this, at least in the United States (can't speak on UK), is also that the country was founded upon religious freedom as well. So, while the US Government was very much founded upon Christian tenets, it was also founded under the belief that one religion should never be forced upon a person under it's rule. And, in cases like abortion, that is precisely what is going on. People are forcing a religious issue upon others.

Now, there are other, more fundamental problems with anti-abortion, which I won't get into here, but that fact remains the same.

Remember what the ENTIRE purpose of democracy is. It is to form a government in which the majority rules, but it should still serve the best overall interests of EVERYONE in that state. And, just because the majority believe something should exist, it does not believe that it serves the best interest of all the people.

 

[Father:_Polley]

You are absolutely right, the point of a democracy is majority rules. Not only that, but the majority of governments are actually founded upon religious principles.

HOWEVER, the problem with this, at least in the United States (can't speak on UK), is also that the country was founded upon religious freedom as well. So, while the US Government was very much founded upon Christian tenets, it was also founded under the belief that one religion should never be forced upon a person under it's rule. And, in cases like abortion, that is precisely what is going on. People are forcing a religious issue upon others.

it's sort of impossible to get seperation though. because if you completely cut religion out of the decision making, isn't that the same as forcing an atheistic approach on people. and forcing people to adopt a cold scientific approach to thinking about issues. i mean you can take religion out of the system, but you will never take it out of the candidates.

Remember what the ENTIRE purpose of democracy is. It is to form a government in which the majority rules, but it should still serve the best overall interests of EVERYONE in that state. And, just because the majority believe something should exist, it does not believe that it serves the best interest of all the people.

in my opinion this boils down to the fact that you will NEVER please everyone. if you enforce a rule that goes against the popular view, well then you have the wrath of the majority aimed at you. while the opposite, the minority will bitch that they are being oppressed & ignored because they ARE the minority.

take stem cell research as an example. honestly, in my opinion i think it's wrong to say that it's ok to test on something that is, in MY own view alive and will grow into a fully formed human being. As a pharmacist, do i believe it would help medical advances...yes I do, but i don't believe it's right that when we live in a society that gets up in arms about animal testing, to test on something which is in all essence except form human. i don't believe any one person should be able to tell me that i have no right to hold that opinion because it would help, the same way if some one told you that something you felt was an important issue didn't matter. in a democracy, if people really felt it was for the greater good of society, i'd be over-ruled. i wouldn't be happy about it but i'd damn sure never give in

 

[Slyfox696]

it's sort of impossible to get seperation though. because if you completely cut religion out of the decision making, isn't that the same as forcing an atheistic approach on people.

Not at all.

I'm not an atheist, but I can certainly devise policy that is completely devoid of religious overtones.

in my opinion this boils down to the fact that you will NEVER please everyone. if you enforce a rule that goes against the popular view, well then you have the wrath of the majority aimed at you. while the opposite, the minority will bitch that they are being oppressed & ignored because they ARE the minority.

That is where doing whats best for an entire population has to come into play. It's the very basic premise of a compromise. I give a little, you give a little, and we both come out ahead, although neither one of us if fully happy.

But, that's how a democracy should work if it is intending to serve everyone equally.

take stem cell research as an example. honestly, in my opinion i think it's wrong to say that it's ok to test on something that is, in MY own view alive and will grow into a fully formed human being.

While this is not about stem cell research, I trust then, that you are 100% against the idea of contraception AND you never *********e. Is that an accurate opinion?

Because, after all sperm is alive too, and can grow to make a fully formed human being. And, you wouldn't want to be a hypocrite by willingly kill millions of potential babies, would you?

i don't believe any one person should be able to tell me that i have no right to hold that opinion because it would help, the same way if some one told you that something you felt was an important issue didn't matter.

Yeah, but the problem comes in when people adopt certain beliefs, merely because of their religious beliefs.

For example, the majority of people against stem cell research do it out of their religious beliefs, and the same goes with those against abortion.

in a democracy, if people really felt it was for the greater good of society, i'd be over-ruled. i wouldn't be happy about it but i'd damn sure never give in

But, in the end, you would receive the same benefit from the testing as everyone else, and if the testing can discover a way to cure Parkinson's disease, and you come down with Parkinson's disease then you will benefit from that policy.

However, if you get your way, and I come down with Parkinson's disease, the overall good is wasted as not only did I not get my way, I've also lost my ability to be cured.

Make sense?

 

[Father:_Polley]

however those beliefs all stem from a persons view on embryological life. a person who is pro-abortion and pro-stemcell research will have a view which is based on what their religious view on the issue of when life begins.

i've heard the argument about all sperm being considered abortion. sperm don't contain the full chromosome number and so are not technically in possession of a full genomic profile. by themselves, sperm aren't genetically human. as a result i've no problem with contraception etc.

did you know sly, that it's not financially viable for pharmaceutical companies to invest in research into drugs to prevent parkninson's disease because patenting and FDA approval mean that the 20 year patent on drugs will have expired before it ever reaches the market and the company can kiss the money goodbye. now surely a change in these laws would be as beneficial as a law regarding stem cell research?

 

[NYSandman]

Religion should be kept out of things the Government controls. There's no 2 ways about it.

I believe in God and Jesus, but that is 100% MY business.

I agree with HBK, and religion has absolutely NO PLACE in Government decisions. None. Nada.

Here is what I'd like to know. The church wants to influence politicians and influence the private lives of citizens, yet does NOT want to be taxed! WTF? The don't want it both ways. They go to abortion rallies, which they call murder, yet if the baby they save grows up to be an abortion doctor, THEN it's okay to kill them.

Tax these churches! Can you imagine the revenue from the property taxes alone? Also, any priest caught molesting a kid causes the church to be fined one million.

When churches pay their fair tax like every other property owner in the country, then the "seperation" will end.

But, if these guys want a free ride, they have no business influencing government. They also have no right, whether they pay taxes or not, to try to tell anyone, in their flock or not, how to live and what laws to follow.

Here it is, folks. Religious law is OPTIONAL! God's promise of free will overrides all. If you don't want to eat meat on Friday, that is YOUR business. A law saying you cannot eat meat on Friday would be insane. You shouldn't commit adultery? Well, you can. You won't be struck down by God.

Breaking any religious law holds no consiquence here on earth. If you believe, you will be judged after you die.

Again, if you believe. HBK doesn't believe, and I respect that. She has no right to tell me not to believe, and I have absolutely no right to push my beliefs on her.

 

[Shocky]

I'm hardly a religious person at all, but you simply can't discount relgious views. In the end, it is still majority rule with minority rights, so if the majority continues to vote based upon their relgious beliefs, that's the way the cookie crumbles.

When it comes to elections, the conservative Christians are always the group of people that you can guarantee will be there on election days. Liberal more vocal people are mostly full of talk, and little action. When push comes to shove, they are usually too lazy to go out and vote on election day, then they bitch about the outcome because they figured they would win.

If the majority of people vote in favor of religous views, then that is the best thing this country has. You have to go out, and change the minds of those in the majority to get your new views across. Abortion, Gay Marriage, any of the hot button religious issues out there you have to convince people to see things your way. You simply can't say, separation of church and state, keep your religion out of it. It doesn't work that way. It's a democracy, and if that's the way most people feel, you simply have to agree with it, move on, and come back stronger the next time.

 

[Kasey]

I feel that the separation of church and state is paramount. I also believe that anything remotely relating to a specific religion should be removed from anything government related as well. All the way from newly-minted money down to the Pledge of Allegiance. I also think that the good ol' boys like Dubya need to take their intelligent design horseshit and stifle it. Separate it all. On the flipside, I do think that in public schools, if the bible thumpers wish to have their stuff taught, then courses should be offered that explain most of, if not all major religions in depth so that people can actually get a feel for what is going on around them in the world and have a better understanding of other cultures and their beliefs instead of having the common myopic view so many people do. After all, fair is fair. Otherwise, keep it all out of the school and focus on the things schools should focus on. I do think that religions should be taxed, though. It's a funny thing when the only American religion that pays taxes is the Church of Satan. I'm a practicing atheist, which is also a religious choice, so why the fuck can't I be tax-free if I get a group together and not pray to someone?