First of all, the separation of church and state should exist and in some ways does. The use of bibles and other religious icons in the governmental process isn't really religious anymore. To swear on a bible means about the same to an atheist as it does to a christian: tell the truth. The name of god is invoked on many of the things that make up certain parts of our government, but i do not think that the government ever acts in such a way as to be submissive to these religious ideals and morals. If anything, government has made the religious iconization of Latin phrases a weapon in its arsenal of justifying its own ends. It would seem to me that the entire existence of a government ruled by anything other than the divine is not religiously bound. We bring religion and morals in when it suits us, but when it's time to kill people it doesn't really matter if god has given rules that make this act of murder illegal.
In the creation of the acts/laws that make up the notion of separation of church and state, religion is subdued to the higher power of the state. If religion or the divine law on which it is based is to be superior to the human law, then it could not be in any way controlled by the human enacted rules regarding its regulation. Religion and morals have just become a weapon for whoever needs to justify an act that can't be justified through typical reason or law.
Starting wars is much easier when Jesus tells us that it's okay to do it.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I see what you are saying. I agree that religion is for the most part separated from our way of government. What we use from the bible today may arguably be morals and what is just. We don't have bishops or other religious head figures running the show of anything. We have a checks and balance system that gets rid of any control from religion. It is hard as well from the other side where people say that government isn't staying out of the hands of religion. This is a touchy subject that will continue forever in my mind.
ReplyDelete