Should religion stay in the area of spirituality, and not influence politics?

Laws are something everyone in a state or country has to follow; religion is not.

It’s hard for me to fathom that I once believed that god sent his son (who is also himself) to save the people he created (knowing they would one day sin) from a consequence he created, by sacrificing himself as a blood offering to fulfill a requirement that he also made. 😳

You are free to hold onto and find comfort in your beliefs the same way I am allowed to see the bigotry and oppression by the same beliefs.

“You can safely assume that you’ve created God in your own image when it turns out that God hates all the same people you do.” ~Anne Lamott

So why are christians deciding what rights people have? You know, the ones spewing "marriage is between Adam and Eve- not Adam and Steve." 🙄

This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »

BlueVeins · 22-25

The ideal case would be if we could move past what I'd refer to as "true believer" religion in general; that is, people viewing their mythologies as an actual facet of reality rather than as a tool for improving their mental health and building community.

Failing that, it's kinda impossible to truly have a separation of church and state. You can't source morality from religion, use morality to inform your political positions, and then not expect your religion to influence your political positions. It's a flawed concept in itself, and it's probably why theocracy has only decreased in line with a decrease in "true believer" religion.

Bushranger · 70-79, M

@BlueVeins To me, separation of church and state means the state doesn't support any one religion over others and that religions can't have a direct influence on governments.

Personal ideologies will always influence people's decisions, whether they are based on religious beliefs or not. Provided those ideologies don't lead to legislation that forces a particular religious belief on others, then there shouldn't be a problem.

BlueVeins · 22-25

@Bushranger It doesn't nominally support one religion over another -- which is admittedly still important. It can still represent and therefore legitimize one religion's values through its actions.

Bushranger · 70-79, M

@BlueVeins Which, to me, is a problem. On the other hand, governments should not be allowed to legislate against any religions. The state should be completely neutral, however, I doubt they will ever be so.