1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Yet another one

Discussion in 'Issues Around the World' started by yazdzik, Dec 30, 2002.

  1. yazdzik

    yazdzik Veteran Member

    Dear Friends,

    The question arises daily at GA as to what constitutes first amendment prohibitions. I, by nature, simply quote the USSC, because, also by nature, I am not bright enough to hold an opinion.

    However, there seems to be a need on the parts of various belief groups to have that belief recognised or validated by the government.

    I am reminded of the old joke that a conservative has no solutions, and a liberal insists on offering evidence that he doesn't either, but, in the hopes of a flame free, and totally rational thread eliciting information, I query:

    What in the nature or dogma of specific religions would require that the temporal government having territorial jurisdiction over a believer respect the establishment of that religion?

    All good wishes,
  2. Steve

    Steve Is that it, then?

    From my readings of Islam, that particular religion is firmly grounded in the secular culture from which it initially arose. More specifically, there is little, or no, difference between Islamic law and the secular law of "Islamic countries". Islam declares itself to be the only "true" religion (as do others) but goes a step further in declaring the laws and precepts of Islam to also be the laws under which society must operate.

    I know of no other religion that takes a similar stance, although some of the observances of the stricter Judaic sects are similar in nature, if not extent.

    As regards Christianity, I believe it was Christ who first established the doctrine of separation of church and state when he noted "Render unto Caesar what is Caesar's and render unto the Lord what is the Lord's." Of course, various and sundry power-hungy individuals have, over the course of the last 2,000 years, used Christianity and its institutions to accrue temporal power. That is not the fault of Christianity, however.
  3. Techie2000

    Techie2000 The crowd would sing:

    Personally I feel that the government needs to not get involved with religion at all. It allows religion to operate within the laws of society and that's all that matters. If a religion is practicing something that is not within the laws of society then a house of congress must decide if they will be allowed to continue their practices, or if what they are doing is inhumane and must be ceased.
  4. Steve

    Steve Is that it, then?

    But that wasn't his question. Martin was asking which specific religions, if any, mandate that the government protect and promulgate that specific religion.
  5. bruzzes

    bruzzes Truthslayer

  6. jamming

    jamming Banned

    Israel does protect Judaism, but Judaism doesn't mandate it that I am aware of, of course arguments could be made it does.
  7. Stiofan

    Stiofan Master Po

    That's a fine line. They have well over a million citizens who are Arab and Islamic. They also have the Star of David on their flag. I think offically endorse would be a better term.

Share This Page