Separation of Church and State, Pt. 2- The Church Stays Out of the State

This is, of course, the counterpart to Separation of Church and State, Pt. 1- The State Stays Out of the Church.

In Pt. 1, the discussion was about the benefits of Separation of Church and State to the individual. There are also many benefits of keeping religion out of government as well, and many of these benefits are direct to the citizens.

The United States of America is a huge melting pot. Thousands of different cultures, peoples, groups, and religions are represented in the United States. Religion is something that is extremely important to many people, and the freedom to practice their own religion is a precious opportunity, and one that is denied in many other countries around the world.

The United States government is forbidden to establish an "official" religion for the country or to ban the practices of any one religion. This also means that one religion or a religious belief cannot dictate the laws and regulations for the citizens. Religious and spiritual individuals cannot and should not expect others to adhere to their beliefs if they are not shared. It would be against freedom and all that the United States stands for if it became a national requirement to attend church every Sunday, and it would not be fair to anyone.

There is a difference between being moral and being religious. It is quite possible (and very common) for one to be moral without being religious. It is also quite possible for one to be religious without being moral. Take a look at the dictionary.com definition of moral:

adjective
1. of, pertaining to, or concerned with the principles or rules of right conduct or the distinction between right and wrong; ethical

The interesting thing about morals, though, is that while many morals are universal (for example, it is wrong to kill another person), there are also many morals that are not universal. Many of these non-universal morals get their roots from religious beliefs. For example, in the Hindu religion, cows are considered sacred (see source). There are more than one million Hindus living in America (see source), and if their belief that cows are sacred were to be enforced as a law, that would mean no one would be allowed to eat beef. McDonald's, Wendy's, Black Angus, Outback Steakhouse, and many other businesses would suffer if they were no longer allowed to serve hamburgers, steaks, tri-tip, and other beef products, resulting in a loss of business, loss of jobs, and so forth. Thankfully, Separation of Church and State means that the religious beliefs of any group cannot be imposed on others.

Perhaps beef may seem like a silly example, so let's look at something more serious and more mainstream: Gay rights. Most all arguments against gay rights stem back to religious beliefs. Should those who believe that homosexuality is wrong impose their beliefs on those who see nothing wrong with homosexuality? By all means, no! It is no different than the example of not being able to eat hamburgers because of the Hindu belief that cows are sacred. In fact, very few religions actually condemn gay rights or gay marriage. Americans are entitled to the "pursuit of happiness." That isn't selective- it doesn't say "straight Americans are entitled to the pursuit of happiness" or "male Americans are entitled to the pursuit of happiness," it applies to all. Why should the religious beliefs of one group dictate the actions of other people who do not belong to that group? Gay marriage would not invalidate the sanctity of straight marriage (because we all know how low the divorce rate is, right?) nor would it affect others any more than my marriage to a man affects the neighbors down the street. When two people love each other, in a country that promotes freedom and the pursuit of happiness, why should their sex matter? Religious people cannot enforce their religious beliefs on others, whether it is to stop them from eating cows or from marrying someone of the same sex. (If you want to read an interesting article, check out Newsweek's "The Religious Case for Gay Marriage". It is very interesting!)

As citizens, we share many morals with each other. It is not far-fetched to say that most everyone will agree that murder, stealing, and rape are wrong. But when the morals are individualistic and depend on one's religion, they should not be imposed on others. As long as those beliefs do not bring harm to others, then there is no reason we may not each celebrate our own morals. Live, and let live!


(On a side note- the author is a Spiritualist Christian who believes in gay rights. It is not uncommon for many Christians and people of other religions to support gay rights!)