TED Conversations

Lindsy Wayt

Reporter/Photographer,

This conversation is closed. Start a new conversation
or join one »

Why is it important for religion to remain separate from politics?

I am a senior in high school, and am focusing my CITS Composition II paper and my senior symposium on the separation of church and state. I have read Kenneth D. Wald's Religion and Politics in the United States along with Isaac Kramnick's and R. Laurence Moore's The Godless Constitution: The Case Against Religious Correctness and a few works by Richard Dawkins. From my research, I am convinced that the destructive roles of religion used in the decisioin-making realms of government can be detrimental towards the evolution of humanity. Freedom of religion is also freedom from religion, and religious involvement often creates more problems than solves. Examples of these problems include, but are not limited to: political controversies of same-sex marriage, the availability of contraception for females through all types of medical insurance, the pro-life/pro-choice controversy, abortion-related violence, and last, but certainly not least- war. Patriotism and religion should not walk hand-in-hand.

However, I feel like I have such strong claims and views on this topic. I am in search of more support and opening this controversial topic for further discussion. I am all for expanding and sharing my viewpoint, and I hope this post recieves some thoughtful response. Thanks!

+3
Share:

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.

  • thumb
    May 6 2012: When going over my outlines with my teacher, she said that what I had to say leads to more questions than answers- and I agree.

    Are there any secular countries currently operating with little to no involvement of religion in politics? I feel like there has to be. Perhaps Sweden? Maybe Switzerland? I find it's a little tough to research- especially within the databases I am provided- the most I get are newspaper/magazine articles vaguely brushing the topic.

    Also, I truly do not want to come across as attacking the other side. I want to provide the most logical and concise argument I can, but at the same time show my passion and my stance on the argument. Can anyone offer advice as to how I can do this? Or how I can easily keep some fluidity in my writing while discussing either side?

    This topic is much more delicate and tricky than I anticipated...
    • thumb
      May 9 2012: I would argue that valuable commodity in this debate is the individual. Since a dynamic of the individual is spirituality and religion I think your conclusion is fallacious. In fact I would argue that the opposite of your statement is true, by evidence :

      "From my research, I am convinced that the destructive roles of religion used in the decisioin-making realms of government can be detrimental towards the evolution of humanity. Freedom of religion is also freedom from religion, and religious involvement often creates more problems than solves. "

      I think this author is one point of view and you have not looked enough at the other point of view as with Hillsdale.

      My view is that religion and government should be separate but to take it anything further than it is already would be to deny an individual an integral dynamic.

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.