Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Religion's impact on society
Religion's impact on society
Religion's impact on society
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Religion's impact on society
As we move toward a religiously diverse America, the call to separate religion and politics grows. As Americans head into the future there is a huge immersion of the different religions into one common society. It is becoming a challenge in trying to appease and maintain these different religions in the secular social world. For some Americans the solution is to remove all religious affiliation from the state. Upon analysis of Wilfred Cantwell Smith’s discussion of religious diversity, Maritain’s position on the relation between religion and the secular world, and Hegel’s presupposition about abstract rights, this common question arises. Should the secular world be isolated from the religious dimensions of Human life? With so much religious diversity among groups of people could government politics function without any religious affiliation and still represent the will of the people as a whole. In Wilfred Cantwell Smith’s book The Faith of Other Men he starts by describing his challenge as a teacher in Lahore. He mentions that his colleagues were, like the great majority of the students, a mix of Hindus, Muslims, and Sikhns. As a Christian he and the rest of the community had to work toward the construction and maintenance of a religiously diverse community. The missionary college emphasized the message that faith was a serious and fundamental matter, that could neither be taken for granted nor dismissed. That message for Smith’s can be echoed in the oversimplified religious society of today. The religious life of humanity according to Smith is one that religiously plural, and this is true for all of us. Muslims, Hindus, Confucians, and Buddhists there no longer these far away peoples but rather they have become our neigh... ... middle of paper ... ...Hegel fails to address about the common good/ will with religious diversity. (Maritain,14,11-19, 73,75, 76-8) After looking at philosophy’s of Goerg W.F. Hegel, Wilfred Cantwell Smith and Jacques Maritain clearly society cannot ignore religion. In ignoring religion society would as a result overlook the essence which makes an individual a whole. There can never be a society free of religion, nor can religion be without the secular social world they are intertwined. Works Cited Georg W.F. Hegel, Philosophy of Mind: Part Three of the Encyclopedia of the Philosophical Sciences (1830), William Wallace trans, (Oxford: the Clarendon Press, 1971). Jacques Maritain, The Rights of Man and Natural Law, Doris C. Anson trans, (New York: Gordian Press, 1971 [1943]). Wilfred Cantwell Smith, The Faith of Other Men, (New York: New American Library, 1963).
There is no society without religion. James has also states that religion is “personal destiny”, which means that it existence is infinite in human life. Human lifestyle has been influence by the religion, so religion is a principal factor in universe. Religion is based on different believes and practices of humans which is totally understandable, despite of difference in religion people have same shared belief of putting their God above the others and shows the love and affection toward it. God has created this universe, the specious around us is the sign of his existence.
New brands of distinctly American Christianity began developing early in the country’s history. Before the revolution, George Whitefield set the stage for American religious movements. The most important factor that helped launch these movements was the American Revolution. The country was ripe with conversation and action on a new understanding of freedom. The revolution “expanded the circle of people who considered themselves capable of thinking for themselves about issues of … equality, sovereignty, and representation” (6). The country was beginning to move toward an understanding of strength lying in the common people, and the people’s ability to make their own personal decisions on issues of leadership and authority. There was a common belief that class structure was the major societal problem. The revolution created the an open environment that pushed equality of the individual, allowing political and religious beliefs to flourish and grow without being held in check by authoritarian leaders.
For more than a century, the concept of secularism and its boundaries has been widely disputed by secularists and non-secularists alike. English dictionaries define secularism as simply the separation of church and state, or, the separation of religion and politics. Michael Walzer, a true secularist, believes that this separation is an essential democratic value and ultimately fosters toleration of a plurality of religions (Walzer, p. 620). Wæver, an opponent of secularism, defines secularism as “a doctrine for how society ought to be designed”– that religion and politics ought to be divided in order to ensure religious liberty, as well as religious-free politics. However, he does not deem that such a principle exists (Wæver, p. 210). Based on these different viewpoints, I have established a unique concept of secularism: the principle that religion and politics be kept apart, that the state remains neutral in regard to religion, and that liberty, equality, and fraternity be upheld in an attempt to successfully promote religious toleration and pluralism.
With sounds of youthful laughter, conversations about the students’ weekends, and the shuffling of college ruled paper; students file into their classrooms and find their seats on a typical Monday morning. As the announcements travel throughout the school’s intercoms, the usual “Please stand for the Pledge of Allegiance” becomes no longer usual but rather puzzling to some students. “I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for which it stands, indivisible, with liberty, and justice for all.” Confusion passes through some of the student’s minds. With the reoccurrence of “God” in the backdrop of American life, the relationship between church and state has become of little to no matter for American citizens just as it has with American students. While congress makes no law respecting an establishment of religion, the term “freedom of religion” presents itself to no longer be the definition of “free”, while also having its effects on debates today. According to Burt Rieff, in Conflicting Rights and Religious Liberty, “Parents, school officials, politicians, and religious leaders entered the battle over defining the relationship between church and state, transforming constitutional issues into political, religious, and cultural debates” (Rieff). Throughout the 20th century, many have forgotten the meaning of religion and what its effects are on the people of today. With the nonconformist society in today’s culture, religion has placed itself in a category of insignificance. With the many controversies of the world, religion is at a stand still, and is proven to not be as important as it was in the past. Though the United States government is based on separation of church and state, the gover...
A functioning society seeks to work together in harmony to maintain a state of balance and social equilibrium for the whole. There are thousands of different types of religions in the world. So how do they maintain this ability to function and to keep a society functioning. Not all religions are as harmonious. Berger states there is a crisis of credibility a loss of religious legitimacy and plausibility. Pluralism threatens to rip apart a
The most important aspect to consider is why political parties split when it comes to religious battles in the first place. Glaeser (2005) starts this argument by explaining that when you attract the median-voter there is always a high voting turnout. If this is true, then why do politicians take both ends of the spectrum in most cases when it comes to issues like same-sex marriage and abortions? Glaeser (2005) contends that there are statistical evidence that supports the connection between religious attendance and religious extremism. Exit polls from the 2004 Presidential election show a strong rise in the correlation between religious attendance and party affiliation. This happens because religion as a whole becomes a medium for discussion, much like major news organizations. The only difference is that religion is singular in its method, as Glaeser (2005) points out, in that the people focus on one issue and decide politically based on the preferences shown. The political parties differ for two majo...
As many people already know, politicis and religion some times go hand in hand. Recently, president Obama delivered his Inauguration Speech to the world. There were several remarks mentioned that pertained to religion. Many of the remarks can easily tie in with the American culture core values, which include, Americans are among a chosen people, manifest destiny, morality yields prosperity, and the protestant ethic.
In 1789, the First Amendment established that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion…” This meant the Federal and State Governments could not be partial or show support for any certain denomination or religious organization. However, throughout the history of the United States the controversial question over the relationship between church and state has always been called into question in establishing a one religion government. The main focus of the inquiry is to decide whether to keep the establishment clause or to tear it down and move towards a theocratic system. One side of the debate is the group against the separation of Church and State, who believe that if America was a more religious nation that it would become more moral as well as bring everyone in agreement with national decision making. Therefore the belief is that the United State would become more unified in an already corrupt system. On the other hand, the side for separation argues that the distance between established religion and national government is inherently necessary to keep maintain: religious tolerance, prevent biases, and prejudices, along with any sort of religious freedom in country that has thousands of different organized religions.
Throughout our history there has been an ongoing argument between religion and government. Should religion play a part in the government, schools and other social compasses or should it be separated? Some believe that religion should be a part of the government while others believe that there should be a distinct separation. Some believe that religions should be able to influence the workings of the government and attempt to elect their own politicians. I believe the opposite. I believe that religion should have no influence on the way our government approves laws, elects officials or conducts their business. Throughout this essay I will give reasons and references as to why I agree with the separation of government and religion.
Thomas, Oliver "Buzz". "How To Keep The 'United' In United States: Coping With Religious Diversity In The World's First 'New' Nation." Church & State Feb. 2007: 19+. Academic Search Premier. EBSCO. Web. 1 Mar. 2013.
This has resulted in numerous attacks by both non-Christians and Christians alike against the conservative attempt to merge religion and politics. Three arguments have been used most frequently against the conservative mixture of religion and politics. In what follows each of these arguments is stated and then refuted. The first argument is that politics is too worldly.
...its own. It is also dangerous for the state to govern Christian doctrinal views. When politics and faith are only mixed in certain areas, a more fair and balanced approach to government can be formed. It gives religious free will to the people and the great commission is left up to the Church. The one negative consequence can be controlled by Christians participating in the political process. When all aspects of each option are weighed, it can be seen that partly mixing faith and politics is the best option.
Religious tolerance and religious pluralism have many different definitions, depending on the person’s interpretation of the word and where the person gets the definition. Every person of every faith and the people without a faith can have a different definition for tolerance and for pluralism. Diana L. Eck, the director of The Pluralism Project at Harvard University, gives a clear definition for pluralism. Pluralism is a two way street of dialogue, knowledge, understanding, and active participation (Eck 2 “From Diversity”). Pluralism is not meant to be an assimilation of religions or that a person of any faith has to believe all religious paths are true. Religious Tolerance is the continuous congruent relations betw...
In present day United States there is an abundance of problems which attribute to many unhappy citizens. One of those problems being the great influence that religion has on politics; some might say that it’s taking over. While many conservative republicans and devout Christians might argue that allowing religion to influence our politics helps boost the morale of a morally-challenged population, religion, when mixed with politics, only causes deep divides between different political parties and allows unconstitutional laws to be made.
Our country blends the lines of religion and secularism so much that it seems as though they aren’t separate at all. Religion affects our country, our rights and our freedoms in ways that can’t be seen through one set of lenses. It takes pulling apart layers and layers and going through our history and seeing how religion has impacted and influenced us to see that the United States of America is not solely a secular nation. We are so greatly reliant on religion that political arguments can’t be fought without the mention of God or the Bible at least once. America is not a secular nation but a nation that has a little of both sides.