Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Role of religion in politics
The strengths and weaknesses of indigenous education
Indigenous Education
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Role of religion in politics
A person’s religion has a large affect on how they live their day-to-day lives. It can influence the choices they make. Someone’s opinion on the government and the running of a country can also affect what they can and cannot do about religious issues. When religious freedom is taken away or silenced, people will either back down or speak up. A totalitarian government controls over everything society does, from public to private things. In a totalitarian government, religion can be put aside on certain issues.
Conservatism became well known throughout the beginning of the 1980s in the United States, the United Kingdom, and Canada. While during the 1970s, liberalism became popular. At the time, Canada had a liberal government under Primer Minister Pierre Eliot Trudeau. Brian Mulroney eventually overthrew the Prime Minister in 1984. Mulroney set in motion A Progressive Conservative that decreased governmental control in some industries. In the United Kingdom, conservatism became favored when they had their first female prime minister, Margaret Thatcher. At the time, the United Kingdom was in an economic crisis. Thatcher had a ambition to lessen the spending of all of the social programs. Ronald Reagan became president in 1980 as a Republican, winning against the current president, Jimmy Carter. Carter was known for a struggling economy and failing to get fifty-two Americans who were taken as victims in Iran by an anti-Western group. Because of this, Reagan hands down won the election ("Historical Context").
Religion plays an important role in political modifications during the 1980s. The Moral Majority was an evangelical Christian political action committee who had a major part in Reagan's election victory. This caused tension wit...
... middle of paper ...
...rge. "Café Niagara: Overview." DISCovering Authors. Detroit: Gale,
2003. Student Resources in Context. Web. 7 Apr. 2014.
"Government Promotes Religion, Education, and Land Ownership to 'Civilize'
Indians." DISCovering Multicultural America: African Americans, Hispanic
Americans, Asian Americans, Native Americans. Detroit: Gale, 2003.
Student Resources in Context. Web. 3 Apr. 2014.
Grizzard, Carol, and Tandy McConnell. "Religious Liberty (1990s)." American
Decades: 1990-1999. Ed. Tandy McConnell. Detroit: Gale Group, 2001.
Student Resources in Context. Web. 8 Apr. 2014.
"Historical Context: The Handmaid's Tale." Gale Student Resources in Context.
Detroit: Gale, 2011. Student Resources in Context. Web. 27 Mar. 2014.
Library of Congress. N.p., n.d. Web. 1 Apr. 2014.
exhibits/religion/rel06.html>.
This was the final straw for many Americans, and enough to push them to the “right” side of the political spectrum, Republican. The election of 1980 brought the re-nominated Democratic candidate, Jimmy Carter, against the newly nominated Republican candidate, Ronald Reagan. While Carter ran a rather “gloom and doom” campaign, Reagan came into the election upbeat and with high hopes of rebuilding the military. Americans, weary of the liberal government, elected Ronald Reagan. Reagan came into the Presidency wanting to restore United States leadership in world affairs with a “get tough” attitude.
Religion has many effects in any society. It can either destroy it by proving customs wrong or it can guide it like it guides converts to believe in the religion. Religion creates two different societies and while it guides one to become stronger it will destroy another at the same time. Religion guides societies and destroys them.
Glaeser E., Shapiro, J. M. Strategic Extremism: Why Republicans and Democrats Divide on Religious Values. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 120, 1283-1330.
In the book, God’s Own Party: The Making of the Christian Right, Daniel Williams describes the important role played by the Christians at the 1980 Republican convention. He discussed things such as Conservative Christians and their political activeness during this time; the fundamentalists and their little to no access to the political campaign; the two stages of the alliance between the Republican Party and the fundamentalist; the creation of the “New Christian Right”, along with many other things.
1.) Hammond, John L. The Politics of Benevolence: Revival Religion and American Voting Behavior. Norwood, New Jersey: Ablex Publishing Corporation, 1979.
Le Beau, Bryan F.. "The Political Mobilization of the New Christian Right." The American Religious Experience. The American Religious Experience. Web. 01 Feb 2014. .
Hicks Laurel, Thompson George T., Lowman Michael R., Cochran George C.. American Government and Politics in the Christian Perspective. Florida: Beka Book Publications, 1984.
Thollander, Joel. "Under Color of Religion: Smith, RFRA, Boerne, and the Decline of Religious Freedom in America." NeoPolitique--The Decline of Religious Freedom. Regent University. 22 Oct. 2003
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.
“But as there are such a multitude, they all live happy and in peace” (Doc. B). Being able to have the liberty and same rights as other people prevents from everyone going to war with one each other. When people are able to choose and follow the religion they want it prevents from having one religion having all the power, over through and control people at the point they have to follow something they don’t worship. If that were to happen we wouldn't be at peace and we will be unhappy. Government, and religion are two of three import things that make up part of human
Throughout history religion has been used as means to justify actions and to control people. The two earliest examples are Zoroastrianism and Hinduism. The time frames that will be discussed will be the reign of Cyrus, 521 to 486 BCE, and India from 1500 to 500 BCE, before the Persians had a direct effect on India. The Persian religion is thought to be Zoroastrianism or a derivative of it, called Achaemenian. (For this paper the Persian’s religion will be referred to as Zoroastrianism.) However, Cyrus did not strive to spread his religion he introduced his self into other religions as a divine figure. Hinduism is a religion whose origins are unknown but are speculated to have been initiated by the Aryan people. The development of the Caste system intertwined with the Hindu religion was an effective way of controlling the Indian populace by dividing the people into four major divisions, The Brahman Priests, The Kshatriya, Warriors, Vaisya Merchants and the Sudra Peasants. There was another class that was considered out castes they were called the Untouchables. A comparison and contrast of these two cultures will answer: how and why they used religion to ascertain their control over their general population.
The role of religion in politics is a topic that has long been argued, and has contributed to the start of wars, schisms (both political and religious), and other forms of inter and intra-state conflict. This topic, as a result of its checkered past, has become quite controversial, with many different viewpoints. One argument, put forth by many people throughout history, is that religion and the government should remain separate to avoid any conflicting interests. This view also typically suggests that there is one, or several, large and organized religions like the Roman Catholic Church, which would be able to use their “divine” authority to sway the politics of a given state by promising or threatening some form of godly approval or disapproval. By leveraging their divine power, individual figures within a religion, as well as the religion as a whole, could gain secular power for themselves, or over others. A second view, which was developed by many theologians through history, suggests that that without religion there would be a general lack of morality in the people and leaders of a given state, which would give way to poor political decisions that would not be in the interest of the people and perhaps even God (or the gods). This argument, however, does not address the fact that morality can exist without religion. In sociology, it is commonly accepted that social norms, which include morality, can result from any number of things. Religion, laws, or the basic desire of survival can all create these norms, so it suffices to say that as a society, our morals reflect our desire to live in relative peace through the creation of laws that serve to help us to survive. The argument of whether or not religion and politics should mix...
Much of the history we are taught in grade school and secondary education is filled with stories upon stories of political movements and uprising. The vast majority of these movements had one or two political leaders at the forefront whose ultimate goals included such things as liberating an oppressed people or reclaiming a status taken from a group of people by an outside force. Leaders of such movements have used a wide range of tactics to gain support for their political agendas, but one particular tactic has been so often used by said leaders that this tactic certainly deserves a closer examination. This tactic is religion. No matter what the nature of the movement may have been, so often we have seen and continue to see today how political leaders have made claims that God is supporting their cause. From the Crusades to the recent activities of Al Qaeda, the need for God’s support has been shown to be very important to establishing the legitimacy of a political agenda. What happens when the political agenda fails to faithfully correspond with the religion it claims as its backing? Is there a relationship between the effectiveness of a political agenda and the faithfulness with which it adheres to the tenets of the religion it claims as its support? Indeed there is such a relationship, and upon closer examination, we will not only see that political agendas that faithfully adhere to the tenets of a proposed religious affiliation tend to be successful, but we will also see why this is the case. We will then consider how this knowledge can be used today to address current instances of oppressive regimes. First, however, let us examine why it is at all desirable for a political leader to ...
Religious Fundamentalism is not a modern phenomenon, although, it has received a rise in the late twentieth century. It occurs differently in different parts of the world but arises in societies that are deeply troubled or going through a crisis (Heywood, 2012, p. 282). The rise in Religious Fundamentalism can be linked to the secularization thesis, which implies that victory of reason over religion follows modernization. Also, the moral protest of faiths such as Islam and Christianity can be linked to the rise of Religious Fundamentalism, as they protest the influence of corruption and pretence that infiltrate their beliefs from the spread of secularization (Heywood, 2012, p. 283). Religious Fundamentalists have followed a traditional political thought process, yet, have embraced a militant style of activity which often can turn violent (Heywood, 2012, p. 291).
For thousands of years, religion has exerted a great influence over economic and political life. Even today religion is called upon to support rulers, contacts and other legal procedures.