In a previous post, I commented on the separation of church and state, but my argument centred around how there are as many different moralities as there are flavours of ice cream, and legislating based on one (generally, faith-based) inevitably leads to an unjust situation for those who view it differently.
Socialist Swine takes a different swing:
I don't think that religious convictions should be appealed to influence public policy. Even when that influence is in favour of a position that I agree with. I think that religion should have no direct influence upon government. Policy should never be decided through consideration of religious viewpoints. This is because religious viewpoints (which are to be distinguished by views held by religious people) are in some manner based upon a nonrational belief structure. Faith at its core is not a matter of reason, evidence, argument, or anything of that manner. That doesn't mean that religious folks don't have rational beliefs about their religious views. It's just that views based upon a dogma or doctrine that has at its foundation a nonrational belief about the properties of some supposed deity, at the end of the day, are just suppositions based upon the brute acceptance of some religious position.An excellent point and one I wish I had thought of.
Tags: church & state, government, religion