religious but secular: the state?

[Eddi]

This is a question for those who are religious but who believe the state should be secular:

Why do you believe that the state should be secular, and not be based around your religion?

I’m religious and I think that the state should be secular

(I’m based in the UK where we have an established church, which is something I very much disapprove of)

I think the state should be secular as I positively value democracy:

I see a secular state as being more democratic than a religious state

Why do I find it more democratic?

I’m not sure

But I know that it is

I have an intuitive sense

I suppose it is a matter of values, perhaps those who usually support democracy are usually secularists?

(and by "secularists" I don't mean irreligious - I'm religious and also a secularist)

Perhaps the two have somehow got stuck together???

I think it's all a matter of respecting other people?

And a matter of including everyone equally in society?

I don't know, that's why I made this thread

 

[Twilight Hue]

I think a state should help protect a person's religion within reason, but never endorsing or supporting it.

 

[dybmh]

Without proof that God exists, it doesn't make sense to me to force people to follow theocratic laws. Follow God's laws at this point should be completely voluntary.

 

[Eddi]

Without proof that God exists, it doesn't make sense to me to force people to follow theocratic laws. Follow God's laws at this point should be completely voluntary.

So at some other point doing so should be made compulsory?

 

[dybmh]

So at some other point doing so should be made compulsory?

IMO, If God is proven, then it could be considered. Whether or not I would support it, depends on the details.

 

[Eddi]

IMO, If God is proven, then it could be considered. Whether or not I would support it, depends on the details.

I think that if God suddenly made himself known and everyone could see that he exists then it would probably be the end of the world, so the state as we know it - secular or not - would no longer matter, because it would be the end of the world!

So I don't think there'd be any need to enforce anything onto anyone

 

[Estro Felino]

Because the notion of State was forged during the time of French Enlightenment.
During that time philosophers formulated the most sacred juridic principles of our civilization: the individualistic freedom of choice.
That is, the freedom citizens have to choose their beliefs, no matter how unique they are.
Professing a religion (or none) is one of the most sacred rights of the person, and is something private. The State has to protect this right, that is why it is supposed to be secular. Meaning, totally autonomous and indipendent from religious influences.
My country is secular because it is based upon the separation of Church and State (art. 7Constitution).
This separation is carved in our hearts: meaning, we have to loyal to the secular state, even if some state laws are against our religious sentiment or religious convinctions.
Example: the topic of abortion. Being a Christian I cannot but consider abortion a very wrong thing. But, as a citizen of a secular State, I have to respect the law that allows abortion because it is a right our citizens conquered and is a paradigm of women's freedom.

 

[PureX]

This is a question for those who are religious but who believe the state should be secular:

Why do you believe that the state should be secular, and not be based around your religion?

Because the state is an extension of 'the world', which exists as a kind of medium for us to develop within (spiritually). It needs to be a neutral environment where everyone gets an equal chance to be and do as they choose (spiritually speaking).

 

[1213]

This is a question for those who are religious but who believe the state should be secular:

Why do you believe that the state should be secular, and not be based around your religion?...

I think state is what its people are. If people are religious, it will come visible in their actions and therefore also in the actions of the state. If people are not religious, it also will come visible in what the state does. I think they cannot be separated really.

But, I think people should be free and religion should not be forced to anyone.

 

[Regiomontanus]

I think state is what its people are. If people are religious, it will come visible in their actions and therefore also in the actions of the state. If people are not religious, it also will come visible in what the state does. I think they cannot be separated really.

But, I think people should be free and religion should not be forced to anyone.

I agree. And it is up to us: Matthew 6:10