By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Politics Discussion - Should governments start regulating religion?

sabvre42 on 30 August 2015
LuckyTrouble said:
There's an important distinction that should be drawn between Western religions that organize themselves in a similar fashion including Christianity, Catholicism, and Islam, and Eastern religions that focus more on spirituality and improving the self, such as Hinduism and Buddhism.

Western religions are a serious problem, and it's state mandated lack of interference that has let them get as powerful as they have been. People willingly get violent, and use their religion as a scapegoat for bigotry or outright hatred. It's a sad state of affairs, and by offering religious freedom, unfortunately, this is the kind of thing that happens. Notice that when religion causes problems, it seems to always revolve around confrontational Western religions. Granted, you can pick out times of blatant religious intolerance in places such as Japan in the past, but it has never been as troublesome or consistent as in Western countries.

Overall, I have no idea what the best way to handle it is. I guess officially declaring the religion to be atheism for a country can prevent religious interference on higher levels, while giving reason to stop giving massive tax breaks to every person that wants to call their building a church. It doesn't solve any of the deeper issues that have been prevalent for centuries though that are so deeply embedded in our cultures that it seems impossible to get past.

 

Cause the Sikhs and Hindus, zaoists, etc have a history of pacifism right? Oh damn they don't.



Around the Network
Puppyroach on 30 August 2015

OP: Do you mean regulation of religion or that religion should have no influence over politics? Because a sorry should never be allowed to regulate thought or belief but the government should have connection at all with religious organizations. Let them be treated as any other organization.

For example: If you get married in church, it should not be recognized as a marriage on a governmental level, but only as a private matter between two individuals. The only valid marriages should be those conducted by the government.



LuckyTrouble on 30 August 2015
sabvre42 said:
LuckyTrouble said:
There's an important distinction that should be drawn between Western religions that organize themselves in a similar fashion including Christianity, Catholicism, and Islam, and Eastern religions that focus more on spirituality and improving the self, such as Hinduism and Buddhism.

Western religions are a serious problem, and it's state mandated lack of interference that has let them get as powerful as they have been. People willingly get violent, and use their religion as a scapegoat for bigotry or outright hatred. It's a sad state of affairs, and by offering religious freedom, unfortunately, this is the kind of thing that happens. Notice that when religion causes problems, it seems to always revolve around confrontational Western religions. Granted, you can pick out times of blatant religious intolerance in places such as Japan in the past, but it has never been as troublesome or consistent as in Western countries.

Overall, I have no idea what the best way to handle it is. I guess officially declaring the religion to be atheism for a country can prevent religious interference on higher levels, while giving reason to stop giving massive tax breaks to every person that wants to call their building a church. It doesn't solve any of the deeper issues that have been prevalent for centuries though that are so deeply embedded in our cultures that it seems impossible to get past.

 

Cause the Sikhs and Hindus, zaoists, etc have a history of pacifism right? Oh damn they don't.

Although you would be hard pressed to find a religion free of a violent past to some degree, we don't tend to have many examples on the level of the Crusades, or the constant history of seemingly endless examples of violent exploits that so strongly permeate and taint Western religion.

Edit: Granted, maybe it's my Western perspective that makes Western religion seem all the more problematic from my perspective, as Eastern religion doesn't have a firm foothold in basically any discussion I've taken part in that revolves around religion as a whole, likely because they aren't as relevant here. I apologize if I'm being ignorant.



 

sabvre42 on 30 August 2015
LuckyTrouble said:
sabvre42 said:
LuckyTrouble said:
There's an important distinction that should be drawn between Western religions that organize themselves in a similar fashion including Christianity, Catholicism, and Islam, and Eastern religions that focus more on spirituality and improving the self, such as Hinduism and Buddhism.

Western religions are a serious problem, and it's state mandated lack of interference that has let them get as powerful as they have been. People willingly get violent, and use their religion as a scapegoat for bigotry or outright hatred. It's a sad state of affairs, and by offering religious freedom, unfortunately, this is the kind of thing that happens. Notice that when religion causes problems, it seems to always revolve around confrontational Western religions. Granted, you can pick out times of blatant religious intolerance in places such as Japan in the past, but it has never been as troublesome or consistent as in Western countries.

Overall, I have no idea what the best way to handle it is. I guess officially declaring the religion to be atheism for a country can prevent religious interference on higher levels, while giving reason to stop giving massive tax breaks to every person that wants to call their building a church. It doesn't solve any of the deeper issues that have been prevalent for centuries though that are so deeply embedded in our cultures that it seems impossible to get past.

 

Cause the Sikhs and Hindus, zaoists, etc have a history of pacifism right? Oh damn they don't.

Although you would be hard pressed to find a religion free of a violent past to some degree, we don't tend to have many examples on the level of the Crusades, or the constant history of seemingly endless examples of violent exploits that so strongly permeate and taint Western religion.


Ok. Again google any of those 3 religions. There are homicidal fanatics in all teligions including aethiesm.



ps3-sales! on 30 August 2015

No.

We just need less dicks.



Currently own:

 

  • Ps4

 

Currently playing: Witcher 3, Walking Dead S1/2, GTA5, Dying Light, Tomb Raider Remaster, MGS Ground Zeros

Around the Network
Robert_Downey_Jr. on 30 August 2015
LuckyTrouble said:
sabvre42 said:
LuckyTrouble said:
There's an important distinction that should be drawn between Western religions that organize themselves in a similar fashion including Christianity, Catholicism, and Islam, and Eastern religions that focus more on spirituality and improving the self, such as Hinduism and Buddhism.

Western religions are a serious problem, and it's state mandated lack of interference that has let them get as powerful as they have been. People willingly get violent, and use their religion as a scapegoat for bigotry or outright hatred. It's a sad state of affairs, and by offering religious freedom, unfortunately, this is the kind of thing that happens. Notice that when religion causes problems, it seems to always revolve around confrontational Western religions. Granted, you can pick out times of blatant religious intolerance in places such as Japan in the past, but it has never been as troublesome or consistent as in Western countries.

Overall, I have no idea what the best way to handle it is. I guess officially declaring the religion to be atheism for a country can prevent religious interference on higher levels, while giving reason to stop giving massive tax breaks to every person that wants to call their building a church. It doesn't solve any of the deeper issues that have been prevalent for centuries though that are so deeply embedded in our cultures that it seems impossible to get past.

 

Cause the Sikhs and Hindus, zaoists, etc have a history of pacifism right? Oh damn they don't.

Although you would be hard pressed to find a religion free of a violent past to some degree, we don't tend to have many examples on the level of the Crusades, or the constant history of seemingly endless examples of violent exploits that so strongly permeate and taint Western religion.

Edit: Granted, maybe it's my Western perspective that makes Western religion seem all the more problematic from my perspective, as Eastern religion doesn't have a firm foothold in basically any discussion I've taken part in that revolves around religion as a whole, likely because they aren't as relevant here. I apologize if I'm being ignorant.

what do the Crusades have to do with the current world?  The Crusades were a terrible war by both Muslims and Christians and it happened because there were literal armies being used for the purpose of killing the other religion.  Currently Christianity does no such thing (there are still radical Islamic armies such as ISIS).  It's time for people to start judging religions by CURRENT context.



I am Iron Man

Mr_No on 30 August 2015

Regulating religion is a pretty bad idea. It would be like deeming atheists beliefs and practices illegal and punishable by law, even though atheism isn't a religion. Right now, it's impossible to force America to turn into a secular country overnight.

I do agree that many religions do a lot of harm that overshadows the good things that benefits society, and that they have quite some power, but regulation is not the answer. As a Catholic, I wouldn't want the state to subtlety force me to be atheist just because that's what's best for society. That would make them as bad as the religious extremists who try to blatantly impose their religion on others. A change like that should come from the person.



pikashoe on 30 August 2015

Religion should be a personal thing only. It should have zero government involvement or any involvement in education. No religion should be in a place of power, it only causes problems.
I imagine that most religions will probably be nearly dead in Europe and America a hundred years from now.



nanarchy on 30 August 2015
pikashoe said:

I imagine that most religions will probably be nearly dead in Europe and America a hundred years from now.

We can but hope, but I doubt it. Never underestimate the gullibility and ignorance of the human race or those willing to exploit it.



RubberWhistleHistle on 30 August 2015

uhh... OF FUCKING COURSE NOT