Do we need to defend secularism more, the only system of gov't that allows freedom of religion for all?
373886
I think we do.  Ensuring that the government is religiously and theistically neutral is the only way maintain balance and keep things fair.  That way no ones beliefs are being promoted and no ones beliefs are being denied.\n\nA lot of people don't realize that part of freedom *of* religion is freedom *from* religion.  You aren't really religiously free if you don't have the ability to dissent and say "I don't believe that".\n\nIt may bother some people that they're not allowed to use the government to promote their beliefs, but as long as the government doesn't promote any beliefs everyone is being viewed equally.
577323
Yes.  Religious school.  Public school is government schooling and the government should not promote any partricular relgion or class of religions in any way.  By ensuring that schools carriculums remain secular it empowers parents and loved ones to educate their children on spiritual matters without government interference and preserves our freedom.
730859
Certainly. In fact, if ALL religions were equally respected or if ALL religions were equally non-existant, we would have a LOT more peace than we do now.
859269
Try a spellcheck.\n\nSo you're suggesting that religions, which have killed each other for centuries over whose god is real, should come together, make peace, and team up against secularism.\n\nLet me lay this out for you... Secularism is what is bringing peace to the world.  And religious differences are the reason people want a secular society.  If we let religious people rule our governments (which we have done since the beginning of recorded history) there can be nothing BUT warfare.\n\nBut if you want to make religions play nice with each other, by all means, go ahead and try.  You're completely wasting your time, but good luck with that.
275363
Because that's the way it should be. Learn from history and look around you! Religion and state don't go well together. Too many conflicts, and it won't work unless the people all have the same religion. Try that, build a country based on religion and you'll go back to the dark age.
856571
Politics and Religion should always be kept apart for several reasons.\nGovernment for the most part is elected by the people,\nA religion can and has been invented or created by one person.\n\nLaws made by Government are decided by discussion and \na majority vote,\nLaws made by religion merely depend on the interpretation of a certain passage or story within the writings that are used as a basis for nearly all faiths\n\nHistory itself shows that  governments under religious influence\nare more likely to make war on countries that have a different\nreligion or a offshoot of their own religion that does that will not comply with the state religion.\n\nAn individuals belief is just that, INDIVIDUAL and should not, and must not be forced on any one person or group of people.\nNor should any country dictate to it's own people or the people of another country on how,where or to whom they pray.
294918
Ban religion would be about the only way.  Then you have a chance.
790385
From the outset let me make one thing very unambiguous, I am not aiming my criticisms at any particular religion.  Since what I put in writing applies to all religions, regardless if they are large or small and wherever they exist.  \n\nI make no apologies whatsoever to whomever is offended.  I maybe accused of having malicious intentions, but I believe in what I write and fully respect Freedom of Speech & Expression.   Of course what you will read will not make me very well liked, but I robustly believe that every human being should be told the facts from fiction.  As religions will never confess the truth nor they have any reasons to now or in the future.  Nevertheless I will tell you why religions are weakening everyone and even the supernatural being himself.  Subsequently, in due course, I shall then explain to you the alternative to religion.\n\nEverywhere I go or turn religion seems to dictate the agenda.  In one shape or form attacks on marginal groups are recurrently instigated which constantly seems to staunch from religious perspectives.  This morning I switched on the television and not to my surprise religion has been used obliquely, to rebuff equal homosexual civil liberties.   To me religion in one manner or another is currently, bordering on the end of their tolerance position, regardless what has been preached.  In private there must be an unfathomable repulsion amongst them, but they abstain to air their true views, as this would be seen as politically inaccurate or be accused of being out of touch with civilization.\n\nFirstly how should a person decide, which religion to pursue and be least likely to be consistent with its discrimination?  The quandary is that generally most religions discriminate and proselytize on how to live a moral life.  The next question is then who ought to advocate these principles?  Throughout history most Governments, have been assembled from religious points of view, which in turn passes legislation according to religious perspectives. So the issue is somewhat intertwined, on how beliefs should be implemented by Governments, religions or both.    \n\nIt would be absolutely unacceptable, for any religion to force or intimidate any civilian into believing its theologies or philosophies.   In such instances Governments should promote secularisation and stop harmful religious conduct where necessary. The legislation passed must afford freedom without any hindrance, to any particular individual who feels or is endangered by his or her beliefs by religion.  This legislation must preserve fairness and equality, irrespective of religious viewpoints.  As Governments have major denominations of influence and power, through various means, e.g. newspapers, television, radio etc.  \n\nCountless people since mankind started have been disenchanted, misguided by religion in some shape or form.  Such as opinions on homosexuality, abortions, etc which, are repeatedly expressed to be sinful and an abomination, principally by monotheistic religions.  These ill-intentioned despicable interpretations have caused immense cataclysm in society.  These views have contributed towards homophobic attacks and other atrocities (genocide) committed on minority groups of the human race. \n\nAll due to religion millions of deaths of innocent people have implemented (e.g. the Holocaust) and will consequently do so now and in the future.  In the world we live in majority of the past and present conflicts have been influenced by religious detestation.  Still mankind believes religion is the superlative form of assurance to preach harmony throughout out the world. Of course there are various religions, which do endorse harmonization amongst humanity whatever a person’s race, belief etc.  However nevertheless, who in there right mentality would declare religion is non aggressive?\n\nOn the other hand, there are some people who just acknowledge religion despite the consequences of its views and carry on conveniently,
262936
All beliefs should be open to scrutiny, otherwise they just become dogma. Enforced dogma is totalitarianism and repression. It can happen anywhere where free (respectable) speech is stifled. To maintain that one can't ask a respectable question about another religion is simply engendering fear. To maintain that they MY god is above questioning but YOURS isn't, is essentailly a circular argument that takes us nowhere. To maintain that my question insults your god (and that this involves punishment to me) is simply barbaric. I am happy to discuss all of my views with ANYBODY that doesn't intimidate or threaten me.
826772
we still have that "freedom of religion" thing still in the constitution, don't we?
80340
Personaly nothing, in fact I think soceity would become a better to live in fo we were to become a secular nation.\nNo more people using religion to push their ideology onto others, or trying to hinder peoples lifestyle or dictate how one should live or can not live.
384047
Thanks, i had a good belly laugh over your question but dont you think all people should have freedom of religion
715757
In the democratic form of goverment that the U.S. currently has, that is correct.\n\nDemocracy in the U.S. does not mean "rule by the majority."  In a democracy there are certain fundamental human rights that are protected.  Among these rights is the right to freely practice an individual's chosen religion, any religion, without government interference AND without establishing an official state religion over any other religion.
1101927
Not as long as there is a constitution to serve us as a religion.
1183680
Perhaps. But the government only recognizes so many religions. Otherwise people might start doing terrible things in their religion's name... oops, wait... bit late for that. Really, though, unless the government decides to recognize cubianity as a legitimate religion you don't have a leg to stand on. If they did you might be able to get away with it.
49561
Yes, but I don't think it is due to a lack of religion or the devil walking in our midst. In fact it should not have anything to do with religion as there should be a seperation of church and state. Which is not to insinuate that there is anything wrong with religion except that our goverment attempts to limit the power of factions for domestic security. I could care less what people do in their private lives it doesn't carry over to the public arena. I don't agree with the motives to follow but the US could fall as our economy is a source of security. Since WWII we have been economically dominant yet, our economic superpower is waning as various economies around the world are becoming stronger and challenging America. America will become more desperate to try and keep its self secure on many fronts therefore becoming overextended.
498454
There is no way for democracy to exist in a religiously centered regime.  The religious regime will require that certain rules have to be followed no matter how much the people may oppose those rules.  Since the people can't reverse the religious rules, there isn't a democracy.  I would doubt that democracy can really thrive in arab nations as long as they are Islamic regimes.