Free Essay Example. Secularism and Religion

The purpose of this paper is to find out if secularism and religion can coexist. There are distinct objectives between secularism and religion, and with tension amongst them, they can still coexist. As a belief system, secularism with the state's affairs ascertains that religion should not be part of it; hence, it rejects religion. People mix both religion and secularism with a vested interest, although religion has communal and spiritual dimensions. The objective of religion is to promote God, while secularism tends to eliminate or minimize God from society. Within the community, if balanced, this tension can retain both secularism and religion form. A lack of secularism can create dominance for a particular religious tradition by undermining other culture's rights of followers. Throughout history, this has occurred involving extreme measures such as imprisonment and persecution. With all the differences in religion and secularism, people can coexist with essential beliefs in the nation's development, humanity, education, and constitution.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Order now

Democratic or open society's survival is compatible with minimal constraints of belief or freedom of religion. Freedom of belief, including nonreligious, should be committed with the human rights treaties of a country (Worthen, 2012). There is a need for neutral grounds where all people share public institutions, the law, and the state towards distinct beliefs and religions for the coexistence of secularism and religion. A country that places itself behind one specific belief or religion is entirely wrong in the susceptible and profound disagreement statement. It lacks agreement to establish falsehood or truth of claims made by everyone else, including humanists, Muslims, and Christians. Secularism is the meaning of neutrality, and it applies to states as a political principle. Widespread religious beliefs can create a home with support from religious believers in a secular state. Secularism, as a foe of religious privilege, is the best assurance of belief or religion. In a secular society, secularism needs to be distinguished because it recommends detachment from a society's morality. It is challenging in a secular state to impose neutrality on everyone with secular and liberal values. In the case of an Italian crucifix, professors of unjust law claimed that across on a wall is more neutral than in an Italian classroom with an empty wall (Kyritsis & Tsakyrakis, 2013). Any individual citizen with an assumption or lack of imposing any belief or religion by institutions, government, and laws leaves them free to either none or hold any belief or religion.

People fit every individual with their style by rejecting secularism; thus, secularism is the possible paramount guarantor for everyone on freedom of belief and religion. Secularists claim that there should be no weight on public policy for religious opinions. Still, people do not wish such arguments being voiced be forbidden or suppressed with freedom of expression as a Voltaire-like defense coexisting both secularism and religion (Allan, 2013). The minds of decision-makers and politicians should account for nothing but convention on the existence of secularism and religion. Religion disputes warning against assisted death; this is an assessment and argument where all people can comprehend. However, their words should be ignored in the decision-making process if they dispute that it is not for people to take away life since it is a gift from God. Societies with such a claim cannot admit it legitimately, especially where competing beliefs are so many and coexist in both secularism and religion. By citing from religious doctrines, religious people should encourage each other and draw their motivation to form it. Nevertheless, in Public Square, they should try to have a language everyone can understand. Correspondingly, the premise on the nonexistence of God by secularists should not receive or expect any thoughtfulness to their dispute with the principle of human rights and freedom. Religion freedom best guarantees secularism even though it seems as an opponent because it creates a base for equal existence among people.

Human Rights and Freedom

Secularism develops from the principle of human rights and freedom by not entailing on freedom of speech restrictions unless for good intention (Greenawalt, 2008). It does not go beyond predictable treaties of religion, such as the ban of religious clothing as a uniform, reasonable clothing requirement to safety or role risk. In a private opinion, secularism appropriates people as representatives who may state a belief, religion, or possibly political affairs. Freethinkers, for example, in France, oppose the ill-founded ban of a burka. Secularism opposes licensing all or any religion forms with anti-discrimination law for unnecessary exemptions such as religious education biased arrangements that disregard humanism, parliament guarantee of seats for a particular religion, and even where children face physical collective worship requirements. On a broader view, this creates an equal ground for both religion and secularism within societies coexisting both with objectionable privileges. On a massive scale, churches in Europe have hundreds of millions of taxpayers who objectively privilege the handle of majority religions to semi or public funding. With repute to religion, secularism is a politically aware position that is neutral. Hence, freedom of religious attitude is most compatible with secularism through its holding of no government or state towards religious beliefs. Religious beliefs lack hostility with support from secularism to advocate the coexistence of both in communities. The United States is trying to contain religious disputes by making its constitution secular and not because, at the time, there were nonreligious inhabitants (Greenawalt, 2008).

Constitution Pliancy

A constitutional approach by a nation is amendable but not for many religious practices and groupings. Spiritual practices hardly face significant alterations, while since the constitution came into power, there have been many amendments, for example, in India. There have been more violent than reformative and regularly regressive changes in religion; for instance, Hinduism's various practices attempt to homogenize (Rai, 2009). Diverse communities with personal law and constitutional provisions are a sure sign for lack of force or sanctity that cities do have with beliefs and practices. Compared to other religions, Muslims and Christians are definitive and institutionally structured with their system of belief being narratively leaner than the traditions of Hindu, whereby they are more narrative-rich and eclectic. Other religions may not easily permit Hinduism's variety of practices and multiplicity. Still, somehow with constitutional norms, they can align and prove to be amenable through proposed reforms, re-conceptualization, and creativity re-interpretations hence try to coexist both religion and secularism on a broader view. Religions through constitutions can make up secularism in terms of the disputation of legacies and histories of a nation with corresponding legacies of the religions. Exemplification of this in Europe is through the Counter-Reformation and the movement of Christian Reformation with jurisprudence and theology of Islam. The Islamic religion allurements from four distinct sources for content in the Shariat, such as the Sunna, Hadith, and Quran, and more collection of secular forms the Ijtihad, Qiyas, and Ijma (Miftah, 2014). Religion agreement to remain constitutional coexists with secularism for the handling of any disputation.

The handle of distinct objectives from secularism and religion balances the tension created by them, therefore, coexisting both within society. The dispute balance is not limited to a particular nation since it exists globally. Britain, for instance, in the role of religion debates into split parties of believers and non-believers, but all play a significant role in public life. There is no gradual marginalization of faith for religions in the country hence leveling up the field and coexisting both religion and secularism. Similar disputes exist in the United States, and the conflict balance is not limited to one nation but face different ways to coexist both. Dual religious clauses not set up in Britain exist for the United States in the First Amendment as Freedom of religion and the Establishment clause. Protection against government intrusion is by the clause of Freedom of Religion, while against the invasion of religion into government is through the Establishment clause (Greenawalt, 2008). Courts as arbiter generally act for the coexistence of religion and secularism, while for better or worse, they balance the rights in each clause. Policymakers exemplify wisdom by drafting the balancing requirements of both freedom of religion and the Establishment clause to coexist. Constitution encourages opinion expression to be free and find religious paths for people while tackling assumptions that may arise.

Constitutional provisions appropriate the legitimacy and validity of secularism and religion by upholding the need to reassert ways of equality for non-believers and believers. These provisions accommodate belief systems in nations by ensuring they are in the act at the right time. Constituents without affecting other provisions of the constitution for communities oblige to discover means that can put up particular religion in acceptance with the community's practices and claims. The dialogic approach gets commitment similar to the principles of the constitution through adjudication and maintain by the judiciary and legislature. It is constitutionally appropriate to validate legally changes for religions across the globe to ensure equal existence with secularism (Allan, 2013). Secularism saves religion because it is the only way, which it can exist. The United States, for instance, their constitution, may convey all other lesser religions out of the nation to an end if there is the removal of secularism and expand a significant religion. The government to avoid political conflicts uses the degree of secularism required within a society to be incompatible with multiple religions. Sate neutrality as a principle for a country when tackling churches in politics creates a strong secular tradition. There is no exception and favors in religion, especially for a particularly religious place of worship with the precise understanding and translation of the law. Vast numbers of nations throughout history with this principle are governed by the consideration that there is no religion better, and over the other, making people equal with the effect it creates.

Conclusion

Religion and secularism can coexist with a central belief in the nation's development, humanity, and constitution. Public debates try to disregard religious commentary with the expression of secularism as an aggressive form. As the constitution provides, the law separates the doctrine of religion and state, coexisting both religion and secularism. Government interference is under protection by the constitution with humanity and the nation's development, creating a well-found relationship between believers and non-believers. There has been too little attention in practice application of how secularism and religious principles should be; therefore, there are more possibilities that both can coexist and promote freedom in the future.

References

Allan, M. (2013). Reading Secularism: Religion, Literature, Aesthetics. Comparative Literature, 65(3), 257-264. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.com/stable/24694557

Greenawalt, K. (2008). Secularism, religion, and liberal democracy in the United States.