Secularism vs Religion: Effects on Life - Essay Sample

Introduction

The different aspects of secularity and religion and its effects on life are contested in different parts of the world. At the most basic level, secularism involves the separation of the state from the church. It focuses on the commitment to the principle of state neutrality towards matters that involve religion in public life. On the other hand, religion is an essential aspect of human dignity. For most believers, religion is more than a lifestyle decision. It is often a deep component of being. Violating one's religious freedoms or moving them to act indifferent from their religious beliefs violates people's inner beliefs. Believers often associate religion with community life, well-being, positive family life, and school performance. Religions also provide different passage rites such as birth, initiation, marriage, and death. Religion and secularism can coexist if religion does not affect the decisions made in the state.

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

Order now

Neutrality in Secularism

Secularism is highly neutral, where states cannot disfavor or favor any belief or religion over another. However, there are many different ways that the principle of neutrality has been understood in public. Most secular believers comprehend the separation of the state from the church to mean that religion should be on the same level as other political actors without any privileged role in the public life (Wessler, Rinke, & Löb, 2016). Others believe that religion should be an equal and free participant in different political debates. Some have taken a somewhat restrictive focus. Those that support exclusivist secularism believes that in pluralistic and diverse societies where citizens have different incompatible and competing views, different actors that bring ideas in the public sphere should employ a secular reasoning and language form, also known as the pubic reason (Wessler, Rinke, & Löb, 2016). By applying this perspective, the arguments brought about by the proponents of general beliefs become understandable to members of the source community or group, making it inaccessible to all citizens.

On the other hand, using public reason, which brings out language and concepts easily understandable by the majority of reasonable citizens, allows free exchange of ideas and deliberate engagements to enable society's effective functioning. For this reason, secularists assert that forms of reasoning based on religion should be illegitimate in the public sphere and used only before secular arguments are brought forward. There are several debates on the issue. Some secularists maintain that the public reason should be applied only to constitutional and legislative matters. In contrast, others maintain that the principle should be set up in a manner that embraces the conception between the public sphere, including issues of political decision making between citizens.

Contentions in Religion

A lot of contention is present in the United States. Several religious institutions register as volunteers, which allow them to claim billions of dollars in public subsidies (Sägesser et al., 2018). This is different in Germany, where the state deducts automatic church tax from the members of religious dominations as a subsidy of the public for religion. Such taxes are also present in many places around the world, such as Finland, Italy, and Austria. This illustrates how religious organizations have enjoyed many privileges and safeguard status for a long, yet they are similar to other sectional interest groups.

There is a lot of evidence that illustrates that secularisms offer more human freedoms and rights. According to Scott (2017), the nations that have state religions often have civil liberties and political rights compared to countries with religion in the state. Moreover, political rights such as transparency in voting, voter registration, and free and fair elections were 27% worse than in nations with religion in the state. Civil liberties, such as the freedom of association, belief, and expression, were 37% lower. Similarly, nations that have state religions were seen to have more government regulation on religion. These states also have more restrictions on religious practices and beliefs. There were also high amounts of persecution in nations that have a state religion.

Contentions in Secularism

Those that criticize the secularism illustrate that the criteria used secularists are restrictive in an unfair manner. The public sphere should be accessible and open to everyone, including the religious arguments and views (Allan, 2013). An essential claim here is that it is downright impossible to expect people who have religion as a critical aspect of their being to discuss different debates in the exclusion of religious motivations and beliefs. According to the critics of this system, the need for people to do away with religion violates the moral agency of the religious members of the community (Allan, 2013). This violation forces the citizens to act in an inauthentic manner. They are required to put their real motivations and deeply held convictions to one side and try to justify themselves in non-theological terms. Therefore, the exclusion of religion from the public leads to the development of an unreasonable burden on citizens with religious beliefs since the need to relate to the arguments placed out in public is not distributed equally (Worthen, 2012). There is a need for non-religious citizens to be more respectful and open to religious ideas and claims. This will allow citizens to work together despite their different backgrounds.

Similarly, critics of exclusivist secularism have argued that worldviews and religious discourses are not different from the regular ideological perspectives or political worldviews such as conservatism, socialism, and liberalism. Thus, denying the use of religious arguments in public is undemocratic and illiberal, ensuring that there is a free flow of ideas in society (Worthen, 2012). Multiple intrinsic dangers are associated with secularism. Suppressing people's identities in such a fashion risk leads to the development of pressures that may lead to the growth of resentment. Resentment may drive once moderated believers into an extremist position, which may develop conflict.

Co-existence of Religion and Secularism

Secularists that believe in this position assert that religious beliefs such as these are mostly harmful. Religion is grounded on their driving claims about the moral endeavor, the afterlife, and the nature of reality. This approach ensures the social "othering," which creates strong group mentalities and dynamics that often lead to the development of violence, distrust, intolerance, and prejudice (Scott, 2017). Through this basis, it is arguable that giving religion a role in public life ensures that all manner of social divisions come about. According to secularists, religion is not a necessity for ethical or moral behavior. Secular society and groups can be effective at developing social trust and cohesion, similar to religious organizations. Sägesser et al. (2018) also found that secular communities are better placed on different ranges of society, such as happiness, drug abuse, juvenile delinquency, violent crime, family breakdown, and social inequality. While most secularists come out as atheists, some secularists believe in a particular faith. However, while they believe, they do not think that their belief should be placed on a pedestal for special treatment.

For religion and secularism to coexist with religion, several things should be set in line. Religion should be seen as a private matter for worship and home, and that the states should not be affected by religion. There is also a need to separate different bits of culture that emerged from those religions that inspired them (Scott, 2017). The church and the state should be separated entirely, meaning that there should be no official representation of religions in parliament. Prayers should also be banned in government meetings and arms. Moreover, religious oaths should be applied on those that hold public office. All financial benefits offered to religious organizations should be used for missionary work.

Furthermore, all exclusive benefits enjoyed by religious organizations need to be scrapped off. Special protection given to faith groups should also be abolished (Sägesser et al., 2018). All faith schools should be converted to community schools to ensure that all students are accommodated despite their faith. All religious education offered in school should be multi-faith and non-denominational. There should be no religion that should be taught as a fact, and no religion should be superior to another (Sägesser et al., 2018). Education should also present students with different methods of viewing the world other than religion. Religious education might also be replaced with citizenship classes where there will be a few mentions of religion basics. Such an approach would not do away with religious references present in other subjects such as art and history. Finally, blasphemy laws need to be abolished.

Conclusion

Secularism may not support the preferential treatment of religions, but it does not go against it. Secularism believes that the state should protect individual believers and not their beliefs. Additionally, secularist believers are against the discrimination of people because of their religious beliefs. While there should be a protection of the believers, the law should not restrict religious criticisms, including those that may hurt believers' feelings. Furthermore, law should not permit incitement towards religious hatred. Additionally, religious discriminations such as those present in employment should be outlawed, including exemption from those organizations seeking to enable these discriminations. The special treatment given to religious broadcasting should be abolished. There is a chance that religion and secularism can exist, but this is only if religion does not permit communalism. The belief system held by secularism is one where religion is rejected as part of the state's affairs and public education. Therefore, if religion is degraded to communalism, secularism will not exist.

References

Allan, M. (2013). Reading Secularism: Religion, Literature, Aesthetics. Comparative Literature, 65(3), 257-264.

Greenawalt, K. (2008). Secularism, religion, and liberal democracy in the United States. Cardozo L. Rev., 30, 2383.

Sägesser, C., Nelis, J., Schreiber, J. P., & Vanderpelen-Diagre, C. (2018). Religion and secularism in the European Union. Observatory of Religions and Secularism (ORELA) Report.

Scott, X. D. (2017). Religion and Secularism-Towards a Reconciliation.

Wessler, H., Rinke, E. M., & Löb, C. (2016). Should we be Charlie? A deliberative take on religion and secularism in mediated public spheres. Journal of Communication, 66(2), 314-327.

Worthen, M. (2012, December 22). One Nation Under God? Retrieved August 1, 2020, from https://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/23/opinion/sunday/american-christianity-and-secularism-at-a-crossroads.html?pagewanted=all&_r=2&