How has religion influenced politics?
My take is that religion has a tremendous impact on politics. For example, in the United States government, religion has an extremely growing influence. This is to the extent that lawmakers feel distracted. To illustrate this, during the latest debate on healthcare, President Obama had to consent to an executive order, which stipulated that federal finances would never be directed towards abortion.
Without his consent, the vital legislation would not have been passed, irrespective of his personal stand on abortion. According to me, religion is being used by conservatives to promote their missions, which is detrimental to any country.
In my opinion, another current issue is gay marriage. A keen reflection gives the proof that people consent that gay marriage is a sin. This is entirely because of biblical scriptures. A majority of the countries argue that there should be a separation between the state and church. In addition, every individual is permitted to practice the religion he wishes, without the fear that he might be persecuted.
However, different individuals are persecuted every day, which is attributable to the religious beliefs of one group. My take is that this is exceptionally ridiculous. There are so many accusations in the media concerning religious beliefs. There are immense laws at the local and state levels, which shun working on Sundays. These laws have their origins in religion.
Majority of the electoral processes require the candidates to consent to the relevant religious stances. I support the fact that religion has no place in politics. My opinion is that religion is a private sphere. In this case, people hold their opinions as individuals and members of the church they choose to belong.
On the other hand, politics is concerned with the public concept, where people are participants in the wider community, which is the nation or city. In essence, people in a nation hold varying religious beliefs. In my opinion, this distinction is necessary, considering the violence and hatred that has been linked to religious differences. It is necessary for countries to agree to disagree, as far as matters regarding such issues are concerned. This is because upholding a civil society becomes extremely difficult.
The idea that religion should be excluded from politics leads to the development of two different perspectives. The differing claims from various religions are seen as absurd and, therefore, ignored. Others hold their religious perspectives dearly, but are afraid of the political success.
What is religious fundamentalism?
Irrespective of the fact that religious fundamentalism has a wide array of historical characteristics, it is a modern world concept, which came up during the 1970s and 80s. In my opinion, religious fundamentalism is basically a political thought feature, as opposed to a political decree and opinion.
The manifestations used in this concept imply the operational and doctrinal variations in principal global religions. It is worth pointing out that some versions of the concept are linked to anti- constitutional and violence demonstrations. On the other hand, other versions advocate for peaceful actions and adhering to the law.
My take is that religious fundamentalism mainly deals with denying the difference between politics and religions. Therefore, religious fundamentalism focuses on terminating secularism, and making religion a global concept. In regard to this, religious fundamentalists see religion as an institution made up of unquestionable principles.
These principles direct how people should behave, as well as the management of political, economic, and social life. Most of the times, religious fundamentalism’ principles are drawn from the sacred texts, which imply agreement with scriptural literalism. During other times, the principles are as a result of comprehensive and active analysis of texts, which might reduce the perceptiveness and intricacy of scripture. This enhances a theo- political work.
I think that in religious fundamentalism, modernization is perceived to be decline, proclamation of godless secularism, and decay. Therefore, anti- modernism is advocated for in religious fundamentalism. However, fundamentalists embrace mass communication techniques. All religions have mixed feelings towards fundamentalism.
However, some religions may be more affiliated to fundamentalist developments as opposed to others. It is worth noting that Islamic fundamentalism is more politically oriented. Irrespective of the unique Shi’a and Sunni versions, as far as political Islam is concerned, there are several other subjects within the religion. One of these themes is that the society can be renewed, so that it adheres to Islam ideals and religious philosophies.
This implies the replacement of current secular government with an Islamic government, where religious authority and philosophies override political authority and philosophies. In my view, the values from the West are corrupt, which disapproves a jihad. In the United States of America, fundamentalism is seen through the novel Christian right, where traditional values are attributed significant importance.
This results to social conservatism. In my opinion, ethnic nationalism is promoted by fundamentalism is Israel (Judaism), India (Sikhism and Hinduism), and Sri Lanka (Buddhism). I think that religious fundamentalism is given immense value, since it promotes understanding in a world, where there is so much confusion and doubt.