The Great Divide

In recent years, the politics that run our country have been changed into a battleground, where people wage war over everything from the greatest moral issues of our time, like stem-cell research, to issues as trivial as cheating in baseball. With such government influence, it is important to pick a candidate for their moral and social ideas. Religion has always had a great amount of influence over politics and that is unavoidable; people believe strongly in their religions and make many decisions based on those beliefs. Yet, it is vital, to upkeep the freedoms of this country, that our government maintain a strict separation of politics from any single religion.
To have a belief in something, or the lack thereof, is the right of all people, and it has always had a place in the founding of America; in fact, “In God We Trust” can be found on any piece of U.S. currency. To many, religion is a pillar to hold them up in hard times and to direct them in what stance to take on moral issues. ‘A good church makes good people, who in turn make a good government’(McManaman 1). Religion also has a profound political drive, which can easily tip the scale in an election. Some religions seem almost too strong in their ability to elect candidates, and this is where the impact of religions begins to get dangerous. Giving any one church too much power over the political system is a disgrace to the freedom our country is founded upon. With beliefs being such a strong part of peoples lives, it is obvious that endangering the freedom to practice these beliefs would create a rift in society. Already a divide has begun between those who believe church should stay away from politics and those who want its involvement. “…we strive to be a nation with a common identity and a common project. Religious division threatens that unity, as we can see today…(Feldman 1). It is obvious that removing such a strongly influential aspect of society completely from politics is just impossible because politics are based on the ideas in the society. But it is valid to argue that a weakening of its strength over the government is needed before it gets out of hand.
It is true that to have a religion is a persons human right, but the church can, in fact, hurt the political system in ways our framers did not expect. Our founding fathers decided to make politicians have to work for the people’s vote and leave it up to those people to freely decide who should represent them. One equal vote is given to all and they are allowed to do with it what they may. Religion causes problems with the idea of free voting because it makes people vote not for the candidate, but for his religion. In the recent Iowa caucus, a state known to have a large evangelical population, a candidate by the last name of Huckabee won by a land slide. Of course, Huckabee is a strong evangelical and in the following primaries has yet to place above third in the polls. It is very important to vote for a politician whose ideas you trust, but it is also important not to assume that if a politician shares a persons religious affiliation than he or she must also share the same views on issues. Still, most Americans exercise their right to vote without any influence from religion; in fact, 70 percent of Americans believe that churches should have no involvement in a politician’s campaign (Robinson 1). Also, religion is a cause for the receding of social evolution. New generations come. With them they bring new ideas and at time religion comes to stop this change by holding strong to classic beliefs. Some believe that “…the right answers to questions of government policy must come from the wisdom of religious tradition”(Feldman 1). A wisdom that takes a negative stance on both stem-cell research and same-sex marriage. These two issues alone bring up more debate in churches than any others, and it is because they are revolutionary ideas that church leaders in the past had no way of knowing would be an issue. It is important to understand and keep in the mind the moral grounds that every person has, but it is also important to understand that an evolution in science needs to continue, even if it does anger a few church leaders.
Traditionally, it is believed that separation of church and state is for the good of the government, but this is not the case. The idea of keeping separate the moral innocence of religion from the easily corruptible atmosphere of politics is an idea that is meant to keep safe both churches and people. When giving a person of religious affiliation authority over society, unforeseen prejudices can be directed towards those religions without representation. Already social prejudices against foreign religions are beginning to creep into society. ‘According to a USA Today and CNN conducted poll, 77 percent of people said the ten commandments should be displayed in public areas, while only 33 percent said a monument to the Qur’an would be acceptable in a public place’ (Robinson 2). It is polls like this that perfectly show the need for a separation of church and state. In a country so dedicated to a single religion it would be very easy for us to become a religious state like those of the middle east. Consequently, the separation of church from state is also used to protect the churches themselves. Church’s ideas have long been thought of has the moral standard in society, and those standards often align with what society feels is correct. Though when churches begin to get involved with small political debates, “…they become too involved in routine politics, they risk being viewed as just another special interest group, and thus lose their moral credibility” (Reichley 16). If religion even wants to continue having the respect of society it is important that they do not allow themselves to be viewed as another lobby. Religion has its place in the decisions of government; it affects the views of the people who in turn use that view to decide their vote, but keeping church from direct contact with government is best for politics, religion, and the people.
It is easy to see that religion has a valid and strong position in the minds of people today. It is the moral decider, and with this position comes a great power over the ideas of society. Yet, it is structurally important that government abstain from allowing religious influence over their decisions or run the risk of being biased towards smaller religions. Political views differ just as greatly on views of religion, but there is on idea which holds firm in everyone’s mind; religion is of the people, and should remain sovereign to those individuals. Otherwise more prominent religions would gather greater strength and the nation would risk losing the freedom, it so preciously protects from outside harm, from inside corruption.