Secularism in the World

2008-03-10 03:51:19

#1

sergeriver: Cowboy from Hell; +1,928|7184|Argentina

Does 100% Separation of Church and State Exist? If so, pls give examples.
Which countries are closer to that?
Which countries don't have any separation at all?

IMO the US is a good example of almost complete separation of Church and State. GJ 1st Amendment. Sadly in Argentina you need to be Catholic in order to run for president. It's in the fucking constitution. Not that I want to run anyway. In France bishops are appointed by the government. Not to mention Muslim countries. What about in other countries?

Last edited by sergeriver (2008-03-10 04:02:36)

2008-03-10 04:04:47

#2

DonFck: Hibernator; +3,227|7059|Finland

sergeriver wrote:
IMO the US is a good example of almost complete separation of Church and State.

"One nation, under God."

"In God we trust."

"I feel like God wants me to run for President" - Dubya

If by separation of church and state you mean freedom of religion, then practically every western nation gets an A+. However, if the impact of religious views to political decision making is discussed.. ..well, you know. Even if there are no references to anything remotely religious in E.g. legislation.

IMO, Nordic countries have come pretty far with the process. The church does have a presence still, but it's pretty limited. Besides, the Lutheran church is IMO mostly a group of agnostics that only pay their church tax because a) they've always done so, or b) they want to have a church wedding at some point. I'll stop now before I go any more off topic.

I need around tree fiddy.

2008-03-10 04:13:06

#3

Raga86: Member; +6|6912

I would say that Sweden is a pretty secular country. The church and the state are completely separated. The church appoint their own leaders by internal voting systems and the state cannot interfere with this alot... Would say that most Scandinavian countries work this way it works out fine. The religious interest here is also declining...

2008-03-10 04:14:03

#4

sergeriver: Cowboy from Hell; +1,928|7184|Argentina

DonFck wrote:
sergeriver wrote:
IMO the US is a good example of almost complete separation of Church and State.
"One nation, under God."

"In God we trust."

"I feel like God wants me to run for President" - Dubya

If by separation of church and state you mean freedom of religion, then practically every western nation gets an A+. However, if the impact of religious views to political decision making is discussed.. ..well, you know. Even if there are no references to anything remotely religious in E.g. legislation.

IMO, Nordic countries have come pretty far with the process. The church does have a presence still, but it's pretty limited. Besides, the Lutheran church is IMO mostly a group of agnostics that only pay their church tax because a) they've always done so, or b) they want to have a church wedding at some point. I'll stop now before I go any more off topic.

Under God was added in the 50's. In God we trust is in the dollar bills, not in the constitution. Dubya isn't the US.

2008-03-10 04:16:15

#5

Mekstizzle: WALKER; +3,611|7048|London, England

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secular_state

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/b/b8/Secularmap.PNG

/Smartass

Last edited by Mek-Izzle (2008-03-10 04:16:24)

2008-03-10 04:18:38

#6

sergeriver: Cowboy from Hell; +1,928|7184|Argentina

Mek-Izzle wrote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secular_state

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/e … larmap.PNG

/Smartass

Portugal, Spain, Italy and France? Mmmm, no.

Brazil and Mexico? I don't think so. Pretty much the Catholic Church says how things are there.

Last edited by sergeriver (2008-03-10 04:20:57)

2008-03-10 04:26:24

#7

DonFck: Hibernator; +3,227|7059|Finland

sergeriver wrote:
Under God was added in the 50's. In God we trust is in the dollar bills, not in the constitution. Dubya isn't the US.

The state is it's people. The people are represented by their elected leaders. If the elected leaders are strongly religious and use the Holy Bible as a book of guidelines, the state acts according to a religious agenda, hence scratching the concept of secularism from the list of ideologies. Of course, this is not the peoples fault. Nor is it a constant condition. IMO

However, leaders change, the constitution (hopefully) doesn't.

I need around tree fiddy.

2008-03-10 04:29:24

#8

Mekstizzle: WALKER; +3,611|7048|London, England

sergeriver wrote:
Mek-Izzle wrote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secular_state

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/e … larmap.PNG

/Smartass
Portugal, Spain, Italy and France? Mmmm, no.

Brazil and Mexico? I don't think so. Pretty much the Catholic Church says how things are there.

Yeah, and I find it odd that legally the UK isn't secular but in reality it's pretty much one of the most secular places in the world. The Politicians here have to be more Athiest if anything, I remember Tony Blair saying how he "hid" his faith from the public (unlike GWB) because people would think he is a nutter, and rightly so. 'Cos religion has no place in politics, and he knows it

2008-03-10 04:29:41

#9

sergeriver: Cowboy from Hell; +1,928|7184|Argentina

DonFck wrote:
sergeriver wrote:
Under God was added in the 50's. In God we trust is in the dollar bills, not in the constitution. Dubya isn't the US.
The state is it's people. The people are represented by their elected leaders. If the elected leaders are strongly religious and act accordingly, the state acts according to a religious agenda, hence scratching the concept of secularism from the list of ideologies. Of course, this is not the peoples fault. Nor is it a constant condition. IMO

However, leaders change, the constitution (hopefully) doesn't.

You can't say the US isn't a secular state just coz GWB is a wacko creationist.

2008-03-10 04:30:56

#10

sergeriver: Cowboy from Hell; +1,928|7184|Argentina

Mek-Izzle wrote:
sergeriver wrote:
Mek-Izzle wrote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secular_state

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/e … larmap.PNG

/Smartass
Portugal, Spain, Italy and France? Mmmm, no.

Brazil and Mexico? I don't think so. Pretty much the Catholic Church says how things are there.
Yeah, and I find it odd that legally the UK isn't secular but in reality it's pretty much one of the most secular places in the world. The Politicians here have to be more Athiest if anything, I remember Tony Blair saying how he "hid" his faith from the public (unlike GWB) because people would think he is a nutter, and rightly so. 'Cos religion has no place in politics, and he knows it

Isn't the Queen kinda the head of the Church in England?

2008-03-10 04:34:11

#11

DonFck: Hibernator; +3,227|7059|Finland

sergeriver wrote:
You can't say the US isn't a secular state just coz GWB is a wacko creationist.

If the leaders of a country make decisions that are based on religion, then the country has ceased to be, in that moment, secular. Indirectly. On paper, that nation can still separate church from state all it wants.

But as I said, the condition isn't constant. Hence, the US is in fact a secular state which has had the misfortune to act in a very nonsecular way.

In other words, I'm not speaking of what countries have stated to be their official standpoint, but how this is implemented.

I need around tree fiddy.

2008-03-10 04:35:09

#12

jord: Member; +2,382|7105|The North, beyond the wall.

Mek-Izzle wrote:
sergeriver wrote:
Mek-Izzle wrote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secular_state

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/e … larmap.PNG

/Smartass
Portugal, Spain, Italy and France? Mmmm, no.

Brazil and Mexico? I don't think so. Pretty much the Catholic Church says how things are there.
Yeah, and I find it odd that legally the UK isn't secular but in reality it's pretty much one of the most secular places in the world. The Politicians here have to be more Athiest if anything, I remember Tony Blair saying how he "hid" his faith from the public (unlike GWB) because people would think he is a nutter, and rightly so. 'Cos religion has no place in politics, and he knows it

If you read the wiki article it just says because of various ceremonial positions we're not "completely" secular.

Meh, in a choice between heritage and ceremony and being on a Wiki map for being secular... I'd choose the first one, though I don't really care either way.

2008-03-10 04:39:22

#13

sergeriver: Cowboy from Hell; +1,928|7184|Argentina

jord wrote:
Mek-Izzle wrote:
sergeriver wrote:

Portugal, Spain, Italy and France? Mmmm, no.

Brazil and Mexico? I don't think so. Pretty much the Catholic Church says how things are there.
Yeah, and I find it odd that legally the UK isn't secular but in reality it's pretty much one of the most secular places in the world. The Politicians here have to be more Athiest if anything, I remember Tony Blair saying how he "hid" his faith from the public (unlike GWB) because people would think he is a nutter, and rightly so. 'Cos religion has no place in politics, and he knows it
If you read the wiki article it just says because of various ceremonial positions we're not "completely" secular.

Meh, in a choice between heritage and ceremony and being on a Wiki map for being secular... I'd choose the first one, though I don't really care either way.

I really don't care about Wiki. I can't say Argentina is a very secular country if you must be Catholic to run for president. Then, I think people's opinion is more important than a wiki article on the issue.

2008-03-10 04:40:49

#14

Varegg: Support fanatic :-); +2,206|7237|Nårvei

Norway is in the process of becoming secular on the paper ... have infact been secular for some time ...

Wait behind the line ..............................................................

2008-03-10 04:47:08

#15

^*AlphA*^: F*ckers; +3,135|7165|The Hague, Netherlands

haven't heard any church propaganda in the government here in ages, to be honest never since I was around? hmm (any other Dutch guys know? )

tho our biggest party at the moment is the CDA (Christian Democratic), not that they should come with Christian stuff since a lot wouldn't vote for them then...

https://bf3s.com/sigs/36eac2cb6af70a43508fd8d1c93d3201f4e23435.png

2008-03-10 05:12:12

#16

konfusion: mostly afk; +480|6977|CH/BR - in UK

sergeriver wrote:
Isn't the Queen kinda the head of the Church in England?

Yeah, but she has absolutely no political power. She's a figure head - she can still technically revoke anything, but if she does, she knows she'll be removed from her position.

-konfusion

2008-03-10 08:30:31

#17

Turquoise: O Canada; +1,596|6832|North Carolina

Mek-Izzle wrote:
sergeriver wrote:
Mek-Izzle wrote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secular_state

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/e … larmap.PNG

/Smartass
Portugal, Spain, Italy and France? Mmmm, no.

Brazil and Mexico? I don't think so. Pretty much the Catholic Church says how things are there.
Yeah, and I find it odd that legally the UK isn't secular but in reality it's pretty much one of the most secular places in the world. The Politicians here have to be more Athiest if anything, I remember Tony Blair saying how he "hid" his faith from the public (unlike GWB) because people would think he is a nutter, and rightly so. 'Cos religion has no place in politics, and he knows it

It just goes to show that the separation of church and state matters more in actions and attitudes than it does on paper.

We have an officially secular government, but it often acts like a religious body.

2008-03-10 08:32:59

#18

S.Lythberg: Mastermind; +429|6874|Chicago, IL

complete separation?

Russia, China, North Korea, Japan

Complete opposite?

Saudi Arabia, Syria, Vatican City.

US is pretty good, but far too many religious right interest groups to be true separation.

2008-03-10 08:33:26

#19

IG-Calibre: comhalta; +226|7169|Tír Eoghan, Tuaisceart Éireann

The UK is a Protestant constitutional Monarchy - the queen is the head of state

2008-03-10 08:59:14

#20

FallenMorgan: Member; +53|6341|Glendale, CA

In the US it seems like religion and government aren't well seperated. A big chunk of America is conservative. I don't know why both coasts have to listen to the backwater region known as the bible belt. Our president is from the bible belt, and most Republicans are Christian. There's a vile movement called 'dominionism' spearheaded by fundamentalists that basically want to turn the USA into the United Christian States of Jesusland.

2008-03-10 09:13:03

#21

Stingray24: Proud member of the vast right-wing conspiracy; +1,060|6872|The Land of Scott Walker

sergeriver wrote:
In God we trust is in the dollar bills, not in the constitution.

Separation of church and state isn't in the constitution either.

FallenMorgan wrote:
There's a vile movement called 'dominionism' spearheaded by fundamentalists that basically want to turn the USA into the United Christian States of Jesusland.

Dominionism is an incredibly small sect that does not represent the whole of Christianity.

Last edited by Stingray24 (2008-03-10 09:14:58)

2008-03-10 09:15:40

#22

sergeriver: Cowboy from Hell; +1,928|7184|Argentina

Stingray24 wrote:
sergeriver wrote:
In God we trust is in the dollar bills, not in the constitution.
Separation of church and state isn't in the constitution either.

Ok, it's in the First Amendment.

2008-03-10 09:24:35

#23

Stingray24: Proud member of the vast right-wing conspiracy; +1,060|6872|The Land of Scott Walker

Ah yes the establishment clause, preventing a state religion and preventing government from restricting religious expression. All citizens should seek to influence their government, whether they choose a particular faith or not. However, some people who hate religion seem to begrudge people of faith involvement in the process.

Last edited by Stingray24 (2008-03-10 09:39:41)

2008-03-10 10:21:59

#24

FEOS: Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate; +1,182|6838|'Murka

Stingray24 wrote:
Ah yes the establishment clause, preventing a state religion and preventing government from restricting religious expression. All citizens should seek to influence their government, whether they choose a particular faith or not. However, some people who hate religion seem to begrudge people of faith involvement in the process.

That's only because they (those who begrudge) are mirror-imaging. The begrudgers have no problem forcing their morality on everyone else, so they assume others (people of faith) will do the same.

“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular

2008-03-10 10:33:44

#25

Agent_Dung_Bomb: Member; +302|7163|Salt Lake City

Stingray24 wrote:
Ah yes the establishment clause, preventing a state religion and preventing government from restricting religious expression. All citizens should seek to influence their government, whether they choose a particular faith or not. However, some people who hate religion seem to begrudge people of faith involvement in the process.

I have no problem with religious people being active in politics. I do have a problem when it becomes a litmus test. Yes, it is illegal to have formal requirements of religious affiliation to run for office, but not having a religious affiliation is tantamount to running as the Great Satan. I also have a severe problem with people wanting to alter the constitution to fit their narrow little definition of what is right and wrong. Yes, there are moral standards that need to apply to everyone in order for society to function, but those that don't affect others should not be allowed to be a federal discrimination clause in the Constitution.

BF2S Forums Secularism in the World

sergeriver wrote:

DonFck wrote:

sergeriver wrote:

Mek-Izzle wrote:

sergeriver wrote:

sergeriver wrote:

Mek-Izzle wrote:

DonFck wrote:

sergeriver wrote:

Mek-Izzle wrote:

sergeriver wrote:

Mek-Izzle wrote:

sergeriver wrote:

Mek-Izzle wrote:

sergeriver wrote:

Mek-Izzle wrote:

jord wrote:

Mek-Izzle wrote:

sergeriver wrote:

sergeriver wrote:

Mek-Izzle wrote:

sergeriver wrote:

Mek-Izzle wrote:

sergeriver wrote:

FallenMorgan wrote:

Stingray24 wrote:

sergeriver wrote:

Stingray24 wrote:

Stingray24 wrote:

Board footer