Public Truths vs. Private Truths
To what extent is it legitimate to use religion as a basis for political decisions on public policy? Many people believe that such a use of religion ultimately results in violations of the separation of church state, and thus other people’s religious liberty. Many religious believers, however, argue that it is wrong to exclude religion from public debates and that such a policy effectively constitutes discrimination against religion and religious believers. Who is right?
In a way, both perspectives are “right” — it would be a mistake to assume that only one is valid and that the other must be wrong. Nevertheless, it must also be pointed out that former position is ultimately stronger. So long as it is not taken too far, it is the position which must serve as guiding principle.
For the government to adopt any particular religious position as a basis for laws or policies, though, would mean treating the religious beliefs in question as true — or at least as more true than the religious beliefs that have been excluded. All other religious beliefs that have something to say on the matter are treated as if they were false, or at the very least as worthy of less consideration. This is a genuine example of religious discrimination which cannot be tolerated in a democratic, tolerant society.
http://atheism.about.com/od/churchstate101/a/publictruths.htm
= new reply since forum marked as read
