Abrahamic Religions and it’s Compatibility with Liberal Democracy The topic of religion and democracy’s compatibility is an especially complex one. The academic debates and the current literature express different opinions regarding religion and democratic values and if they are compatible or not. What is meant by compatibility is, if the core values of them both are contradictory or not. This essay will argue that the Abrahamic religions and it’s values are incompatible with liberal democratic values. There are three main reasons why they are incompatible. First being that religion is static, meaning it’s core values do not change over time, whereas a democracy is always changing according to the people’s demands and needs. Second,
…show more content…
One of religion’s objectives is to explain the unknown and to establish social order by claiming that one should have faith. If one is to doubt, instead of having faith, it is considered a sin. Liberal democracy needs public policies to govern, which are based on science. Public policy is needed for an effective democracy, as it groups human issues and problems and finds a way to solve them using logic that is scientifically based and has sufficient evidence. With Abrahamic religions, because faith is used in most circumstances, if democracy was to be based on faith the probability of creating effective policies and laws will be low. For example, if there happened to be an epidemic, religion may implement a policy based on faith and praying rather than policies that are based on science, medication, and research. Some religious branches of christianity such as Jehovah’s witness do not believe in taking another person’s blood even in emergencies, which has led to deaths. This simply proves that faith, which is a key component of religion is not compatible with the policies that democracy may implement because it is what the people of a nation require. It is not say that religious individuals cannot live with these policies but, it undermines some of their religious …show more content…
Eventually if religions keep “progressing” or changing their core values to accommodate democratic needs the traditional and original religion’s survival becomes threatened. The reason for the threat of survival that has been taking place is because “core Christian doctrines of sin, repentance, and election were reduced to a “theological populism” (Heclo, 2009) . This is the reason why democracy and religion are not compatible, because of the strong impact it has on religion departing from the orthodox practices and traditions. The church especially, is leaving the traditions of moral teaching to accommodate liberal movements. Hence, the authenticity of religions has been loss and democracy and the need for policies that came with it is responsible for that. For example, if Christian pastors wanted an accommodation of not going against their religious beliefs to marry a gay couple, “religious accommodation claims of this kind may continue democratic conflict in new forms” ( Nejaime & Siegel, 2015) Or for instance, if 51% of a democracy votes that all rapists should be killed the only way the religion is going to be compatible with that new policy is if they undermine, or disregard what is said in their own books or set of laws about not
One of religion’s objectives is to explain the unknown and to establish social order by claiming that one should have faith. If one is to doubt, instead of having faith, it is considered a sin. Liberal democracy needs public policies to govern, which are based on science. Public policy is needed for an effective democracy, as it groups human issues and problems and finds a way to solve them using logic that is scientifically based and has sufficient evidence. With Abrahamic religions, because faith is used in most circumstances, if democracy was to be based on faith the probability of creating effective policies and laws will be low. For example, if there happened to be an epidemic, religion may implement a policy based on faith and praying rather than policies that are based on science, medication, and research. Some religious branches of christianity such as Jehovah’s witness do not believe in taking another person’s blood even in emergencies, which has led to deaths. This simply proves that faith, which is a key component of religion is not compatible with the policies that democracy may implement because it is what the people of a nation require. It is not say that religious individuals cannot live with these policies but, it undermines some of their religious …show more content…
Eventually if religions keep “progressing” or changing their core values to accommodate democratic needs the traditional and original religion’s survival becomes threatened. The reason for the threat of survival that has been taking place is because “core Christian doctrines of sin, repentance, and election were reduced to a “theological populism” (Heclo, 2009) . This is the reason why democracy and religion are not compatible, because of the strong impact it has on religion departing from the orthodox practices and traditions. The church especially, is leaving the traditions of moral teaching to accommodate liberal movements. Hence, the authenticity of religions has been loss and democracy and the need for policies that came with it is responsible for that. For example, if Christian pastors wanted an accommodation of not going against their religious beliefs to marry a gay couple, “religious accommodation claims of this kind may continue democratic conflict in new forms” ( Nejaime & Siegel, 2015) Or for instance, if 51% of a democracy votes that all rapists should be killed the only way the religion is going to be compatible with that new policy is if they undermine, or disregard what is said in their own books or set of laws about not