The Role of Religion in US Politics

Should People Leave Their Religion at the Door to Public Life?

While atheists, agnostics, and avowed secularists are still in the minority (according to virtually all polls), they are nevertheless on the move. There are indications that their forces are growing and they are most certainly making inroads into the public square. By all accounts, more people are listening to them, helping to drive atheist authors like Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris, and Christopher Hitchens to the top of bestseller lists.

With the 2008 presidential campaign looming, religion is once again a hot topic. And this time, how religion should be brought to bear in public life isn't the only question being asked. Now, many are wondering IF religion should be brought to bear.

Church and State

The Freedom From Religion Foundation (FFRF) states unequivocally that the United States Constitution is a "secular document," and that its only references to religion are "exclusionary." FFRF is correct. The United States government was established as a tool to govern the United States, and the Founding Fathers pointedly refused to make it a tool of any religious establishment.

Many secularists, including the FFRF, have then taken the point a step further, arguing that churches, synagogues, and mosques (and other religious organizations) should stay away from the public square and that politicians should refrain from bringing religion into their role as public servants.

Democratic presidential candidate and US Senator Barack Obama disagrees. While acknowledging that religion should be handled with grace and respect, Obama nonetheless rejects the idea that it must be shelved. Writing in a 2006 op-ed for USA Today, Obama explained: "Applying [faith-based] values to policymaking must be done with principles that are accessible to all people, religious or not. Even so, those who enter the public square are not required to leave their beliefs at the door."