Absolutely.
I think Middle East would be a much better place if the countries there deemphasized religion when it comes to government and politics. When a country insists on being an Islamic state or a Jewish state or even a Christian state, special internal and external tensions and problems seem to follow.
I believe that governments should be respectful of religious groups as a rule, but should refrain from being radicalized. A government should not become an autocratic arm of the religion, and a religion should not be elevated to the place that it can hold power over members of the populace that are not members.
Laws drafted by the government should be designed to assure a minimum standard of safety to the populace at large whether they be members or non-members. For instance, you shouldn’t be able to kill your daughter because she’s not dating someone you approve of. You shouldn’t be able to mutilate her. You shouldn’t be able to stone her or your wife because they were raped. And if they don’t want to wear the religious garb, they should be cast out by the church, rather than be physically punished.
I’m sure you agree with this.
In the case of Israel, and it’s “Jewish” status, we have a situation where a race of people happen to be called by the same name as a religion.
To what extent the government goes to, to enforce Sabbath laws and other religious tenets, I’m not actually sure. If it doesn’t do things like this, then I would be hard pressed to consider it a religious state.
It is my take that at the current time, the Islamic nations like Iran are the only ones where religious law is incorporated into the governance.
It could be said that a Christian moral (criminal) code was in effect in Western nations. I don’t believe it’s quite the same thing. Those governments don’t try to enforce moral edicts like, Sabbath observance, religious tenets, or proper personal behavior according to a particular church on penalty of fine, incarceration, or physical punishment.
In addition, on the issue of religious governance, I do have one problem with completely disassociating the government from religion. When religions like Islam come into the U. S., a natural adversarial relationship develops.
This is why we see so many challenges to public prayer and religious symbols. In the extreme this type of friction WILL result in our own laws being challenged on constitutional grounds.
For instance, why should Western law trump Sharia law in the United States? There is our (Christian based) criminal code, and then there’s the (Sharia based) criminal code. In a society with even a moderate Islamic presence, the case could be made that Sharia laws must be incorporated into the criminal code on a even-handed non-biased basis.
People will have to forgive me for thinking we are headed down a path toward a real hell-hole future, by allowing more and more Islamic adherents into the United States.
I don’t say this based on race, but I do think there is a very simple reasoned based objection here.
I said it the other day, and I still believe it. I would gladly sign on to a plan to give $2 million dollars to any Islamic family that would agree to relocate outside the United States. It would be an investment that would pay off 10,000 fold over time.
Islam is a religion that demands attention. It sucks all the oxygen out of the room. Sooner or later, there will be significant strife in the United States, based on this one issue alone.