a religious state?

[QuestioningMind]

should a state of a country make it's laws based on religion? since religion is about peace and love, can religion make a state more humane?

"should a state of a country make it's laws based on religion? "

Only if you want to live in an oppressive nation like Saudi Arabia or Iran.

 

[sayak83]

It is because religion is a broad term that applies to how we live not merely what things we believe. It is an English term which refers to what you do regularly, so it has grown to encompass church attendance and other practices such as prayer. More recently it also includes beliefs, and while some people exclusively use it to refer to beliefs it cannot be limited to that, mainly because of Buddhists. The simplest thing would be to eliminate the word religion and replace with 3 things: Lifestyle, beliefs, and culture; however laws are religious. They tell us how to behave and to some extent also tell us what to believe.

While Buddhists do not believe in a God, they certainly believe in supra-physical states like the jhanas and nibbana and supra-material processes like rebirth and kamma. Also many Buddhists believe in deities and Bodhisattva-s. So it does not seem to be a problem to say Buddhist practices and laws are also based on a supramundane worldview. Also religion always had a distinctly divine overtone

religion | Origin and history of religion by Online Etymology Dictionary

 

[ProMultis]

Religion works best on the micro level - ennobling people's lives, creating social networks, and inspiring works of charity.

 

[Mohsen]

Just because a governing system doesn't call itself a religion and parades around as a secular democracy, doesn't mean it isn't religious in nature. I would say secular democrats are religiously protecting their interests

Peace

 

[Tumah]

since religion is about peace and love,

Source?

 

[RedDragon94]

should a state of a country make it's laws based on religion? since religion is about peace and love, can religion make a state more humane?

Human decision to follow religion can make society better, religion in and of itself should not be enforced because that takes away human autonomy. Without human autonomy humans can't know what justice is or give just punishments because everything is without human intervention.

Does that make any sense?

 

[Brickjectivity]

While Buddhists do not believe in a God, they certainly believe in supra-physical states like the jhanas and nibbana and supra-material processes like rebirth and kamma.

While I cannot claim expertise on the subject, no I do not think that these terms: Rebirth and Kamma mean to them what you think they think that they mean to them. Mahayana is called 'The Great Vehicle'. Its trappings have the appearance of superstition, however the Southern schools and the Zen schools more openly discuss that the Buddha is not superstitious but aims towards skepticism. I do think that some versions of Buddhism are superstitious but the more superstitious varieties appear designed to invade, to propagate and to replace war with peace. Look at Japan.

Japan is originally quite serious about gods, war, honor, ancestors and such; but then Buddhism appears and begins to influence the culture. It moves people towards a philosophical way of life, and that appears to be by design. Around 600CE in the Warring Period, Japan gets introduced to Mahayana Buddhism and gradually becomes less war-like over time. Around 1100CE Toyatoma Hideyoshi convinces the Satayama clan to surrender to a lord named Nobunaga, and subsequently unites Japan under Nobunaga. The land forgets its Samurai who become Ronin and spend their times studying Buddhism. Buddhism preaches harming no one. It is thought that the Samurai become Ronin because the land becomes unified, their jobs mostly redundant. The possibility of unification, however seems attributable to Buddhism's gradual increasing influence, which uses all available tools including Taoism and superstitions to influence the culture. War loses its popularity. Sure it is just guesswork coming from me. I think its an example of religion slowly pacifying a war obsessed region.

Also many Buddhists believe in deities and Bodhisattva-s. So it does not seem to be a problem to say Buddhist practices and laws are also based on a supramundane worldview. Also religion always had a distinctly divine overtone

Sure they do, but I think they are taught to question whether their own beliefs are real. I would have to check with someone more familiar with the particular school.

 

[Twilight Hue]

why evil, if it has good standards?

What if they don't want obey religious laws? How would a good standard apply if someone doesn't want a religious law dictating what they can believe and what they cannot?

 

[The Emperor of Mankind]

why evil, if it has good standards?

That's the problem; 'good' is a subjective term. As is 'evil', right enough. What's good or beneficial for one person or religious group is evil or harmful to others. For instance, treating leaving a religion or 'apostasy' as a criminal offence might be good for the conservative, dogmatic religions but isn't good for minority groups or those which strongly advocate freedom of & from religion.

A thousand different empires, nations and kingdoms have tried to implement theocracy over the millennia and it has never worked out well. How many more times do we have to try interweaving religious doctrine with lawmaking before humankind collectively realises it's a bad idea and packs it in? Forcing people not of a religion to follow that religion's rules never works out well.

 

[syo]

You can't legislate love, kindness etc.

imagine if it was the norm.

 

[syo]

What if they don't want obey religious laws? How would a good standard apply if someone doesn't want a religious law dictating what they can believe and what they cannot?

it's not about believing but about human relations.

 

[syo]

Source?

jesus's teachings.

 

[Tumah]

jesus's teachings.

So when you said "religion is about X" you actually just meant Christianity.

 

[syo]

So when you said "religion is about X" you actually just meant Christianity.

I believe that all religions have teachings similar to jesus's. is there a religion that preaches hate and war?

 

[Tumah]

I believe that all religions have teachings similar to jesus's. is there a religion that preaches hate and war?

religions is about =/= religion teaches

And yes. In Judaism, there are times where we are religiously required to engage in war. You may or may not be familiar with the Book of Numbers and Joshua.

 

[The Emperor of Mankind]

I believe that all religions have teachings similar to jesus's. is there a religion that preaches hate and war?

Well you're wrong. Plenty of religions don't "have teaching similar to Jesus'". That actually makes it sound as though Jesus was the one who came up with these ideas.

 

[syo]

Well you're wrong. Plenty of religions don't "have teaching similar to Jesus'". That actually makes it sound as though Jesus was the one who came up with these ideas.

isn't buddha similar to jesus? reducing suffering by being kind?

 

[The Emperor of Mankind]

isn't buddha similar to jesus? reducing suffering by being kind?

That's one of the few similarities which exist between Christianity & Buddhism and it is only skin deep.

 

[syo]

and it is only skin deep.

skin deep? it's the alpha and omega in my opinion.

 

[Ponder This]

should a state of a country make it's laws based on religion? since religion is about peace and love, can religion make a state more humane?

What do you mean "should"? Do you mean that a state that isn't based on a religion is wrong?

This is the problem: the state should reflect the people it governs. It makes no sense to force a religion onto people unless you want to start a rebellion against your religion and corruption within it's ranks. It would be fine to have a state based on religious values, even beneficial in some ways, but it makes no sense to say that that it how things should be.

It's like saying that all people everywhere should be saints. It seems true, doesn't it? Shouldn't everybody be the epitome of virtue and morality? And if we made a law that said everyone must uphold saintly virtue, then we might even think ourselves clever... but it would not be wise.