Religion and Democracy At Odds

By T.S. Khanna

August 21, 2006

Religion and Democracy At Odds

All through the human history, religions have evolved in response to the innate human desire to develop connection and establish engagement with the Almighty Creator of life and the Universe. Perceived, imagined, or intuitive concepts regarding the Creator by various religions differ widely. These concepts are sanctified and not exposed to the test of human rationalism or scientific techniques. They are held as real facts and the truth by the followers of various faiths and become the cause of conflict among religions.

Regardless of its goal or intent, every religion gravitates into an uncompromising political body of believers of their superiority over others. The political body of every religion has traditionally worked as the dictatorial government for its followers.

Secular democracy is relatively a recent invention of government to accommodate various faiths by separating government from religions. However, such a set up also generates some conflicts:

1. Under secular democracy, “will of the people”, not the religious authority is supreme. All religious leaders feel offended as their authority is eroded.

2. Secular democracy guarantees protection to minorities. Under religious government, minorities are considered agnostic or infidel--- a punishable crime.

3. Secular democracy encourages individual rationality and freedom; religion demands faith and obedience. Most people find it easier to follow the religious path of the “Givens”. Situational analysis, self-reliance, and independent judgment become burdensome without the training for independence through education and opportunities. Religious training is quite the opposite and is given during the earliest and most impressionable years of life.

4. Secular democracy guarantees equality of individual; religions, traditionally, do not accept or encourage equality. Gender equality has not been recognized by religions. Religious moral standards have always favored male gender.

Although, the principle of equality is accepted publicly, in public life, the followers of every faith carry a feeling of superiority, not recognized by secular democracy. They feel frustrated with democracy and consider it their moral duty to uphold their respective faiths superior to others. Without visualizing the alternatives, they feel lack of their religion is the root cause of all social ills. The followers of each faith blame secular democracy for degrading their faith by bringing it at par with other faiths. Pronouncements of such condemnations in religious institutions emotionally charge the faithful to support the religious fundamentalism. The religious moderates are considered unfaithful and looked down upon by the orthodox.

5. Under secular democracy, unlimited freedom of speech without accountability works against democracy in as much as it facilitates and encourages demagoguery to intensify split and enmity among religions. In the name of sanctity, religions restrict even freedom of thought into unquestioning faith for stability and continuity.

6. Unlimited freedom of speech,under secular democracy, allows pornography to flourish as a highly profitable business; religion condemns pornography.

7. Democracy requires national loyalty; religion emphasizes only religious group loyalty.

8. Democracy encourages discoveries, inventions, business, production of goods, and profit within the legal framework to remove poverty; religious teachings are against materialism, for living within smaller means, and require devotion to the perceived Almighty Creator.

9. The very nature of religious hierarchies does not lend itself to multi-religion secular democracy. The societies with strong religious orientations can, at best, accommodate single religion theocratic democracy, not secular democracy.

Gradualism is the basic characteristic of democracy, both in its development and in its operation. Just as liberty is taken, not given, the desire for democracy must gradually grow from within the society and cannot be quickly given to it. The case in point is the Middle Eastern countries.