So it seems that the 33-foot statue of the Virgin Mary a couple weeks ago ruffled a few feathers. That is not unexpected. Whenever there is a religious symbol in view of the public, those staunch defendants of the separation of church and state agitate to remove it. It seems that about the only place where such champions of freedom will accept religious displays is on top of the church's roof.
Here's the deal: there will never be a true separation of church and state. As long as politicians, judges, or anyone part of the government believes in a higher being, religion will exist within and have influence on the state.
Religion is a core belief: a set of morals to be followed in everyday actions. It holds sway over the decision making process. How is it that we know what laws to make? Who are we to know what is right and what is wrong? So what if I steal a laptop left lying around somewhere? Big deal. What makes that wrong? Because I am taking what is not mine? Because it hurts someone? Why shouldn't we hurt others? The answer is that there are codes we follow and these codes are descended from religious teachings. Every major religion has principles outlining what is right and what is wrong. From those principles laws are made. Whether or not this is the best way to decide what constitutes good and bad behavior is another discussion entirely. Nevertheless, religious teachings tell us stealing is wrong and therefore is outlawed by the government.
A politician's background influences the decision he makes. Teachers or farmers do not simply forsake what they have learned in those professions once they are a part of the government. They will attempt to pass legislation that calls for more money to the schools or greater subsidies for poorer farmers. Religion is as much a part of their background as their profession. One does not cease to be a Christian upon entering the Capitol Building. An Islamic or Protestant or Catholic representative of the people makes decisions influenced by the teachings of his religion because this is how he knows what is wrong.
Take the abortion controversy for example. A majority of Pro-Life advocates are of a conservative religious persuasion. A lawmaker within that group will then push for outlawing abortion or at the very least further restrictions on the practice. The prime argument for this stance is that abortion is morally wrong. This is not a secular argument for his or her moral views are generated from religious faith. If the representative opposed abortion because it generates a great monetary cost to society or poses too great of a danger to the mother's health, that would be different. But those reasons are not at all what Pro-Life advocates express.
And making religiously influenced decisions is not a bad thing. I want people guided by a code of right and wrong to make the laws that society is asked to abide by. Yes, I might not agree with them on every topic. But, as a general rule, I want what they want; I would make the laws they make.
Returning to the statue of the Virgin Mary, I am not Catholic and I am not offended by the display of devotion any more than a Green Bay Packers jersey or an Eastern Illinois University hoodie offends me. They are a part of who people are. If the Newman Center wants to use the court directly in front of their church to display a symbol - admittedly a rather large symbol - of their faith, then who are we to tell them to remove it? Seeing as it doesn't infringe on my rights, it conversely strengthens them. If the Catholic Church can put up the Virgin Mary then Buddhists can roll out a statue of Siddh?rtha Gautama and followers of Judaism can erect a large Menorah. If we ban one then we ban them all and no one benefits. Everyone is allowed an equal opportunity. However, whether or not another religious group takes advantage of it is solely up to them. UIC finds pride in its diversity. Yet, diversity can never be achieved if we cannot express that which makes us different.
Be the first to comment on this article!