Utah’s safety net for the poor is so intertwined with the LDS Church that individual bishops often decide who receives assistance. Some deny help unless a person goes to services or gets baptized.
Political speech in church has an influence on voters, voters elect politicians to represent their interests. If you can take away one of the tools they’re using to hold on to power, it evens out the odds for someone who could win without being indebted to religious leaders or worried about getting their endorsement next election cycle. That’s someone who will feel less pressure to push policies that benefit those churches.
It’s not fast, it’s not perfect and it’s not the full range of what needs to be done but it is an important step.
That doesn’t answer the question at all. You just repeated what you said before. Are you saying you want to ban people who attend religious services from holding public offices? Ban politicians from passing laws if someone (who?) decides the law is based on religion? Do you want to legalize murder because the bible says it’s a sin?
There’s a lot of shit people get away with, like putting the ten commandments in courthouses and putting “In God we trust” on money, but that shit is already banned. You can’t just pass a law requiring the government to follow the first amendment and expect it to have any effect. So what objective standard do you want to enforce that isn’t already part of the law?
What does “ban religion in politics” mean? What actual conduct are you proposing to ban?
Enforce the Johnson amendment, for one.
That would be great but I don’t see how it bans religion from politics. It’s not placing any restrictions on what the government is allowed to do.
Political speech in church has an influence on voters, voters elect politicians to represent their interests. If you can take away one of the tools they’re using to hold on to power, it evens out the odds for someone who could win without being indebted to religious leaders or worried about getting their endorsement next election cycle. That’s someone who will feel less pressure to push policies that benefit those churches.
It’s not fast, it’s not perfect and it’s not the full range of what needs to be done but it is an important step.
I mean exactly what I said. Religion and politics do not and should not ever mix. Therefore, ban religion in/from politics.
That doesn’t answer the question at all. You just repeated what you said before. Are you saying you want to ban people who attend religious services from holding public offices? Ban politicians from passing laws if someone (who?) decides the law is based on religion? Do you want to legalize murder because the bible says it’s a sin?
There’s a lot of shit people get away with, like putting the ten commandments in courthouses and putting “In God we trust” on money, but that shit is already banned. You can’t just pass a law requiring the government to follow the first amendment and expect it to have any effect. So what objective standard do you want to enforce that isn’t already part of the law?