What is the potential tension between any religious tradition and the principles of democracy?
What will be an ideal response?
As democracy requires majority rule and recognizes that the interests or preferences of the majority can change over time, democracy poses a difficult problem for any religious tradition. Many people with strong religious beliefs regard the principles of their religion as timeless, unchanging, and morally binding. People with strong religious beliefs the world over confront the possibility that a majority of their fellow citizens might vote for policies that contradict their moral principles.
When religious people believe that a policy or law violates their moral principles, they frequently get involved in social movements or interest groups to press for political change. In a democracy, the losers must accept the outcomes of the process and mobilize their energies toward winning the next election. Yet, sometimes, a group of people finds a policy so offensive to their religion that they reject the principle of majority rule and seek to overthrow the democratic system as a whole.
People the world over differ as to how strictly they interpret their faith's principles. In other words, every religion has liberals and conservatives. Yet, democracy requires a certain degree of liberality: not just freedom of expression for everyone, but a "live and let live" attitude. Democracy by definition requires tolerance for a variety of beliefs that extremists within some religions may be unwilling to accept.
Most democracies are in areas where Christianity dominates. Yet several non-Christian democracies exist, such as Japan, Israel, and India. Moreover, several predominantly Christian countries remain non- or only partially democratic, such as Russia and Belarus (which are predominantly Eastern Orthodox Christian); Venezuela and Colombia in Latin America; and most countries in sub-Saharan Africa. In contrast, nearly all predominantly Muslim countries are non-democracies.
You might also like to view...
The Supreme Court
A. has reduced its protection of symbolic speech dramatically, and has recently ruled against flag burning as a form of protected symbolic speech. B. ruled, during the Vietnam War, that the burning of draft registration cards was a protected form of symbolic speech. C. has generally protected symbolic speech almost as substantially as it has protected verbal speech. D. has ruled that even forms of symbolic speech considered to be dangerous to the public are protected. E. has protected symbolic speech much more substantially than it has protected verbal speech.
Positive goal changes have been noted most often in the ______ sector.
Fill in the blank(s) with the appropriate word(s).
How are fine and fee practices abused and how do they subvert some core principles of criminal justice, according to opponents?
What will be an ideal response?
Which of the following holds office for life or until retirement?
a. a Supreme Court justice b. a Senator c. the chief executive d. a Representative