Question

explain why Tocqueville believed that religion functions best as a political institution when it remains separate from the state.

Answer 1

The science of politics and the seemingly archaic superstitions involved in many organised religions at first instance appear to be diametrically opposed. The natural conclusion here is that there allowing religion to play a part in politics is to preclude a successful twenty-first political leadership and there are, indeed, numerous arguments for this case. When religion enters the political arena, it often threatens to impede technological and social development. An example of this was seen in the UK in 2008, when Gordon Brown was faced with a ‘damaging rebellion by Catholic cabinet ministers’ (Telegraph, 2008) over a Bill to reform fertility laws and allow lesbian couples to become legal parents. The government’s plans were attacked openly by the Catholic Church and three MPs threatened to resist the order because of their religious beliefs. This incident also reveals a deeper incompatibility between religion and politics. The nature of democracy is that it involves a process of negotiation in order to reach a compromise between parties who have conflicting interests. Religious institutions, however, follow strictly codified beliefs and, as Buruma points out.

In the UK, the tactical exploitation of religion by politicians tends not to achieve positive results. Photos of Tony Blair launching the 2001 general election campaign that showed him standing against a stained glass window with hymn book in hand were widely criticised by the general public and press alike as tasteless and ‘cheesy’ (TES, 2008). Political parties in the US, in contrast, have found it much easier to exploit contentious issues such as abortion and homosexuality in order to gain extra votes. The Republican party, for example, incorporated an anti-abortion position in its programme in the 1970s and hardened its stance during the 1992 and 1996 presidential elections in a bid for support from the Christian Coalition (BBC, 1998). The danger here is that the deciding factor in election results becomes pressure on voters from their religious groups rather than a reflection of their individual political views. Additionally, a small number of contentious issues may become the focus of entire campaigns to the detriment of a well-rounded manifesto.
The founding fathers of the US, many of whom themselves had first-hand experience of religious persecution, were careful to incorporate a formal separation between church and state into the constitution of their new country. Although de Tocqueville’s comment portrays the contemporary situation in a very favourable light, it can be observed that this barrier has in fact had the opposite effect – many Americans actually want their leaders to have religious belief. A poll conducted in 2004 by the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life found that 72% agreed with the statement “The president should have strong religious beliefs.” (BBC, 2004). The key here is that the church does not confuse its role with that of the state. Preachers in US churches may strongly discourage their congregation not to have sex before marriage but there is no danger that this moral imperative will become law.
To conclude, there is certainly much evidence for the dangers of mixing politics with religion. Allowing religion to play a part in politics may open the door to contentious issues such as abortion and stem-cell research overshadowing many more valid matters, particularly at election time. It may also be exploited by politicians as an easy strategy to gain votes, as religions members of the population feel pressured to vote solely on the basis of their religious convictions. The practical realities of contemporary government, however, cannot be prescribed by sweeping assertions. Legislatively separating religion and state does not necessarily lead to a healthy democracy, as demonstrated by the political climate in the UK, US and China. Moreover, it is questionable whether it is even possible to keep religious beliefs, which inevitably inform an individual’s moral and ethical code, out of the world of politics entirely.