Speech On Secularism

Speech On Secularism
It cannot be denied that in a multicultural and a multifarious religious state, secularism cannot be given any precise definition. It is a tool in the hands
of the State to use it judiciously for the promotion of inter–communal peace and harmony, and to ensure, depending on the peculiarities of each case,
that all the communities receive equal treatment.
India waited another twenty–seven years to enshrine secularism as one of the objectives of the nation. On 1 September 1976, through the 42nd
Amendment Act, passed during an internal emergency, the words "secular" and "socialist were formally added to the preamble of theConstitution. Then
proposed constitutional changes can be considered under the following heads: (i) Amendability of the Constitution; (ii) Fundamental Rights; (iii)
Directive Principles...show more content...
R. Gokhale, made a lengthy speech on its far–reachingconsequences. Yet about secularism and its introduction in the preamble of the Constitution, this
was 'all he had to say:
"(T)he objectives which we had always in view, namely, socialism and secularism, which we have tried to implement, will be more and more
implemented and will be more accurately and correctly reflected in a basic part of our Constitution, namely, the Preamble. Let anyone say that
"socialism" or "secularism" is incapable of definition (sic)."
Well, in order to accept that argument of the Law Minister , one may say that "democracy" in that sense is also incapable of definition because, it is
understood in different ways in different countries. But, there is consensus on the way we practice democracy. In the same way, the meanings of the
words "socialism" and "secularism" are well understood and embedded in the Constitution. Thus, all the argument seems futile but the main objective of
the amendment to the Preamble was a very important and fundamental feature of the Amendment
Get more content on HelpWriting.net

Secularism And Secularism
Secularism and religion are always debatable issues. Secularism is the separation between religion and other public fields. For some people, Islam is
not compatible with secularism and it has resistant to secularism (1). For Islamists, there are two distinction between religion and worldly affairs.
Religion rules enforce to worldly affairs (2). So religion cannot separate from other public fields because there is link between religion and other
public fields.
Secularists are apostates from Islam and unbeliever for Islamists. Moreover, secularists are spreading unbelief into Muslim society in Islamic countries
and they are the agents of Western powers who try to change culture of Muslim society. For secularists, secularism is necessary for modernization
...show more content...
Muhammad Imara divided secularists two category. First group is the extremists. They are minority and they reject religion entirely. The second group
is the moderates and they are majority. The moderates believe in God and they do not fight against religion, even some of them fulfil religious
obligations and duties. On the other hand, they support separation of religion and state (16). Imara did not refused secularization because secularization
imported from the West. The main reason is that Christians examine their conditions and reached secularization. According to Imara, Muslims should
examine Islamic religion conditions to reach their own secularization. Muslims need to use same way to create their own process (19). Islam and
secularism are two different ideologies for Imara. Public interests are more important than self–interests for Islam. Worldly affairs is not important for
Islam. On the other hand, secularism is pragmatic and it gives priority to self–interest so Islam and secularism are not compatible. Secular societies
support change and innovation but Islam also does that too for Imara. Muslims do not need secularization for inspiration

Secularism In Australia
Good morning, I'm Zodie Bolic, a Christian Research officer with the Christian Research Association, here to present my findings on growing trends of
the secularism in Australia and their effects on religion and related rituals in contemporary Australian society. During my time researching this topic, I
have discovered many insights through the use of surveys, interviews and online research. As a result, I have found that secularism is growing rapidly,
due to the effects of science, multiculturalism and commercialism.
Religion in Australia has continually evolved since the beginning of the country's existence (Reference). Originally, the traditional owners of Australia,
Indigenous Australians, believed in the Dreamtime, and the idea that the...show more content...
The most popular rituals of Easter and Christmas are probably the most changed. Originally, Easter celebrated the resurrection of Christ, with Good
Friday being a day of solemn reflection (Q1c). However, in today's society, Easter has become more about the chocolate– Easter eggs and Easter
bunnies have seemingly become common place in every household in contemporary Australia. Hot Cross Buns are big as well, with them being sold
in every grocery store as soon as Christmas ends. In today's society, Easter is celebrated by seemingly everyone, instead of just Christians, as it was in
the past. Like Easter, Christmas has also become more secular, with the majority of Australians celebrating Christmas, even if they are from another
faith group, or have no religion (Q1b). Social researcher Mark McCrindle writes that Christmas is unique in the Australian Calendar as it
'simultaneouslygathers familiesandthebroadercommunityin celebration' (Q1b). Often, religious citizens will celebrate Christmas by attending mass
and praying, with 1 in 5 Australians 'definitely' attended a service (Q1b). Although, secular celebrations of Christmas have become more popular
everywhere – these include Christmas trees and giving gifts. However, in more recent times, debate has occurred over whether Christmas should be
celebrated in public places, for example,

Secularism In Canada
Although Canada is a multiculturalist nation practicing secularism, there are still struggles on religious diversity in schools. Consequently, segregation
of students' base on their religious beliefs precedes typecasting, thus a division in social groups happens. Students when singled out from their peers
can have an adverse effect on their self–esteem, more importantly, when they have difficulties adapting in a new and diverse school community. More
likely when teachers ask students to say some insights or overview about their religion, some students may cringe from getting too much attention,
hence making them feel uncomfortable. For that reason, handling issues of diversity with sensitivity can make students feel safe and prone to learn

Karen Armstrong Religion
Karen Armstrong is a woman with many experiences within the branches of religion throughout the world. As mentioned in the interview, Armstrong
has written numerous books, visited many countries, and spent several years in a covenant as a nun. During the introduction, it is told that she has
"written a biography of Buddha and a short story of Islam." As the interview goes along she expresses how she is not selective towards any religion as
she recognizes the strengths and flaws throughout each one. While she does show her support towards many religions, she also shows her disapproval
of certain religions as well. Karen Armstrong's focus throughout the interview is her belief that religions are focused on compassion and ridding of
egotism. While Armstrong does make many valid points throughout her interview, there are also many aspects in which I disagree with her. I disagree
with her view on Secularism and her focus on...show more content...
The two positions she stated that I mainly disagreed with where her opinion on secularism and her large focus on egotism. Armstrong mentions in the
interview that "secularism has shown that it can be just as murderous, just as lethal as religion." I disagree with her view on this as I feel during her
interview she shows many negative feeling towards secularism. During the interview, Armstrong says that all the fundamentalist movements she's
studied have shown that the religions are convinced that "secular liberal society wants to wipe out religion, wants to wipe them out." In my opinion,
secularism is very beneficial for religions, especially in countries that allow citizens to practice their religion of choice. The separation of church from
state allows benefits to believers and non–believers as they are both protected overall. Armstrong mainly expresses the negatives she has seen but
doesn't talk about the benefits this separation

Religion vs. Secularism
Religion and Secular Public Policy
The relationship that never worked
In the American presidential election of 2004, faith–based policies and issues of religion were at the center of the controversy. With his religious
stances on abortion, gay marriage, and faith–based education, as well as his campaign's success in painting him as a man of religious conviction,
President George W. Bush commanded the pious, Christian population, which appeared in great numbers at the polls. Senator John Kerry's campaign,
alternatively, painted its candidate as an intellectual, academic politician. The senator appealed to the more secular and intellectual population that, in
the end, proved less populous than the pro–Bush voters. Though it is difficult to...show more content...
A pre–election trip across the Arkansas countryside is all it takes to see evidence of religion's coupling with politics. Removable letters outside a
church in Conway, AR displayed not the usual reminders of church services, but instead reminded voters that "a vote for Bush is a vote for God."4
Because most truly religious people hold allegiances to things higher than their countries, such as the Vatican or God Himself (the laws of God are
above the laws of Man), religion itself has a blinding effect for these people who also hold the right to vote. This church, clearly favoring the
President, employed guilt tripping as a tactic to bolster the Republican vote in the area. Religion tends to define the lines between issues: it tells its
followers what to believe. Such messages, whether literally displayed on church lawns or subliminally implanted in campaign advertisements and
speeches, do not call the legality of religion in politics into question (this discussion is not about the separation of church and state) but instead call into
question the ethics of casting a vote in the political arena based on a belief held in the religious arena. The problem with the relationship between
secular politics and religion is that it is entirely unnatural: the two institutions are both necessary and both omnipresent. Religion and public policy are
two

Secularism In Canada
On the international stage, Canada is often viewed as a secular and multicultural nation. Throughout the history of the country, immigrants have come
to Canada seeking a country which is accepting of diversity in ethnicity, language, religion, and culture. Especially since the 1970s, when
multiculturalism was introduced by former Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau, thus becoming an official policy of Canada, the diversity of the nation has
increased greatly, (Wang & Handy, 2014, p. 1561). However, while Canada has become a more multicultural country as a whole, it has not necessarily
become more religiously pluralistic. In fact, it has been argued that Canada remains and will continue to be an overwhelmingly Christian country and
many immigrants...show more content...
Though Canada is officially a multicultural country, it has not resulted in complete religious toleration or separation from Christian values and
preference of the state. Through observation of the ongoing, nationwide debate regarding sharia law, this can be seen. Since the early 2000s, a
common area of contention amongst Canadians has revolved around the debate of whether or not Sharia law should be included in Ontario family
tribunals. Sharia law is used to describe Islamic law as according to the Qur'an. Some Canadian Muslims believed that the addition of sharia law would
help better integrate Canadian Muslims into society. While previously, other forms of religious arbitration were permitted in Ontario, the attempt to
include Sharia law in the early 2000s played an vital role in the Ontario government's decision to ban all forms of religious arbitration, (Reitz, Banergee,
Phan, & Thompson, 2009, p. 700). Consequently, the Family Statue Law Amendment was introduced in 2006 by the Ontario government in order to
ensure that the was 'one law for all'. This legislation effectively banned all faith–based arbitration by instituting that all family law arbitration in the
province would be conducted the same as it would be for any other Canadian, (Berger, 2015, p. 52). Conversely, prior to this amendment, religious
arbitration was permitted in Ontario. However, when religious pluralism began

Speech On Secularism

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Featured

Featured (20)

Speech On Secularism