Alexis De Tocqueville: Democracy In America

Utopia by Thomas More and The Sleeper Awakes by H. G. Wells express unidealistic social features that seem ineffective towards worthy governance. When a social system lacks an unorderly structure, chaos is formed. The ideal social system should include religious tolerance, gender equality, social structure, and blah blah blah. These will help lead to a successful system, by allowing equal opportunities for all citizens to prosper in one’s nation. An important factor for a successful social system is the establishment of religious tolerance.

God does not create everything to be perfect. If we would be perfect without sins, flaws, and problems then there would be no God, then we would be totally equal as God, and there would be no one higher and lower than us. There would be sinners, atheist, offenders in His own creation because simply He gave us free will. God allows evil to exist because of the free will. Humans is given their God-given freedom which is the free will, it is the power to make a decision of one individual instead of taking or having God to decide what to do.

The Puritan Dilemma In the earlier American years, there was the existences of a great deal of politically and religious turmoil in England. There was the desire of escaping and going to places where they are free to congregate by their philosophies in which they have faith. John Winthrop saw America as a country in which they could not have any interference from the government. Winthrop sees America as a paradise and a place for religious freedom. Winthrop believes that the church in England is corrupt and requires purification to become more pleasant to God.

3rd Quote that supports the Topic Sentence: “The authority of government, even such as I am willing to submit to- for I will cheerfully obey those who know and can do better than I, and in many things even those who neither know nor can do so well- is still an impure one: to be strictly just, it must have the sanction and consent of the governed. It can have no pure right over my person and property but what I concede to it.” (13) EXPLANATION of 3rd Quote: Thoreau will listen to the government as long as it is just to everyone. It cannot have any right over his body and property, but what he surrenders to it. INTRO TO Research That Supports/Helps Explain 3rd Quote:___________________________________ RESEARCH QUOTE: ______________________________________________________________________( ) EXPLANATION OF RESEARCH

I feel both groups make good arguments. Coming from a church going family I do feel that religion is very important but on the flip side I am also an advocate for freedom of all kinds. This makes it very hard for me to make a decision. My background tells me that if Christianity was made the prominent religion it wouldn’t matter, but my conscious tells me that it is not right and goes against what our country was founded on. In conclusion separation of church and state is a significant matter in our country.

In order to determine whose idea of government is to be agreed upon, the proper way is to take into consideration why there exist two completely different ideologies of government where both forms of government believe are born generally with good nature. Like stated above, Locke believes people are fitted with understanding ( Locke two treatises ex. 77) and are under the “ law of nature’ where no one would want to hurt anyone ( Locke two treatises ex.6) and similarly, Godwin believes that men are born naturally “benevolent to their fellows’. However, both of them agreed that there will be an irrational and a greedy side of humans. The difference in their ideologies is their perspective on human nature against time.

“ In Calvin’s mind, no human law could stand on it’s own without God, who has created the world and government in the beginning. According to Calvin, the laws of the state should be positive laws that are grounded in God's law as revealed in nature and written in God’s Word. “Calvin’s views regarding government stemmed from his belief in the necessity of civil authority because of the depravity of man, his belief in providence, and his uncompromising certainty that God is sovereign over all things, including governments.” In “Prefatory

He says that it is both intensive and extensive in its reach and implications. Nevertheless, Aquinas’s use of the Aristotelian axiom, which says, “human beings are naturally political animals.” Aquinas gives logical proofs that prove that this is the case. Therefore the morality of the authority of the state’s government and law is controlled by the church, but when law and government are meant to comply not challenge one another. Aquinas did not agree with Augustine in the fact that “Augustine thought that government forms were not important since they were all temporary.” However Aquinas did see the government as helpful working with the common good to benefit all. Aquinas was able to study the way Augustine thought and develop how he could make his own determinations about what he truly believed in.

Eusebius argues that because God is divine and perfect and holly, and because He (God) created humans in His own image, humans ought to emulate God and His order (WH: 358, 11). Consequently, monarchy and its one ruler system trumps all other government systems, simply due to the fact that monarchy reflects God’s natural structure. Eusebius applauded Constantine and his monarchy because, “he [Constantine] directs his gaze above, and frames his earthly government

This has led to the idea of absolutism being disputed throughout history, with some favoring this method of government, while others preferred constitutional monarchy. The passion people feel regarding absolute monarchies was strengthened beyond their function due to their religious significance. Due to the fact that monarchs were considered to be chosen by God, an absolute monarch's power was considered to be an extension of God's power. Despite this religious significance, absolute monarchies were more dangerous than they were helpful, as, despite the fact that they prevented opposing factions of the government from cancelling each other out, they also allowed one ruler to make unquestioned and unrestrained decisions regarding anything they