There are some things that sometimes make the implementation of democracy in a country can not be run with good. Like I often to see, not infrequently, some citizens abusing the interests of democracy for their own interests, such as being too free and do not obey the rules because they do not run a democracy well and do not pay attention to the limits in democracy. Then, in this era there arose a notion which then supports the operations of a democracy to be very constrained. Fundamentalism that was originally at designated for religious circles is then developed into an understanding that opposes the existence of many religions in the world. This can be very influential on democracy in a country.
Mohanad EL-Tantawy 900115054 CREL 2603-02 Dr/ Ananya Chacravarti Response Paper #1 Religion has been dependably a questionable theme that has been examined by such a variety of individuals all through the history. They were such a large number of hypotheses about religions proposed and examined, and some of these speculations are for Karl Marx, Emile Durkheim and Max Weber. The impact of religion on society and how the religions have a control over individuals' life are simply a couple of reasons that got their consideration and investment. These three had solid speculations and suppositions about religions and what they speak to. These speculations have numerous things in like manner in a few parts, then again, we can discover a ton of contrasts
At the start of his article, Zapf starts by discussing social work and the role that spirituality and religion have has in the profession. Spoiler alert, it is practically a nonexistent relationship between those two topics and social work or other mainly government ran helping professions. He goes on to explain the western view of spirituality and how that is actually hurting professions such as social work. In the efforts to respect people’s right of the separation of church and state, spirituality was affected as well. A huge misconception of spirituality is that it is the same thing as religion, when in fact it is something separate.
With the decreasing influence of Christianity in Western world and the proliferation of other religions such as Islam and Hinduism in the West, opposition to the traditional Christian view and those who hold to it will continue to grow. In contemporary society, religious pluralism presents a range of complex challenges to religious groups and communities. In a plural situation, they are faced with the need to compete for social and communal support, such as members, financial contributions, legitimacy, and political influence. Religious groups have to decide on the ways in which they want to approach and relate to members of other groups—whether they opt for dialogue, mission, confrontation or indifference. They have to find ways of addressing internal pluralism, democratic pressures, and individualism.
The oppressing government of Gilead combines their message of power with that of god. This is a tactic that is very effective upon controlling communities. Most people don’t like being controlled by their government. Yet when those same people are told they are being controlled for the greater good of society, their thoughts and opinions are somehow changed. When this is all backed by the illusion of god people seem to follow blindly.
That is why we have our freedom of speech which protects us people from having the government limit what we say. It allows us to say our opinions on things. Another way it protects our freedom is from letting the government making us the people follow a certain religion. The first amendment allows to practice religion how we want. Another way civil liberties protects us is through are eight amendment that makes sure the government does give us cruel and unusual punishment.
Religion has played a fundamental role in determining not only social structures but also individual behavioural patterns throughout much of the known world. Pagan nations, before the advent of the Abrahamic religions, viewed their gods as primal beings, possessive of many human traits, such as cunning, wiliness, and, as such, they tended to act in a manner that reflected this, offering up physical gifts to the gods, rather than requesting help through abstract rituals. However, the Abrahamic religions changed much of this, with the concept of god changing to being a more spiritual deity; an abstract entity, rather than a physical being. In Christianity, the concept of God has changed over time, branching out, and allowing for different interpretations,
Comparison of Weber and Durkheim in the area of Religion by Margaret Stowe A comparison of the views of Max Weber and Emil Durkheim in the area of religion and its role in shaping social behaviour and history shows that the two thinkers have a different method, language, and resulting theory. It is made more interesting by looking at the upbringing and religious orientation of each thinker, Weber being the Protestant Christian and Durkheim the agnostic. A few main themes of difference between the theories of the two thinkers are evident. Weber’s focus was on the individual and their relationship with their god, Durkheim focusing on the effects of religion as a group activity. Weber focused on the economic effects, Durkheim, the moral.
It is argued that having a system of belief is more important than whether or not that system is true. That being said, regardless of whether a belief or system is true or false, one should still possess the right to evaluate it so. This however raises a possible division of belief (non unification) and as a result may corrupt society as it lacks unity. However such a "unified" society is not unified as such a unification is not possible with the nature of human beings. In fact the idea itself imposes certain ideologies that will not be collectively agreed upon by everyone, and as a result lacks unity, in fact trying to argue otherwise already illustrates the lack of unity as there is a conflict of ideas.
Why? A myth does contain small portion of truth, but this only affects people who accepts the myth. The historians, religion, and even politics used myth. They say that myth has its own truth, and hope that certain people can have faith on , although it has a different kind of truth than what the science offers to