Religion does indeed have a place in politics

Thank you for taking the argument, lets have some fun. If you want my sources, feel free to ask. First we need to consider what part religion has played in the creation of our nation. I accept the fact that mot of the founding fathers were NOT Christian. Thomas Jefferson himself wrote a bible that didn't even consider Jesus as the savior. What needs to be considered is the fact that most states had established religions that did have an affect on the drafting of the Articles of Confederation and ultimately the Constitution itself. Americans have grown up reciting the document that outlines their right however this document was ratified by states with religious ideals in mind. It is hard to deny the fact that religion has a place in America's history. Furthermore the US has been raised on the ideals that the religions have set. For example, the puritans (Christians altogether) have the idea set in their minds that they have to propagate their religion and spread it to the corners of the earth. This idea of spreading our brand of morality can be seen in multiple foreign relations episodes. Here are a few just for an example; manifest destiny, forming of "The League of Nations" after World War I, Operation Iraqi Freedom, Operation Enduring Freedom, the Cold War, and so on. In addition the ideals of the original settlers still have an impact in popular politics (abortion, legal homosexual partnerships) even today. Important questions are often answered with religious biases and these biases are nearly impossible to ignore. A major question that must be asked is this; "What role should religion have in politics?" The first conclusion that people jump to is that it should have none at all. People should not vote based on religion nor should religious groups be allowed to petition government officials in order to promote religious based legislation. There has been a general disgust with the LDS churches in Utah for spending money on lobbying in California against gay marriage. Lets examine the two statements. First is the statement that individuals should not vote based on their religion. What are the most influential things in a person's life? Their parents? Their friends? Teachers? Many people who hold religious beliefs would say that their church or their pastor has been their influence. When a person is raised on a certain morality, should the vehicle of learning said morality matter? I don't believe so. Religious people have a morality in place due to their religion and this morality will show in all their decisions. Decisions including who or what to vote for. Even politicians who truly have religious beliefs are subject to the morality that is so imprinted in their minds. Maybe the government should just ignore religious people. Maybe if you hold office in a church you should not be considered within the government. This seems to be the only answer to getting religion out of politics 100%. However if you support this idea you need to consider the 1960's. Two of the most influential African Americans, Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. and Malcolm X were religious leaders. What would have happened if the government just ignored them? The influence these religious men had on American society was pivotal to forming the nation we have today. We can not tell people to not vote based on their morality nor would the Constitution allow a ban on voting based on religion. The individual person's right to believe whatever they want will always affect their voting, especially for religious people. Individuals are impossible to remove from the democratic system so let's inspect the religious groups or organizations that partake in politics. I believe that these groups are also impossible to avoid. Consider this; the NAACP is lobbying to get a bill passed. No big deal, right? What happens when I substitute the group in the statement? The LDS Church is lobbying. Why does this offend people? Is it because the LDS is pushing their religion on others? Maybe we don't allow the LDS to lobby. What then? Then the people who care about the issue in the first place will form another group. This time the group will be something else like "Concerned citizens for banning gay marriage". The CCBGM is still a group lobbying for the same ideals due to the religious affiliation of the people in the organization, the only difference is the name. At this point we may disagree with what the CCBGM is lobbying against and we may know why they lobby against it but we can not discriminate against them because of how they got their morality. If the NAACP has a right to "push their beliefs" on others, why shouldn't the LDS Church?Since religion is such a major part in the lives of so many Americans I believe that it is morally permissible for religion to have a small influence in politics. For the reasons stated above I believe that it is impossible to dismiss religion from politics. I support a secular government but as long as we give the individual the right to choose their religion, we will have a government influenced by religion.