"Separation of Church and State" is always the best form of government

Unfortunately, history is on your side for this particular topic, as you are correct in that there are more instances of unjust theocratic rule than the opposite. However, I can still muster a few examples to prove that a by-the-book (or rather by the religious book) government can have its upsides. The most unorthodox, yet most effective implementation of this is demonstrated by several Aboriginal/indigenous tribes. (1) By definition, a theocracy is, "a form of government in which God or a deity is recognized as the supreme civil ruler, the God's or deity's laws being interpreted by the ecclesiastical authorities", or, "a system of government by priests claiming a divine commission." Using this template, one can look no further than the many First Nations people of Canada to see how a governance with divine-induction can properly function. Before the arrival of the Europeans, the Aboriginal people lived in accordance with their animistic religious traditions. (2) "They also owned the lands and resources within their territories, and so had property rights, subject to responsibilities placed on them by the Creator to care for the land and share it with the plants and animals who also lived there." (3) Shamans, spiritual authorities of healing, prophecy, and cultural tradition, also played a significant role in their society. The First Nations, who lived in accordance with religion, were a people whom thrived for millennia until the colonials arrived on the scene. Another more contemporary example on the other side of the world was in Vietnam. During the devastating times of the country's war, many members of the Sanghas (Buddhist communities) took initiative, using their sacred teachings. (4) There were instances of nuns rescuing victims from floods, organizing schools and teachers, and setting up hospitals for elders who had lost their homes due to the ensuing conflict. While not technically an illustration of a strict theocracy, this is an example of a religious institution performing the tasks of government. In this and many other cases, it had positive repercussions. Your main argument against my position is dogma, and how the integration of religion into governmental affairs will only pervade this. However, as the current political climate of several nations shows, this is not necessarily the sole cause of religion. Dogma can exist independently of any faith-based factors. After all, it isn't the interference of religion into the current U.S. administration that has resulted in a drastic far-right movement. When it comes down to it, the intertwining of church and state has been a permanent fixture of human civilization. Even in seemingly secular countries like the United States, this status quo has not yet been abandoned (case in point, the President being sworn in on a Bible). While we should acknowledge and implement the concept of a "wall of separation" as Jefferson proposed long ago, we must also acknowledge that this is not the ultimate solution for every government due to context, tradition, and history. Thank you for a most enjoyable and stimulating debate! SOURCES: 1. http://www.dictionary.com... 2. http://www.fngovernance.org... 3. http://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca... 4. http://www.mindfulnessbell.org...