Introduction Right and wrong are concepts considered to emanate from one’s behavior. Both notions are debatable since what is accepted in a given setup can be viewed as wrong in a different setting. People are considered to be right when they follow various set rules and regulations in a given entity or environment in which they live. On the other hand, wrong is any activity that is considered to be against the laws, morality, culture, and ethics that are held by a given society. It also entails conducts that are against justice and equity. This essay provides insight into the differences that exist between rights and wrong in regards to justice based on the three readings from the book ‘A World of Ideas’. Stephen L. Carter’s Separation of the Church and State According to Carter’s article on the Separation of the Church and State, much of his ideas are drawn from the understandings of the separationists concerning religion and secular lives. These people hold the idea that in any given American society, some significant restraints should be subjected to justice for religious purposes (Carter 293). The implementation of such ideas in the justice system is considered wrong. For instance, when a policy is either supported or opposed by the politicians, a closer examination to investigate whether it is derived from a religious or secular background is done. For such reasons, it is wrong for the public to influence the policy negatively by appealing to either the religious or secular reasons (Carter 293). In a setup whereby the separationists dominate the locality, the implementation of public policy should be done in such a way that it conforms to the desire of everybody. This state of affairs can be accomplished by considering the religious, pluralistic, and separationist points of view among others. Owen reveals that people, groups, and organizations perceive right and wrong differently (4). In this case, it can be wrong for one group of society (deemed as the majority) to justify their rightness based on the plausibility of their numbers (Owen 4). Another justification to show that the separation of the church from state is wrong is seen where most religious beliefs are used exclusively in the private sectors. In such situations, the public is barred from using such beliefs (Bunge 18). This act should be abandoned owing to the important roles the churches play in shaping the public domain in the right direction. For example, in his article ‘Separation of Church and State’, Carter confessed that he met a Christian minister who had a drug rehabilitation program (294). He elaborated on the benefits of religion in rehabilitating drug users (Bunge 18). Although such programs were not supported by the state, their results were far above the expectations of the agencies that were defeated in the first place (Carter 293). The failure of the government to support the religious organization through funding is wrong. To correct such issues, a clear understanding of the metaphorical statement of the separation of the church and state should be put in place. Such an idea of separation should rather be codified based on morality as a requirement for the citizens irrespec