I’ve always been under the impression that a secular government is one that completely separates itself from any matter of faith, including both organised religions and atheism.
However recently, I’ve come into contact with someone who swears blind that
[ul]
[li]A secular government promotes atheism.[/li][li]An atheist government would be secular.[/li][li]A person can not be secular.[/li][/ul]
I’m pretty sure that the first two aren’t true and I’m not sure about the third. Is there anyone here who knows more about the subject that can enlighten me?
A secular government generally says, “We have nothing to say on the topic of religion. Worship, or not, as you see fit.”
I suppose you could posit a government that actively pushes atheism and proactively seeks to suppress religion. The Soviets tried that and only had marginal success (which is to say religion was suppressed to an extent but never gotten rid of…not even close).
Of course a person can be secular unless you want to say all the people on this list are somehow really religious.
Maybe I do not understand what the last point is really asserting.
Exactly. A secular government also cannot favour or forbid any religion. All religions, or the lack thereof, must be treated equally by it.
That’s not a secular government either; that’s an anti-religious government. A secular government exists balanced on the knife-edge of neutrality towards religion.
While our constitution forbids establishing a religion, it also protects the right to practice it. When the constitution is followed, I think it could called a secular government. Everybody is free to attempt to enlist government support of their view point, but the courts should impartially strike it down. The government should protect victimless behaviors, but not endorse them.
Pffft. All governments are secular – even theocracies. “Secular” means “temporal,” “worldly,” or “not specifically spiritual.” Unless they’re completely falling down on the job, all governments concern themselves with secular things most – if not all – of the time. Organizations that devote more of their attention to spiritual matters can scarcely be called governments, even if they hold secular power.
However, “secular government” or secular statehas a specific meaning relative to a religious government, which typically has an established state religion. A nominally secular state is officially neutral in terms of religion, although religious based holidays (for one example) may be officially recognized.
What the person mentioned in the OP is talking about is state atheism, which is not the same as secularism.