The present society appears to have an identity predicament with the Church, because there is a tremendous amount of self-help propaganda in this society; therefore they simply do not care about a commitment with the Church, but can read about how to be better people in the comfort and safety of their own homes. This concept is safe and they do not open themselves up for disappointment or tedious Church tasks. Billings notes, “Participation in Church life is not seen as crucial for the practice of Christianity, it is the practice of Christianity that British people think important.” (Billings, 2004, p. 104) The British thinking has become a
Examine two critiques of the relationship between religion and morality. It has long been common thought that there is a distinct link between Religion and the fundamental moral laws upon which we base our lives upon. These heteronomous moral codes were used as the basic principles of everyday life. From this viewpoint then, it is hard to imagine a world without the concept of religion, as sure anarchy and suffering would ensure across the Globe. However, if this link between religion and morality is criticised, then there are sufficient grounds for secularist and atheistic ways of life.
Religion for a functionalist would be viewed as more of a reinforcement for the values that society holds. One thing almost all religions have in common is the lesson of being “good”, to treat others how you would want to be treated. It also gives people something to turn to when they feel lost, or something to blame when life is not going the way the would like. Religion holds people together in many ways, offering stability to society. Religion does, however hold both manifest and latent functions.
On those premise it is asserted that religion play an important part in nurturing the virtue needed for a free society. Matthew Spaulding’s Meaning of religion and Liberty, asserts this about religion and morality: “They aid good government by teaching men their moral obligations and creating the condition for decent politics” (p313.2008). While not everyone morality depends on religion, I do believe and support argument that religion is necessary to morality. The religious principles speak to morality and morality aid virtue. Outside of the realm of government if we look at our society today many of our moral have changed.
One difference between the Democrat and the Republican Party is their views on family values. Family values within nations such as America normally have a religious basis, meaning personal choices are made based on ethical lessons taught within religious scripture, typically in western countries, the religion is Christianity. Family values is the concept of basing family rules or unofficial laws within families based on the cultural norm, - the family will normally impose house rules as to what is socially acceptable, based on the same teachings of their upbringing or religious belief. However, in a more liberal society, the term 'family value' has become more of a vague term, often seen as dated for a number of reasons,- such as Christianity no longer being taught within schools, or women's rights being taught more within schools. Because of this, the modern definition of 'family planning' has lead to some controversy amongst politicians within America.
Many theories, such as the Marxist theories, see religion as maintaining the status quo and preventing social change. Religions have also often been supporters of traditional conservative values, especially in relation to the family and sexuality, for example. However, many sociologists argue that religion can also be a powerful force for social change. This essay will look at how religion can prevent social change and how it can act as a force for social change. Sociologists have argued that religion can be a force for social change.
They emphasise the conflict and inequality and they argue that some individuals and groups may benefit more from religion at the expense of others. Using material from Item A and elsewhere, assess the functionalist view that religion benefits society as a whole and its individual members. (18 marks) Functionalists believe that society is a human body, all working together to achieve one goal of togetherness and consensus. Religion is supposed to benefit everyone as a whole and the individual members as well as it is one of the many functions that help run the society. Many sociologists have put forward arguments as to why this is true.
The view that religion is a conservative force stems from theories from Functionalists, Marxists and Feminists. Each see religion as keeping society in its current form, despite the theories coming to the same conclusion the reasons differ. For Durkheim religion acts as a vital organ in society and keeps society alive by maintaining social solidarity. Functionalists believe that religion creates a shared value consensus and acts as a social glue helping unite individuals as well as helping them cope with stress. In comparison to this view Marxists see society as promoting the interests of the ruling class and legitimating suffering and therefore preventing social change.
2. In a short but consistent essay explain the role of religion in today’s world. Give consistent reasons for your explanation. In today’s world religion seems to have a different place than in times before. Throughout history religion is what governed countries, brought people together, and gave morals and rules for everyday life.
The quality of individuality so important in western values, best expressed in classical liberals and even more so in radical liberals, can also be expressed in the religious traditions of Islam and Protestant Christianity. Both religious traditions place an individual’s personal relationship with the creator as the foundations of the faith. This individuality is extremely important in many postmodern political cultures. Tory corporatists however are the dominate cultural group for both Protestants and Muslims. Peace, however, as a tradition can be a quality more difficult to find.