Ethics and Religion Talk: When it's OK for U.S. law and religious law to be the same

This week's Ethics and Religion Talk deals with a reader's question about whether it's ethical to pass laws based on a particular religion's rules.

GRAND RAPIDS, MI - In this week's Ethics and Religion Talk, Rabbi David Krishef and his panel of clergy deal with a reader's question about relationships between civil law and religious law.

Jason Ashley-Oswalt asks, "Is it ethical to pass laws in the United States that are based on a particular religion's rules/dogma? Some examples are laws that restrict marriage to men and women, forbid the sale of alcohol on Sundays or sodomy laws."
_______________________________________________________________________

Ethics and Religion Talk, by Rabbi David Krishef

It seems to me that much of our law is rooted in religion. Laws against theft, assault, fraud and murder can easily be traced back to Western sacred texts. The question really is what kind of religious law should be incorporated into a country's civil/criminal law code, and what kind of religious law should remain part of one's private behavior, and how to tell the difference between the two?

We turn to our panel for some answers:

  • The Rev. Fred Wooden, senior minister of Fountain Street Church in Grand Rapids
  • Sister Mary Timothy Prokes, a member of the Franciscan Sisters of the Eucharist in Lowell

Summary:

I'm not convinced by Sister Mary Timothy's distinction between natural law and law deriving from religious faith. I don't know that a prohibition against sodomy, for example, necessarily protects the dignity of human beings. What two people do in the privacy of their own home, as long as it is consensual, does not violate basic human nature.

In addition, I don't understand the Ten Commandments as a group to be derivable from logic. Some of them like theft, murder and adultery are. But the existence of God cannot be proved by logic alone, and thus the prohibition against recognizing more than one God or taking God's name in vain cannot be proven by logic. The Sabbath, when first introduced to the world (by the Jews, according to Thomas Cahill in "The Gifts of the Jews") was a radical, counter-cultural notion.

I much prefer Wooden's distinction between laws intended to identify and unite members of a particular faith, and laws that are common to many faiths. This, too, however, falls short when we consider difficult issues such as abortion. Is abortion like murder, and thus treated as a law with no particular religious outcome? Or is one's belief about the status of the unborn related to one's particular religious faith?

Do you have another answer to our reader's question?

Ethics and Religion Talk is compiled and written by David Krishef, rabbi at Congregation Ahavas Israel in Grand Rapids. Krishef takes questions from readers and shares them with a panel of clergy, then provides the responses in collaboration with MLive.com reporter Matt Vande Bunte. The views expressed are those of the panelists and do not necessarily represent the official perspectives of their congregations or denominations. Please submit questions from your own day-to-day encounters to EthicsAndReligionTalk@gmail.com.

If you purchase a product or register for an account through a link on our site, we may receive compensation. By using this site, you consent to our User Agreement and agree that your clicks, interactions, and personal information may be collected, recorded, and/or stored by us and social media and other third-party partners in accordance with our Privacy Policy.