Major Religions Essay Example for Free

Major Religions Essay Religions are among the most influential forces in history, if not the most influential at all. Most historical events that has shaped or helped shaped the world as it is today were founded along religious backgrounds and teachings. From Constantine to the fall of the Roman Empire, from European conquest to the Crusades, and from the condemnation of heretics to religious terrorism, these are events with religious influences that took part in the course of history. Even today, religion plays an important role in people’s actions that affect the society and even influences politics. Religion is so influential in fact that even when science has slowly displaced religious beliefs, it has remained a powerful force in dictating public opinion, compelling political leaders to act according to their standards. Religion’s Role in Society Religion is an important topic in every human civilization. The culture, tradition and beliefs of people are based on religion. The importance of religion in every human civilization, and indeed of the society, could not have been stated more precisely in Charles Taylor’s foreword to Marcel Gauchet’s book entitled The Disenchantment of the World: A Political History of Religion from which he used Durkheim’s ideas. He explained that for Durkheim, religion was the very basis of society—â€Å"a pattern of practices that gives a certain shape to our social imaginary† (as cited in Taylor 1997, x). Gauchet, on the other hand, explained the expansion of religion as an accompanying goal of expanding the state. He wrote: â€Å"wars of expansion could no doubt be justifiably considered one of the greatest spiritual and intellectual forces to have ever operated in history† (Gauchet 1997, 36). This he reasoned by stating that â€Å"religious upheaval is inscribed in the State’s action, contained within its necessities as dictated by the political division. Broadening the State’s influence subjectivizes supernatural forces, which can only further broaden its practical scope for dominion by making it an intermediary for an instituting will that it administers. We see how the dialectic between the visible forces and its invisible guarantor, between the actual and presumed power, slowly draws the religious into history† (1997, 40). Significant Historical Events Influenced by Religion There are quite a number of events influenced by religion that has changed the course of history, but perhaps none as prominent as the establishment of Christianity. Beginning with a small sect of Jewish tradition whose members were persecuted for their beliefs, Christianity has emerged to be the most popular religion around the world today, with adherents comprising up to a third of the world’s population. Christians, during the Roman Empire, were persecuted and blamed whenever it was found convenient to blame them for some problems of the Empire. It was not until Emperor Constantine had converted to Christianity did the religion secure its future. Apparently, Constantine held that his victory from a battle against a rival was due to his vision to fight under the Christian standard—the cross. Christianity continued to be influential in empires succeeding the decline of the Roman Empire. The Byzantine Empire, as a continuation of the Roman Empire, rose through a deep religious faith along the majestic pattern of the Roman State and Hellenism. With Theodosius as emperor, pagan worships and heresies were declared illegal thereby promoting Christianity to all territories of the Empire. Some held that the Byzantine Empire had allowed for the widespread adoption of Christianity to Europe be defending the West from pagan invaders from the East. The Empire also brought a close link between the state and the church in that while the emperor takes the lead, the church set a high standard in its relation to secular powers. â€Å"In the threat of excommunication the western church discovers a powerful weapon for dealing with wayward rulers† (HistoryWorld). By the end of the fifth century AD, kings and popes would wield power from the Italian peninsula in the West while emperors would still rule in the East. Christianity is such an important feature of the Empire that when Jerusalem fell into the hands, first of Persia then of the Muslims, it became an urgent matter of State. As the Byzantine Empire was strengthened by the Christian faith, it faced its greatest threat with another rising religion. Islam, with its expansionist doctrine, had conquered the Persian Empire and has severely crippled the Byzantine Empire that before the launching of the First Crusade Byzantium had become the boundary between the Christian West and the Muslim East. The influence of religion as a powerful force in history is perhaps best exemplified in the Crusades. The fact that the wars the Crusades waged into became a contest between the two most influential religions today proves this point. The size and scale of the Crusades could be attributed to the effectiveness of Pope Urban II call for military support against the infidels who threatened their Christian brothers in the East, promising the immediate remission of sins to all those who die for the cause and stating that â€Å"God wills it. † While the Crusades were ordained by the church, the destruction of its knights, particularly that of the Knights Templar, could be attributed to the interplay between the church and the state, with the church taking on a more passive role. It could be argued that while it was under the Pope (Clement V) who found the Templars as heretics, effectively disbanding them and persecuted them, the fact that Philip IV could not have done it himself without pressuring the church proves that the church extends its influence on public opinion. The state relied on the churchs approval and pressured it to promote its will when necessary to make it seem that the states actions have the blessing of the church. After all, a king of any Christian domain would not be king until ordained by the church. Hence, it is only natural for the king to seek the approval of the church or to make it seem they have its approval for their rule to be acceptable. The interplay between the state and the church could also be seen in the churchs influence in the scientific community. This is best exemplified in discoveries and theories that contradicts Biblical claims. The Copernican system, for example, was condemned because it contradicts the claim of man being the center of Gods creation that Galileo was forced to withdraw his findings even when he had his proof that the earth revolves around the sun. Darwins theory of evolution was also met with hostilities because of its claims against religious beliefs that God created the world in six days. While science has slowly displaced religious claims, religion remains to be influential. Up until this day, there are anti-evolution movements that promotes the creation of man and the world by an intelligent being. Contemporary Religion Influences Frank Lambert (2008, 2), in his book, Religion in American Politics, explained that â€Å"as religion shapes individual character and moral development, it thereby influences public affairs, albeit in an indirect way. † As an example, he stated that â€Å"through moral instruction, religion informs the values, priorities, and decisions of citizens and officeholders as they enter the voting booth and the statehouse† (2008, 2). Religious groups, Lambert continued to explain, also become more directly involved in the political process. â€Å"They lobby Congress to enact or oppose specific legislation, participate in electoral politics on behalf of candidates who support their agendas, and offer the full range of their institutional resources to sympathetic political parties† (Lambert 2008, 2). It is important to note that such connection between the state and religion is not limited to America. Religions around the world continue to exert its influence in political affairs by stirring their adherents and promoting their stands into public opinion. This is especially seen in Christian countries. While religious groups continue to play an important role in political affairs, extremist factions of religious origins assert their influence in a more violent manner. Religious terrorism is perhaps the most dangerous, complex and persistent problem the world has faced. Juergensmeyer held that perpetrators in religious terrorism place â€Å"religious images of divine struggle—cosmic war—in the service of worldly political battle† (as cited in Gary 2001). Religious terrorism is a tactic in political strategy while at the same time evoking a much larger spiritual confrontation. Muslim terrorist, for example, continue to call on the divine doctrine of jihad in the destruction of infidels. Much as it has united the Muslims during the Muslim conquests, it continues to have an appeal for extremists into using violence in promoting their ideals. Note that religious terrorism does not encompass solely on Islam. Throughout the world, violence committed in the name of religion occurs. Conclusion Time and again, we see that the influence of religion in worldly affairs can dictate much of what happens in the course of history. Major battles have indeed been waged in the name of religion in the past. We see this through the Crusades, the Muslim conquests, and the religious wars in the sixteenth century. Stately affairs must have the approval of the church, or every action of the state must seem to have its approval. Even the scientific community is influenced by religion, especially with scientific theories and discoveries contradicting religious claims. Today, religion still has a major influence in political affairs, providing moral instructions to their adherents whose approval political parties must win and pressuring legislation in favor of their moral doctrines. In the guise of spiritual confrontation, religion is also exerting its influence through violent means. Despite the technologies and philosophies that has come in modern age, religion continues to be a powerful influence in dictating the course of history. References Gary, Jay. 2001. Unmasking religious terrorism. http://jaygary. com/terrorism. shtml Gauchet, Marcel. 1997. The Disenchantment of the World: A Political History of Religion. Ed. Oscar Burge. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. HistoryWorld. History of the Byzantine Empire. http://www. historyworld. net/wrldhis/PlainTextHistories. asp? historyid=ac59 Lambert, Frank. 2008. Religion in American Politics: A Short History. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Taylor, Charles. 1997. Foreword to The Disenchantment of the World: A Political History of Religion by Marcel Gauchet. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Structure of American and California Governments :: essays research papers

The United States of America is one of the most powerful nation-states in the world today. The framers of the American Constitution spent a great deal of time and effort into making sure this power wasn’t too centralized in one aspect of the government. They created three branches of government to help maintain a checks and balance system. In this paper I will discuss these three branches, the legislative, the executive, and the judicial, for both the state and federal level. The legislative branch of America helps create the laws or legislation. Ideally, it works to create a society that is safe for all members. The State of California like the federal government has a bicameral legislature, in other words, composed of two chambers. The upper chamber is called the senate, while the lower is called the assembly. A unique process for the state level is that it allows for the initiative. This process circumvents the state congress and can create laws without their aide. In the state of California, every ten years, following a US census, which collects demographic information, state legislators draw redistricting plans for itself, California seats in the US House of Representatives, and the State Board of Equalization. There have been attempts to create a â€Å"non-partisan† redistricting commission, but this has been turned down by voters numerous times. Proposition 14, 39, 118, and 119 were all turned down by voters to create a non-partisan district ing commission. Every decade a large portion of the state congress’s energy is spent on redistricting. In fact, two of the last four censuses, Supreme Court has had to step in to break a deadlock. In 1970, Ronald Reagan, a Republican, vetoed all together the Democratic redistricting plan. The Supreme Court had to step in and created its own plans for California to follow. Then in 1981, Democrats proposed redistricting as well as congressional delegation redistricting. The Republicans stopped this by adding referendums to the state ballot. Because it was too close to elections though, Supreme Court overturned these referendums in 1982. In 1984, they officially passed the new redistricting plan which was very similar to the original plans. In 1990, Governor Pete Wilson, a Republican, could not agree with a predominantly Democratic state legislature. The United States Supreme Court again had to step in and make independent plans. They created a system that moved two assembly districts into each senate district, otherwise known as a â€Å"nested† system.

Death is Definitely Not Justified With Physician-Assisted Suicide Essay

Doctors dedicate their blood, sweat and tears to achieve the ultimate goal of their profession – to preserve the health and well-being of their patients. Doctors positively intervene with life processes in order to maintain and preserve the lives of many people. However, when doctors negatively intervene with a natural process like death, problems can arise because they are caught in a dilemma of whether to forego life and help end the suffering or to preserve it and torment the patients suffering with terminal illnesses. This is why, physician-assisted suicide is not just perceived solely as a medical problem because it also involves legal, ethical, social, personal, and financial considerations. Physician-assisted suicide remained as one of the most controversial types of euthanasia because it violates the Hippocratic Oath. Physician-assisted suicide literally means that the physician provides the medication for suicide to a competent patient who is capable of carrying it out. It is not just morally reprehensible for a physician, or any medical practitioner, to assist the patient to conduct this procedure because it negates their responsibility to preserve life, physician-assisted suicide also devalues the life of the patient as their fate is put entirely in the hands of a human being. Indeed, there exists an unprecedented debate over physician-assisted suicide (also called euthanasia) because involves medical professionals, as well as the patients and their families. The arguments range from determining the dignity of the patients, the quality of their lives, their mental state, and sometimes their usefulness to society. For example, the patient who is in a vegetative state is considered dead by some but not by others, and this case presents substantial moral and ethical problems. The Oxford Dictionary of English (2005) defines euthanasia as â€Å"the painless killing of a patient suffering from an incurable and painful disease or in an irreversible coma†. However, euthanasia means much more than a â€Å"painless death†, or the means of procuring it, or the action of inducing it. The definition specifies only the manner of death, and if this were all that was needed to achieve it — a murderer, who is careful to drug his victim to death, could claim that he or she did an act of euthanasia. We find this ridiculous because we take it for granted that euthanasia is â€Å"death† itself, not just the manner of death. How can someone administer a â€Å"medical procedure† to the one who dies in the end? The spate of recent public and philosophical controversy has been over voluntary active euthanasia (VAE), especially physician-assisted suicide. Supporters of VAE argue that there are cases in which relief from suffering supersedes all other consequences and that respect for autonomy obligates society to respect the decisions of those who elect euthanasia. If competent patients have a legal and moral right to refuse treatment that brings about their deaths, there is a similar right to enlist the assistance of physicians or others to help patients cause their deaths by an active means. Usually, supporters of VAE primarily look to circumstances in which (1) a condition has become overwhelmingly burdensome for a patient, (2) pain management for the patient is inadequate, and (3) only a physician seems capable of bringing relief (Dworkin, Frey & Bok, 1998). A much publicized case of physician-assisted suicide came into the headlines when it shocked people with the bizarre activities of Dr. Jack Kevorkian in early 1990s (or â€Å"Dr Death† as the media have dubbed him) in the USA. Dr. Kevorkian, a retired pathologist, assisted over forty people to commit suicide in recent years in circumstances, which were somewhat beyond normal from regular medical practice. These people travelled to Kevorkian from all over the USA to seek his assistance in suicide. Kevorkian assisted their death by ending their suffering. He even attached his patients at the back of a dilapidated Volkswagen van, where a â€Å"suicide machine† can be found. This machine automatically injects patients with lethal doses of drugs, as patients themselves activate it. Despite being prosecuted for assisted suicide on several occasions, Kevorkian escaped conviction and continued his personal campaign for relaxation of the law in his peculiar way. It was only when he moved from assistance in suicide to euthanasia that he was finally convicted. He filmed himself administering a lethal injection, and the film helped secure his conviction for murder (Keown 2002, p. 31). Of course, his actions provoked discussion of the thin line separating passive euthanasia, which is legal in this country, and active euthanasia. Opponents of Kevorkian’s actions state that he is practicing physician-assisted suicide, which is illegal. Proponents of Kevorkian’s actions argue that the patient’s right to control his or her medical treatment is sufficient justification for assisted suicide. Unfortunately, most Americans seem to agree with physician-assisted suicide. A nationwide survey by the Gallup poll in 2004 showed that 69% of Americans believed that physicians should be allowed to help terminally ill patients in severe pain commit suicide. These results were consistent with those of Gallup polls over the past two years, where â€Å"Americans have shown slightly higher levels of support for doctors ending patients’ lives by painless means than for assisting patients to commit suicide† (Lyons, 2004). Allen et al. (2006) suggest about the reasons for these statistics. They said that â€Å"one explanation could be the increase in education and awareness of advances in both medical technology and research on various chronic diseases†. As more Americans are becoming more aware of the devastating psychological effects of disease on a person’s well being; â€Å"they may be more willing to make informed decisions on end-of-life care†. Armed with knowledge of how painful and grueling pains that patients suffer, Americans think that sometimes the best option for a terminally ill patient is physician-assisted suicide or some other form of euthanasia. Strangely enough, a group of doctors also support physician-assisted suicide. Known as the Hemlock Society, these doctors advocate the legalization of euthanasia (Snyder, 2001). This organization believes that the final decision to terminate life ultimately is one’s own, although it does not encourage suicide for emotional, traumatic, or financial reasons, or in the absence of terminal illness. Conversely, the National Hospice Organization supports a patient’s right to choose, but believes that hospice care is a better choice than euthanasia or assisted suicide (Snyder, 2001). Despite the salient points made by the supporters of physician-assisted suicide, we should not forget that this process essentially negates the purpose of a doctor’s profession. The Hippocratic Oath, which dates back in the 400 B. C. E. states that â€Å"I will give no deadly medicine to anyone if asked, nor suggest any such counsel†. Not only that it is in clear opposition to the oath of their profession, it is also morally and ethically reprehensible. According to Somerville (2006), there are two major reasons why people should not allow euthanasia to be legalized. First reason is purely relying on principle that it is not right for one human to intentionally kill another (with the exception of justified self-defense cases, or in the defense of others). Somerville (2006) stated that the second reason is utilitarian, as legalizing physician-assisted death has harmful effects and risks to people and society. In fact, the harms and risks far outweigh any benefits of physician-assisted suicide. While Mak, Elwyn & Finlay (2006) reasoned that â€Å"most studies of euthanasia have been quantitative, focusing primarily on attitudes of healthcare professionals, relatives, and the public†. Most people perceive pain as the major reason for requesting euthanasia, while other factors that convince people to choose it are impairment of functions, dependency, being a big burden, being isolated to people, depression, losing hope, and losing autonomy or control. This is why, Mak, Elwyn & Finlay (2006) thought that legalizing euthanasia is a â€Å"premature† move when research evidence from the perspectives of those who desire euthanasia is not yet proven to be necessary. The researchers suggested that there needs to be additional qualitative patient-based studies in order to broaden the physician’s understanding of patients. They deemed that there should be the â€Å"inclusion of medical humanities, experiential learning, and reflective practice into medical education should help ensure doctors have better communication skills and attitudes†. Thus, doctors and healthcare professionals should focus in examining ways to improve cure and care at all levels so that they can trash out the â€Å"side effects of poor end of life care†. In this way, physician-assisted suicide would not be necessity anymore. In 1997, the U. S. Supreme Court ruled that the Constitution does not guarantee Americans a right to physician-assisted suicide and returned the issue to the state legislatures for continued debate. In its decision, the Court placed emphasis on the American tradition of condemning suicide and valuing human life. In its ruling, the Court made it clear that the states have a legitimate interest in banning physician-assisted suicide, but it also left it open to them to legalize the practice. As a result, the practice has been legalized in Oregon. Although the law is rather unequivocal in regard to the practice of active euthanasia, the court decisions have been quite ambiguous. This may be a proper stance for the law in that its adamant negative position provides a deterrent to all considerations of the practice and forces deliberation of the merits on a case-by-case basis. But under what circumstances is euthanasia justifiable? Is it permissible to kill the terminally ill? How about those who are not terminally ill but have only lost their appetite for life? Even if society decides that citizens have a right not only to life, liberty, and property but also to death, what part do health care practitioners play in this right? Would the role of physician who conducts euthanasia have a chilling effect on the medical profession? What law cannot answer, ethics and morality could provide the answers of what needs to be done by health professionals when faced with a difficult dilemma, such as physician-assisted suicide. As medical practitioners, medical code of ethics should not just become theoretical concepts, because ethics are important references in the application of one’s moral and value system to a career in health care. Ethics involves more than just â€Å"common sense†, which is an approach for making decisions that most people in society use. Ethics goes way beyond this: It requires a critical thinking approach that examines important considerations such as fairness for all consumers, the impact of the decision on society, and the future implications of the decision. In the end, as doctors, the central issue remains caring for the dignity of the patient, which involves respecting the patient’s wishes, protecting the integrity of the profession, and sparing the life of a person under all conditions which are generally understood to be extremely burdensome. Thus, all forms of physician-assisted suicide are ethically and morally reprehensible because it promotes intentional killing. This principle does not require the preservation of life at all costs, which is essentially the role of all physicians.

How Teachers Should Report Suspected Abuse of Children

Teachers are state-mandated reporters  meaning that if they observe signs of suspected child abuse or neglect, they are legally required to take action and report your suspicions to the proper authorities, usually Child Protective Services. Although situations like these are challenging for all parties involved, its important to have your students best interests in mind and to act in accordance with your districts and states requirements. Heres how you should proceed. 1. Do Your Research You need to take action at the first sign of trouble. If this is your first time reporting suspected abuse or you are working in a new school district, arm yourself with information. You must follow the requirements specific to your school and state. All 50 of the United States require your compliance. So go online and find your states site for Child Protective Services, or similar. Read about how to file your report and make a plan of action. 2. Dont Second-Guess Yourself Unless you witness abuse firsthand, you can never be 100% certain about what occurs in a childs home. But dont let that sliver of doubt cloud your judgment to the point where you ignore your legal responsibility. Even if you simply suspect a problem, you must report it. You can clarify in your report that you suspect abuse, but are not certain. Know that your report will be treated with care so that the family will not know who filed it. The government experts will know how best to proceed, and you must trust their ability to weed through the suspicions and find out the truth. 3. Keep a Watchful Eye on Your Student   If you suspect that one of your students is in a vulnerable situation, make sure to pay special attention to his or her behavior, needs, and schoolwork. Notice any major changes in his or her habits. Of course, you wouldnt want to go overboard by coddling the child or making excuses for poor behavior. However, it is important to remain vigilant and report any further suspicions to authorities again, as many times as is necessary in order to protect the childs well being. 4. Follow the Progress Familiarize yourself with the long-term procedures that Child Protective Services will follow with the family in question. Introduce yourself to the caseworker, and ask for updates on what conclusions are reached and which actions are taken to help the family. The government agents will work with the family to provide supportive services, such as counseling, in order to guide them along the path to being better caretakers. The last resort is to remove the child from his or her home. 5. Remain Committed to Protecting Children Dealing with child abuse, suspected or confirmed, is one of the most serious and stressful parts of being a classroom teacher. No matter how unpleasant the experience may be for you, dont let the process deter you from reporting each and every case of suspected abuse that you observe during your time in this profession. Not only is it your legal obligation, but you can rest easily at night knowing that you took the tough actions required to protect the students under your care. Tips Document all of your concerns, with dates and times, in order to support your claims.Gather tips and support from veteran colleagues.Procure the support of your principal and ask him or her for advice if needed.Remain confident that you are doing the right thing, no matter how hard it may be.