Locke’s Conception of Religion

Locke’s Conception of Religion

Name

School

Instructor

Date Due

Locke’s Conception of Religion

Locke is a great known political philosopher who was also an outspoken supporter. He stood for the rights which were known to govern the society. He emphasized on the right to life, liberty and argued that the role of the government is to take care of its people. It should therefore provide security to all people. He was a great man who relied most on social contract theory saying that the government relies on its citizens. According to Locke any exception was tolerated and his bf led him being excluded in the society. This man believed that there is great connection between morality and religion whereby he strongly held this belief. According to Locke, people are controlled by morality and religion.

According to Murphy (2007) Locke has a claim which argued that anyone who does not accept God or any other supreme is supposed to be questioned. It is true that Locke tried to preach tolerance among people whereby he said that human beings should enjoy life and understand what they do. He believes that what we can tolerate is what it has already been experienced. These experiences are mostly found in religious teachings and should pave way to our future. This is a very useful expansion as it educates many people how experiences can be obtained and without knowing any supreme we should question ourselves. In addition, the work of the government is to provide protection to people but the citizens must be driven by morality to do the right (Collins et al. 2006)

I believe that community is supposed to choose which religion to follow according to it and not being forced to act. Every individual has right of freedom of worship and the law cannot even force anyone for extreme religious conditions. Intolerable religious communities have the principle of political leaders whereby the religious community is controlled by public. In addition, there is also a principle of legitimacy whereby there is much civility without considering the feelings of other people. It is very dangerous to be controlled on how you will commit yourself to the religion whereby other individuals may be converted to make their religious commitments on private affairs. This will in turn lead to conflicts and misunderstanding of religious community (Bhandar, 2009).

It may be acceptable for an individual to present what he or she feels not free with to the administration but can never control the administrative law. Every individual has right of speech but not all things can be changed. It is not possible for individual beliefs to cause harm on the administrative law unless it has offended against the person. On the other hand, the administrative law can affect the individual if the law has been violated. Religion is a personal choice not a choice from the government. Every individual is supposed to follow the religion which he or she feels comfortable with and not forced. The government can allow any time of religion but the law cannot be violated (Collins et al. 2006). The government should also have the responsibility of protecting religious communities whereby religion has really been violated in many ways.

In conclusion, it is not allowed for individual feelings to affect the administrative law. According to Locke, citizens are controlled by religion and morality whereby the government is only supposed to offer protection to the people. Locke’s great history is still present in today’s life because it focused on tolerance and will still be relevant. It is important to have religious tolerance whereby a society will do more if it has religious tolerance people (Murphy, 2007). There have been free exercises which have been said to protect religious activities from different countries.

References

Murphy, A. R. (2007). Tolerance, toleration, and the liberal tradition. Polity, 593-623.

Bhandar, B. (2009). The ties that bind: Multiculturalism and secularism reconsidered. Journal of Law and Society, 36(3), 301-326.

Shane, S., Locke, E. A., & Collins, C. J. (2006). Entrepreneurial motivation. Human resource management review, 13(2), 257-279.