Readers React: Separating religion and state

To the editor: Since we are talking about it, why are most churches — not really different than any other business — free from taxation? (“Battles over religious freedom are sure to follow same-sex marriage ruling,” July 13)

Many have income, expenses, produce significant profits and own valuable real estate and have large investment portfolios — and still they avoid contributing to the tax base?

Let’s come up with a plan that allows all of us to be comfortable and avoid any favoritism hanging over these multimillion-dollar operations masquerading as “religion.”

Jim B. Parsons, Canyon Lake

..

To the editor: It’s telling that the words “battleground” and “religious” are side by side in the headline of this article.

Sometimes it’s hard to tell whether it’s human nature that twists religion or the other way around.

The promise of religion is to teach us to live in respectful harmony with one other and to revere the wondrous diversity of creation; its curse is to have triggered more violence, hatred, misery and suffering than any other force on the planet.

Not casting stones seems impossible for us.

Linda Kranen, Carlsbad

..

To the editor: It is quite difficult to understand why a religious person is granted special privileges not accorded to those who do not believe in a mythology.

The practice in this country of allowing exceptions to godly folk would be fine if those privileges were also offered to those who believe in secular humanism, or even in nothing at all.

In an effort to guarantee no abuse to the religious, nonbelievers are abused.

Milt Rouse, Dana Point

..

To the editor: The conservatives who are trying to make their “religious liberties” into a political issue are dead wrong on so many counts.

Religious liberties affect only our freedom to believe and worship as we please, and these are absolute. Those same liberties protect those who do not believe, and those who believe differently, from being forced to abide by the strictures of any one faith.

The idea that the government is going to force the pastors of right-wing churches to marry gay couples is a ridiculous fantasy and would be abhorrent to anyone.

So relax, nothing will change for any religion — unless it plans to throw virgins into volcanoes.

This is not a political issue.

Alix Fargo, Altadena

..

To the editor: There is a historical answer to the problem of a believer being required by law to act against religious principles.

Hundreds of years ago in Europe, a major issue was whether a Christian — opposed to killing — could be forced to serve his prince as a soldier or executioner. Theologians came up with a distinction between an individual’s inner, private and spiritual being and that individual’s outer, public and legally obligated being.

Thus, a hangman, for example, could outwardly perform his legal duties without jeopardizing his inner being, soul or salvation.

It was that period’s equivalent to conscientious objection. God’s kingdom was seen to be entirely separate from Caesar’s.

Can we learn from any of that?

John H. Geerken, Claremont

The writer is an emeritus professor of history at Scripps College.

Follow the Opinion section on Twitter @latimesopinion and Facebook