Extremely disappointed to see no sep. of church and state option

[Veer]

We have the follow Religion civics options:

Primitivism
Pacifism
Freedom of Religion
Organized Religion
Theocracy

This leaves no place for modern anti-religious states such as the Soviet Union. We can have a bureaucratic, communist, slave and police state, but it's religion is "Primitivism"?

For the Soviet Union the 'Religion civic' would be 'Theocracy' - i.e.: no religions other than the state religion allowed. However since there is no state religion....

 

[The Q-Meister]

I would like for someone to address a point I made earlier.

To all the people that have a problem with an atheist/secular Civ getting a scientific bonus and argue that it is not conclusively proven that an atheist/secular state receives a scientific bonus in the real world:

Can you conclusively prove that theocratic states receive a 50% loss in science? How come no one had a problem with scientific penalties for theocratic states yet are up in arms about what would be given its natural opposite and the obvious conclusions that result from it?

Furthermore, I imagine that there are a whole host of units, techs and civics that receive questionable bonuses that we could argue about forever and could never be "conclusively" proven. Again, I am not stating my desire for a scientific bonus for an atheist/secular state, my concern isn't what bonus you give it only for its implementation. However, I do reject some of the arguments that have been made here about why such a gov wouldn't get a scientific bonus.

And a "pagan" or "primitive" state is not the same as an atheist state; those former civics result from simply a lack of religion, ie, "we don't know any", "haven't been exposed to any yet", an atheist/anti-religious state results from a flat-out rejection of religion based on science and humanist values. That is a key difference. One civic comes from ancient values the other from modern ones.

 

[Naokaukodem]

(Yes I wrote this already in the Ideas and Suggestions thread, but I'm not sure if that was the right place to put it in as it is not really a new idea. If you read this one before over there, I'm sorry, you can just ignore it)

I must say how incredibly disappointing it is for me to find out that there will be no atheist or even separation of church and state option in Civ 4. The closest we're going to come to that is "Free Religion" which is not the same thing. Will there no way for the government to have an anti-religious or even non-religious posture?

I am truly, deeply disappointed by this. I may wait for an XP to come out before I lose my 50 bucks.

For me, "Free Religion" and separation of the religion from the state is pretty the exact same thing.

 

[ShaLouZa]

Definitely. It's a non-religious posture : "worship and believe what you want, that doesn't matter in the leading of the nation".

Never thought a thread on that topic would go so long. Religion's such a concern in US ?

 

[SlipperyJim]

For me, "Free Religion" and separation of the religion from the state is pretty the exact same thing.

Of course, the irony is that my Free-Religion empire still directs the construction of Temples and other religious structures, trains missionaries, and even tells Great Prophets what to do.

However, the gold from the shrines helps to keep the State's treasury in the black, so I guess it's all fair.

 

[Honos]

Compared to the muslim states, where state and church are joint together (the king of Morocco is believed to be a Mahoma ancestor), the european countries separated church and state, and thus leaded to the social and scientifical development of Europe when compared to the muslim countries, which remained backwards.

I think you should check out "The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalsim" by Max Weber before making such claims. This is a serious academic book if you haven't heard about it and a very long (boring) read. However, it does offer a valid point of view on the social and scientific development of Europe.

 

[Zombie69]

Separation of church and state is a fiction invented in the last half century by the multitudes of intellectually impaired (so much for glorious democracy without an adequate educational system). What is decreed by the Constitution is 'no State/Government endorsed religion'. That's like saying separation of Brain and Body, as it was the spiritually enlightened who formulated the U.S. of A. So, now, on top of all of the other social dysfunction, you have half of the nation running around yelling about the integrity of socio-political platforms that don't exist, the sacrilegiousity of religious holidays, and the impropriety of our nation's heritage. Thank God for the internet. Now all of the half-wits in our country can speak with a unified voice, and with authority! Hell, they can RUN for OFFICE!

Although, the persecution of a given population's religion would be status quo.

Just because it doesn't exist in the socially ******ed USA doesn't mean it doesn't exist elsewhere in the world. In Canada, separation of Church and State is very much applied, and has been for decades.

 

[KrikkitTwo]

Of course, the irony is that my Free-Religion empire still directs the construction of Temples and other religious structures, trains missionaries, and even tells Great Prophets what to do.

However, the gold from the shrines helps to keep the State's treasury in the black, so I guess it's all fair.

And Your Free Market 'Government' directs the Construction of Banks, Factories and Marketplaces, determines exactly how much luxuries and science spending society makes, etc.

Your Emancipation 'Government' tells people exactly where to work, and what to do it determines if anyone in you society can be a scientist or if they have to work the Fish Farms.... it can even tell the people to sit around and starve while there is food waiting to be harvested.

Your Free speech 'government' determines whether society will spend anythhing on its culture, directing the building of Theaters, and Hollywood, and determines where Your Great Artists will produce their Works

The fact is in Civ you are not playing 'The Government' you are playing 'The Civilization' So when the Free Religion Civic is being run, non-governmental people in your civilization are the ones diverting hammers to temples and the paths of missionaries. ie seperation of church and state.

 

[Sidhe]

Why dont people see if they can win on whatever level by remaining secular. That would be quite a challenge. i can't speak about America but Henry the VIII kicked the catholics out with his disolution of the monsasteries bit(kind of like scientific method ordained by gods chosen or the monarch by devine right) Since then England or at least it's government has been almost completely secular and I would imagine will remain so. European countries are mostly secular politicaly and I think that is a good thing; religion is not about politics it is about faith and politics needs nothing from relgion directly although you do sometimes wish the politicians would actually follow there own faith? Bush a christian. Tony blair a Christian? Osamah Bin Laden a Muslim? I don't think so somehow. Politics and relgion don't mix, bad bad idea to do so, that's how wars start

 

[thordk]

you don't need anything like "faith" in politics. faith is a personal thing. believe in some gods, rocks, trees, whatever you want. if it helps you to understand the meaning of your life the better.

what has been adopted to (western) politics though has been "religious inspired" human rights.

just have a look at the world: those states that are governed by people who mix faith and politics are constantly involved in wars...

 

[Sidhe]

What you mean like the US for example

 

[Smidlee]

you don't need anything like "faith" in politics. faith is a personal thing. believe in some gods, rocks, trees, whatever you want. if it helps you to understand the meaning of your life the better.

Don't forget to most famous god of them all which many serve with their full heart especially it politics: The Almighty Dollar. (Just as the Bible mention , their bellies (lustful desires) is their god) Just as you can't seperate money from politics then you can't seperate "beliefs, religion, gods" from it either because of the power behind them. What the constitution did was to divide the power up so it's harder for one man have all of it.
No matter who you are you serve some kind of god.

 

[malclave]

There is a "Separation of Church and State" option in Civ 4, and it isn't the Free Religion civic; rather, it is the option to not have a State Religion.

Beginning on turn 1, the Government and Religion are "separate". It is a deliberate act on the part of the player that changes that, which can be reversed at almost any time.

 

[King Jason]

While I'm sure other people have bought more, my point is that I have invested quite a lot of my own money into these games, surely more than the average gamer, and I think I have a right to add my two cents into this new version..

A valid point. But you're a bit late.

 

[Bezhukov]

"A little learning is a dangerous thing; drink deep, or taste not the Pierian spring: there shallow draughts intoxicate the brain, and drinking largely sobers us again."

Alexander Pope, Essay on Criticism

Theocracy is the church running the state. See: modern-day Iran, read Dumas's The Three Musketeers

Organized Religion is the state running the church. See: post-medieval Europe (in this case, running it into the ground), modern day China and Tibet

Free Religion is separation of church and state. See: Much of the Roman empire, the U.S. more or less.

The original poster is correct that actively atheistic governments are not represented among the religious civic choices in CivIV, nor are there actively destructive economic civics, say Luddism, nor similar government civics, like say Genocide. You've got various forms of constructive endeavor or live-and-let-live. You want to destroy, play GTA.

 

[ShaLouZa]

read Dumas's The Three Musketeers

Wrong. Richelieu was Prime Minister, in charge but not the top leader, and even in this historically inaccurate book religion was not ruling the country. Richelieu had the work because he was wise and main confident of the king's mother (the former regent queen), not because he was a priest. And there was no religious bureaucraty or other part of the state, even if religion was very influent because of its spiritual influence on the nobles. So there's no theocracy here.

As for free religion in US... Yes, in theory, but as long as "God bless America" will be and than justice witnesses will take serment by the Bible, there's nothing like separation of state and church for me. No state religion means no religion in the state institutions.

 

[SmokeyD]

Why dont people see if they can win on whatever level by remaining secular. That would be quite a challenge. i can't speak about America but Henry the VIII kicked the catholics out with his disolution of the monsasteries bit(kind of like scientific method ordained by gods chosen or the monarch by devine right) Since then England or at least it's government has been almost completely secular and I would imagine will remain so.

I'm sorry, but that's plain false. The Act of Supremacy granted Henry VIII the title of Head of the Church, a title which has been passed down, in some respect, to all his descendents except Mary who renounced it. Under Henry Christianity in England remained essentially Catholic with only very cosmetic differences with the Church in Rome (in fact, the only notable one was that the king, not the pope, was invested with spiritual authority). The disolution of the monastries had no religious motive and was mainly a ploy to raise funds for Henry's wars in France and to undermine the political power of the Church (which was then the largest landowner in the realm).

Under his son, Edward VI (and his Lord Protector the Earl of Warick), a decisive shift towards English Protestantism was made. Catholicism and Catholic-like practises were banned, Bibles were published with anti-Catholic tracts and images and symbols associated with Catholicism (such as the Virgin Mary and the crucifix) were desecrated by mobs.

When Mary ascended the throne in 1553, she renounced brought England back to the altar of Roman Catholicism, with over 300 public burnings at the stake used to this end.

Even Elizabeth I, the so called enlightened monarch of the Tudor dynasty, based her rule on the Acts of Uniformity (which demanded all churches in England use the Book of Common Prayer as the basis for their liturgy) and the Act of Supremacy (which granted Elizabeth Supreme Governorship of the Church and required all public officials recognise the monarch's authority in the Church). Bishops who refused to accept this set of arrangements were removed from office and replaced by conformists. Attendence at church every Sunday was mandatory except in extenuating circumstances Though intially lenient towards Catholics, the Papal Bull of Excommunication placed upon Elizabeth in 1570, increasing hostility with powerful Catholic Spain and the resulting plots to overthrow her in favour of a Catholic monarch (most notably her cousin Mary Queen of Scots) slowly transformed England into a virtual police state against Catholics.


I could go on, but I think my point is proved, even with the actions of only the Tudor monarchs.

 

[ShaLouZa]

Bull of Excommunication

Papal bull ?

Is that the common acceptation in english or a Wikipedia mistake ? It should be papal bubble, that's the original meaning.

 

[SmokeyD]

A bull, used in that context, is a decree issued by a high ranking religious figure or pontiff on matters of orthodoxy or heresy. And that wasn't Wiki'd.

 

[Sidhe]

Thanks for the info. I think my point was that church and state gradually became seperate and thank whoever for that Religion is if followed asiduously a means of great good. Unfortunately mankind has neither the will nor the intelligence to follow the tennants of the religions. Thus religion is the biggest cause of death in European history, political/religous machinations have brought great evil to the world. Kind of Ironic really, but then it is mans nature to ignore what is troubling and to emphasise that which is not.

Thou shalt not do murder? War isn't murder neither is capital punishment? It's justified surely, I kill ten thousand of gods children in the name of wealth and hypocrisy I am justified!!! God damn it? The jews Enacted genocide in the name of God upon the Cananites killing millions of men women&children, but it was in the name of God so it's ok? Christ on a bike people, grow up and stop acting like children, follow your damn faith properly and stop hiding behind it or perverting it to make a political point? WWJD? idiots?

The pope issued a decree that evolution was more than a mere hypothesis? If he's God's representative on Earth then creationists are just making God angry