Is democracy dependent upon religious beliefs, and specifically Judaism or Christianity? Many Americans appear to believe this very sincerely, but the logic and evidence for it is scanty at best. The best argument offered in favor of it is the idea that these religions teach that all humans are "brothers" and equal in the eyes of God. This, then, is supposed to lead us to the conclusion that we should also be brothers and equal in the eyes of the government, meaning a democratic and just state.
The train of logic here is not entirely valid, however. Even if we grant that a religion teaches that all humans are unambiguously and unreservedly brothers who are equal in the eyes of God, this does not entail that they should also be equal in the eyes of the state. For one thing, this sort of equality is one which describes the state of our immortal souls - as immaterial beings we are equal before God, not as material animals.
This distinction may be subtle, but it has been used repeatedly throughout history to justify the grossest inequalities in religious societies which taught that we are all equal before God (slavery in the U.S. and class stratification in Western Europe being only two of the most obvious examples). Ultimately, our socio-economic status in the physical world does not affect the status of our soul in the afterlife; thus, great disparities in social, economic, and political power are entirely compatible with the Brotherhood of Man.
It is also important to point out that religion is often intolerant of error, at lest in the theological realm. This in turn can readily lead to an insistence that people not be allowed to indulge in theological error - which is simply another way of saying that people shouldn't be permitted basic freedom of speech, conscience, and belief when those rights are used to contradict religious orthodoxy.
This was, in fact, the fundamental position of the Roman Catholic Church for a long time, and it has been shared by many other Christian denominations and other religions as well. Democracy, however, is predicated upon the idea that people should be allowed to choose for themselves what will happen to them. They are expected to put their fates into their own hands, not into the hand of the defenders of religious tradition.
It would be incorrect to say that religion must necessarily engage in repression, but it would not be incorrect to say that it is easy for religion to become repressive. There is certainly nothing about religion generally or any religion in particular that is a necessary precondition for a free, democratic society to develop or be maintained. Granted, there are doctrines in various religions which can be helpful in the development or maintenance of democracy, but that is a far cry from saying that they are necessary.
« Is Religion Necessary for Morality? | Are Humans Unable to Establish Morality & Democracy? »
