Article argues religion is a private matter, not a formula for running a state

The article argues that religion is a matter of each person's private faith, not an administrative formula for running a country. It says countries that dream of progress on the basis of religion move over time towards ruin, hardship and failure. Governments, it says, run on the constitution, law and modern science, not on religious extremism.

The article says religion is very good for private morality and for bringing people together in a community. But when religious books are made national law, it says, the result is division in society, poor governance and economic ruin. A government that begins to take decisions on the basis of religious beliefs, it says, loses the flexibility to solve real problems. Compromise is necessary to get ahead in politics, but in a state run by religion compromise is seen as a sin or a weakness. Leaders say their decisions rest on faith, not facts, so mistakes are not easily corrected.

Citing Iran, the article says that before the 1979 revolution it was a fast-growing, modernising society. Tehran had good universities, scientific research and thriving businesses, and the atmosphere was as open as in many European cities. According to the article, when religious leaders took complete control and laws, schools and the economy passed into the hands of clerics, strict social rules were imposed and Iran was cut off from much of the world. Today, despite vast oil wealth, it has inflation, international sanctions and corrupt institutions, and educated young people are leaving the country.

On Afghanistan, the article says civil law was removed under a hardline regime and extremist religious rules were introduced. Women were completely barred from schools and workplaces, institutions collapsed and the country slid into deep poverty and isolation from the world.

On Pakistan, the article says it began with a more inclusive approach. Its founder, Muhammad Ali Jinnah, had fairly liberal political views. On August 11, 1947, Jinnah chose Jogendra Nath Mandal, a Hindu Dalit leader, as temporary president of Pakistan's first Constituent Assembly. The same assembly formally accepted Jinnah as Pakistan's leader and shaped the early administration. Jinnah then made Mandal Pakistan's first law and labour minister. According to the article, Jinnah wanted a constitutional country where religion was a private matter and not the test of citizenship, and Mandal's role was meant to send a message of inclusion.

The article says that after Jinnah died soon after, leaders and army officers abandoned that thinking. In the 1970s and 1980s, to stay in power, the government pushed heavy-handed religious policies. Using religion as a national glue did not make the country stronger, the article says, but broke it, and was among the direct causes of the 1971 war and the creation of Bangladesh. Later, it says, state religion stoked internal violent conflict, harmed minorities, damaged the economy and diverted money for schools, hospitals and infrastructure to security and defence.

Some people cite Saudi Arabia or Israel to argue that religious countries can also be rich and powerful. The article replies that their success has come from modern administration, technology and a market economy, not from governing by religious texts.

On Saudi Arabia, the article says its early wealth came from oil and its standing in the Islamic world. But in recent years, it says, the country's leaders have taken religious authority out of government policy. The powers of the religious police were taken away, women were given more civil freedom, new entertainment sectors were created, and billions were invested in modern technology, renewable energy and scientific research. On Israel, the article says it is a Jewish nation-state, but its high-tech identity comes from democratic courts, strong property rights, large universities and heavy investment in research and start-ups. It adds that whenever religious political groups try to impose religious rules on ordinary people, big public battles break out inside Israel.

The article concludes that religion should stay in the heart and private life, and that government should run on reason, science and the equal rights of every citizen. Real national progress comes from building good schools, promoting scientific thinking, protecting minorities and treating every citizen equally, it says, not from raising walls in the name of faith.