A month or two ago, a pro-choice classmate of mine decided to put words in my mouth. In a friendly discussion about abortion in America, he responded to me with, “Well, you’re just anti-abortion because you’re Catholic.”

My jaw dropped. “But I’m not,” I said. “I’m pro-life because life begins at conception.”

He did not like this response.

I couldn’t stop thinking about his statement for weeks afterward. I was annoyed that he seemed to think I could have no scientific or philosophical justification for my convictions. It’s true that I am pro-life because science affirms that fetuses are living human beings. But I also believe that the extermination of these human beings is wrong because of my religion, which always has and always will inform my sense of right and wrong.

I think that if I encountered the same accusation today, I would say, “Yes. So?”

The phrase “separation of Church and state” is often thrown around in today’s political discussions with varying degrees of accuracy. The prevailing interpretation of this phrase is that it prohibits lawmakers from allowing personal religious beliefs to influence their legal decisions. As such, if your religion condemns abortion, you ought to ignore your religious convictions (or “biases”) in order to consider the question more “objectively.”

While I appreciate efforts to be unbiased, this assertion is based on the premise that religious beliefs are inferior to other kinds of moral judgments. Non-religious people are not exempt from moral biases, and both sides of the political aisle preach about what is right and wrong. Perhaps you prize tolerance as the highest ideal. Perhaps you favor traditional values. In any case, your personal moral code will inform your political beliefs. And it should. The source of your convictions—be it the Pope, the Buddha, or Kamala Harris—does not render these convictions politically invalid.

I believe that it would be a much graver mistake to go against your own moral code for the sake of attempted impartiality. Religion is not something that you can accept or ignore depending on when it is convenient to you. It is a way of life, and as such it ought to play itself out in your daily actions and decisions. It should go without saying that your moral code is more important than catering to the political whims of the decade.

One common argument against letting religion influence your political decisions suggests that it is wrong to impose your moral beliefs on others. I see this almost daily online: A frequent response to conservative beliefs is “stop shoving your religion down our throats.” Very well—you don’t have to convert to Christianity.

Dissenters often cite the First Amendment as grounds for their argument, pointing out that Congress may not enact any laws regarding religion. Pro-life laws, they might argue, are unconstitutional because many Americans are pro-life due to religious beliefs (despite the fact that these laws do not mandate anyone convert to a particular religion or participate in a certain religious practice). However, the same amendment also guarantees Americans the free exercise of religion. As such, telling someone that he cannot allow his religion to dictate his political beliefs is a violation of personal liberty.

The accusation that supporting conservative laws is equal to forced conversion indicates a fundamental misunderstanding of religion in our culture. Religion, particularly Christianity, states that morality is objective. There is a fundamental right and wrong bigger than anyone’s individual moral code; the truth remains true whether it is a popular opinion or not.

It is wrong to belittle someone’s honestly held convictions. It is not wrong or close-minded to allow religious views to determine which candidate to back or which laws to support. This is not to say that all religious people should remain in a comfortable echo chamber; it is good for everyone, conservative or liberal, to challenge their own beliefs. Why should religious people be the only ones banned from bringing their worldviews to the ballot box?

—

Image credit: Unsplash