Virginia Statue Of Religious Liberty Summary

911 Words4 Pages

To understand Virginia Statute of Religious Freedom (1786), on needs to understand the ideology of deism, since it is so present in the statute. Deism is the belief there is a God, but he does not intervene in the events happening. This God’s set up natural laws, and natural rights given to man. Therefore, to go against or suppress a natural right is to go against God’s natural laws. The Virginia Statute of Religious Liberty (1786) argues that freedom of religion is a natural right, and Church and State need to be separate or it breaks the natural right to freedom of conscience. The Statue also states that any laws after this act tries to take away or suppress this right is illegitimate, because natural rights are “irrevocable”. The Statute …show more content…

Jefferson’s works have often been influenced by deism philosophy and the idea of natural rights, for example the Declaration of Independence, “which Laws of Nature and the Nature’s God entitled them” . The Virginia Statue of Religious Liberty (1786), was no exception, and deism philosophy particularly prominent in Paragraph I. of the statute. The statue states, “Whereas Almighty God hath created the mind free; that all attempts to …show more content…

Paragraph I. is the bulk of the Act, but isn’t the act itself. Paragraph I, defines Religious freedom as a natural right, and then explains why forcing someone to believe a certain religion, which they do not agree with, is going against man’s natural right to freedom of conscience. Even though Paragraph I. is the biggest portion of the Statue, and isn’t even the act, it is needed. Without Paragraph I., the statute would be too easy to dismiss, and deny the people’s natural right, because without Paragraph I. the act wouldn’t define how freedom or religion is a natural right, or argue why. Without Paragraph I., the statute would not be convincing. “…that truth is great and will prevail if left to herself, that she is proper and sufficient antagonist to error and has nothing to fear from the conflict, unless by human interposition disarmed of her natural weapons, free argument and debate, errors ceasing to be dangerous when it is permitted freely to contradict them.”, meaning that when suppressing the truth (forcing one to believe something they don’t believe in) that person or government is going above the natural law of truth, and ultimately going above God’s will. This statement and a strong ending to Jefferson’s argument as to why it’s wrong for a government to control people’s religious