The general impression here is that religion plays a small, almost vanishing, role in European social order and government (you are all a bunch of Godless Communitists,etc). But in fact, you are telling us that religion in Germany is a full participant in the welfare state!
Of course. Could you imagine Italy with out the roman catholic church?
And the German model is pretty unique in Europe, don't worry. I think the Scandinavian countries have similar concepts, but not to the same extend.
Meanwhile, here in the USA we have a Constitution that specifically prohibits a religious test for holding office, and a traditional "wall of separation" between church and state. But in fact, these days it would be impossible to get elected President without firmly established Christian credentials. Maybe we could tolerate an observant Jewish Vice-President, but an agnostic or athiest? NO WAY!
Well, you have to remember, that religion plays a different role in your national identity.
It makes me wonder: If the conservative Christians finally got their way here in the USA, persuading everyone to "tear down this wall" sepearting church and state, would the results be surprisingly perverse? Once a polyglut of religions got a seat at the governmental table, would religion in general lose its impact and just get subsumed into our welfare state as in Germany?
Well, we had a quite complex history behind us, to result in the current system. In the beginning, you had ONLY the church as instrument of welfare. Also, you had first only little religious freedom, later none. The most important thing, the USA likely misses, is the Prussian Kingdom. Prussia is still an important part of our national identity, and Prussia was more than just the Army with it's own state, it's neighbors saw. It also had more civil liberties as other countries. You had effectively a protected freedom of religion ("Everybody should become happy according to his own facon", compare this to the "Pursuit of happiness"), you also had a education system which did not depend on a major religion, just as you also had a growing atheist welfare system. Prussia attracted thinkers of the enlightenment during it's prime time and embraced their ideas. Including a limited form of constitutionalism - the king was subject to his own laws (with limitations, but compared to other European countries, it was revolutionary).
This Prussia formed the later German empire and the extension of the welfare state during Bismark. This system got effectively destroyed by the Nazis, but was later restored during the hardships of the post-war years. Before Germany as country as able to act, churches already helped.
So, what is the difference? We reduced the dependency on churches. While they are still an important factor in Germanies social system, you don't need to rely on them, you also have alternatives. As Prussias identity came more from the Ideal of enlightenment, these ideals also dominate in Germanies national identity.
But still:
Conscious of their responsibility before God and Men, Animated by the resolve to serve world peace as an equal partner in a united Europe, the German people have adopted, by virtue of their constituent power, this Basic Law.
The Germans in the Länder of Baden-Württemberg, Bavaria, Berlin, Brandenburg, Bremen, Hamburg, Hesse, Lower Saxony, Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania, North-Rhine-Westphalia, Rhineland-Palatinate, Saarland, Saxony, Saxony-Anhalt, Schleswig-Holstein, and Thuringia have achieved the unity and freedom of Germany in free self-determination. This Basic Law is thus valid for the entire German People.
You have a reference to religion in the constitution - in it's preamble. Religion is not part of the laws, but it is still important, when constitutional decisions have to be made, as one foundation of the constitution. But I think, the difference to the interpretation of the religious right in the USA is, that religion is clearly understood (from this prussian idea) as private matter. Even the churches don't attempt to change this, outside their own rows. Of course you need to be a man of faith, to become bishop. But the churches will not tell people, that they should not vote you, because you have the wrong faith. The churches don't have so much power over the people, especially because religion is private matter here.
I don't think, that a Jewish politician becoming Chancellor here, would be impossible. I don't even think, he will have a harder time as Christians. If he does a good job as politician, he does not need his religion as reason to vote him. Who knows which religion Gerhard Schröder followed?
-----Posted Added-----
Is socialism what we really want in America?
Obviously, in the moment you failed, and you are only one step away from living in the streets, socialism becomes attractive, doesn't it? What else is the 700 billion dollar bail out, as applied socialism. Not even Germans would go so far to disturb the market forces, as the USA did the last days.
You only use socialism as an sticker, an insult, but you obviously fail to recognize it, when it hits you right in the face.
Rachel Maddow is probably the most screechy and harsh of the Air America "bloviators" (I can never get through more than a few minutes of her smarmy delivery before fleeing to music radio) but on Friday, somewhere early in the show, she listed "lies" on both sides. In Maddow World any mistaken utterance is cast as a "lie." (What a b
