I remember reading that only devoted followers of a religion might become good citizens, and the writer was not referring to a theocratic state. Perhaps the author had in mind a small core of shared values—kindness, charity, avoiding greed—that religions promote to build cohesion. Yet the full picture makes this claim seem distant from reality.
Modern democracies are secular, and their constitutions rest first and foremost on equality, such as equality before the law and between genders. All religions reveal violations of these values. All religions discriminate against and do not treat outsiders as equals; they rarely grant to them the same rights as to their own members, and some even permit violence against them. Beyond this, certain faiths divide their own followers by race or caste and give them different rights. Thus, if you follow your religion completely, as a good follower should, you clash with constitutional foundations.
Again, all religions are misogynistic. They treat men and women as unequal, giving men more rights and women more duties, treating womenfolk as second class members. As noted, gender equality is also a core value in modern constitutions.
Thus, claiming that committed believers make good citizens is plainly wrong. Only those who treat religion lightly can be good citizens in a modern democracy.
During my time at college, social circles debated civilisation—what measures its level? Several answers arose, many quite amusing. Some suggested soap consumption, others energy use, and some even wine and cigars. In today’s context, my answer would be how peacefully you can coexist with a minority that does not share your belief system or any belief system. That, and not the degree of your commitment to your religion, also shows how suited you are to live in a liberal democracy.
