In the United States and in many countries that mimic the United States, the secular agnostic State is over violating the principle of separation between Church and State where the agnostic minority imposes on most religious Protestant ministers or pastors and Catholic priests the obligation to renounce their religious beliefs and administer same-sex marriages. That is, the State imposes the religious majority change their way of thinking about the commandments of God.
This transition is the result of the evolution of populist democracy over the past 250 years. In other words, the evolution of populist democracy over the past 250 years has led to the State finish breaking the principle of division between Church and State.
The United States Bolivarian Party sympathizes with the foundation of a confessional State on the basis of belief in God.
We define the Monotheistic Multiple Confessional State as that founded on the belief in only one God before whose commandments we are called to fulfill. The interpretations that each religion makes of God and his commandments would be regulated by the Multiple Confessional State so that no religion could preach a message that goes against the well-being of the collective or against the existence of the State. The State would be obliged to guarantee religious freedom, provided that it does not contradict the welfare of the collective or the existence of the State. The State would be obliged to incorporate in its laws the commandments of God expressed through the religions or not to produce laws that contradict those commandments.
There is a false perception that the State must be secular, that is. should be a State founded in the skepticism towards the belief in God and that their public policy decisions should not be influenced or directed by the religious beliefs of the people about the commandments of God. But this perception does not lead or lead to anything other than of the establishment or existence of an agnostic or atheist State. Therefore, the establishment of an agnostic or atheist State is of itself an imposition on the vast majority of the population that is not agnostic or atheist but believing in the existence of a supreme being whose Commandments should be the guides of the people about what is good and what is evil. As a result, in a secular agnostic or atheist State laws that promulgated the State cannot be above or contradict laws or commandments of God, since all the laws of men must be in accordance with the laws of God.
The problem with the confessional State on the basis of the belief in God is that whoever controls the beliefs of people about what are the commandments of God, becomes a political power that rivals the power of the State. That's why in the past both powers melted into the ruler of a country. The Kings were considered representatives of God in life as well as religious leaders and even they govern on religious leaders. In other words, the Kings were political leaders as well as religious leaders.
When monarchies fall into decline and emerging democratic Governments show up, is establishes the separation between Church and State in which are banned churches try to influence the decisions of the State and the government meddling in religious beliefs. But this dichotomy is not realistic because it leads to an agnostic or atheist secular State that is contradictory to belief in God of the majority of the governed. That is, the purpose of the majority of governed could not be elect, political leaders, to make laws against their belief in God, because that is contradictory.
In practice, the separation between Church and State or secularism has come to become a whimsical approach on the belief of man in God. This is what emerges from a secular State where it is suppose that man relate with God when go on weekends to the Church of his choice and study and meditate the commandments of God through the Holy Book of his religion or the preaching of the religion, but once out of the Church are supposed to leave behind their beliefs. In other words, is required that these beliefs have nothing to do with his practice as a citizen in real life. In other words, implicitly raises the relationship of man with God as a kind of fantasy game or therapy to relax from the everyday stress of real life, but the relationship of man with the commandments of God, as it is fanciful issues that have nothing to do with real life must not influence the creation of the laws of the State. As a result, the laws of the State can be contrary to the commandments of God and believers in God's commandments must honor them even if that means denial of their beliefs in God's commandments.
From this vision or approach to separation of Church and State churches are treated as if they were centers of fanciful therapy to relax the spirit and get rid of stress, but as soon as they leave the Church is assumed that they enters the world of reality where the commandments of God must not be applied or let that they influence the creations of secular laws that we must obey. It is presumed that secular laws do not nor should be consistent with the laws of God because it is presumed that the laws of God do not belong to the world of reality.
From the moment that arises that the laws of the State should not be consistent with the commandments or laws of God, the State becomes in practice in a secular agnostic or atheist State. Therefore, falls into a contradiction in which the governed elect a Government that is contrary to their religious beliefs and which can legislate against them.
This contradiction is irreconcilable. The relationship of man with his religious beliefs cannot be treated as if it were a split whimsical exercise of reality without falling into a contradiction of logic. Rather it should be treated as the primary reality, that part of which the human being use to navigate and determine what is good and evil and correct or good, or acceptable behavior and which is not. The commandments of God in any religion are the result of the millennial experience of peoples converted to values of good and evil. We can not replace ancient peoples experience for the experience of 30 or 40 years that may have legislators and judges on duty of the Supreme Court on what should be the correct or acceptable sexual conduct. Especially when this short personal experience of judges legislators and voters are bombarded by propaganda in the mass media of the press, tv, radio and the internet directed by gay organizations that advocate what they understand it is their right. It is an act of ignorance replace the experience of thousands of years of people on perception of homosexual conduct as wrong for 30 or 40 years experience on this aspect may have the turn generation.
The experience of centuries converted into social values that we call commandments or laws of God can not be cut from root and discarded by the thought unthinking of interest groups that influence lawmakers in turn to achieve legislation in favor of their interests as gay groups.
Therefore, both the belief in God, as the religious beliefs of human beings on God's commandments cannot be based on the approach of a God of fantasy whose function is to reduce the daily stress of real life and, therefore, a religious practice that establishes churches to inside door and ends and leaves behind churches out door. Belief in God has to be based on the approach to a real God whose commandments about the good and bad are to be applied inside and outside churches in real and everyday life.
This contradiction has been manifest in the practice as a violation of the division between the Church and the State where the agnostic minority imposes on most religious ministers or Protestant pastors and Catholic priests the obligation to renounce their religious beliefs and encourage same-sex marriages. That is, the State imposes the religious majority change their way of thinking about the commandments of God. That is, the State breaks the principle of division between Church and State.
The secular agnostic or atheist State is a contradiction. If the majority of the people believe in the existence of a real God that exists both within the Church and outside the churches in real life, his commandments of good and evil can not be circumscribed to be applied within the different churches and that be keep within the four walls of the different churches when comes to real life. The commandments of God are precisely the points of orientation of human beings and, therefore, are to be applied outside the gates of the different churches alike in real life. Therefore in a democratic society where the majority of people are believers in the existence of a real God whose commandments are to obey both within the different churches as in real life, the State cannot be secular agnostic or atheist, because that's a contradictory approach.
It is for the above reasons the United State Bolivarian Party raised consulted in a plebiscite on amending the Constitution to establish a Aconfessional (Multi-Faith) State founded on the belief of men in a supreme being who governs on the real world of men and why no State law can be against or over God's laws raised by the various religions.
Now, since that interpret the commandments of God through different religions (religious leaders) has power to control the beliefs of his parishioners, is necessary to all religious denominations, including the Government through the Governor as representative of God in life, participate in the interpretation and discussion of the laws of God. The contradictory positions on the interpretation of the laws of God will be decided by vote. The vote of religious leaders would have a weight of 50% and the Governor by 50%. If the Governor held a vote that does not represent the feelings of the people, the people would have the option of replacing it in the next election by someone that was in keeping with his belief. Accordingly, the United State Bolivarian Party proposes the creation of a religious body chaired by the Governor of the day and whose vote had a weight when making decisions on controversial topics of 50%. That is, the Governor of the day, including members of the legislature would become main religious leaders so that they could influence interpretations of the commandments of God expressed in the different religious denominations (Christians, Muslims, Jews, etc.). Therefore, State or Government can interpret differently the religious leaders the commandments of God and exposed to losing the vote of the believers. In addition the State can forbid the practice of a religion or religious beliefs that incite to violence or the overthrow of the State, as for example the religious fundamentalism preached by terrorist groups. On the contrary, in controversial topics that have to do with God's commandments, such as same-sex marriage, the State or Government must achieve consensus of believers in different religions or otherwise resigned to losing the next election.
The Governor and other political leaders can count on the advice of a body of theologians, specializing in the history and evolution of the different religions, so that their decisions regarding or the interpretation of the commandments of God is properly documented.