The End of Secularism?

Commentary by Ralf Dahrendorf, from Project Syndicate.
I am still very unsure of copyrights issues - hence only a little bit of the text is quoted. Interested people can visithttp://www.project-syndicate.org
Why has religion returned to secular and democratic politics?
The main reason is probably that the enlightened countries of the world have become unsure of their values, even of the Enlightenment itself. A moral relativism has spread, leading many to accept the taboos of all religious groups in the name of tolerance and multiculturalism. Cartoons of Mohammed are not published, and Mozart’s opera Idomeneo is not performed in order to avoid offending religious sensitivities; and when, in the end, the publication and the performance take place, they become a demonstration almost intended to offend. One can understand that enlightened believers in Islam (of whom there are many) find it upsetting that the world in which they want to live is in fact frail and vulnerable. But why politics and which area of politics is the author referring to? The replacement of the rule of law, by the rule of say the Ten Commandments, for example, should certainly by distinguished from the invasion into another country in the name of human liberty? Moral relativism should affect domestic political scene the most – like the case of stem cell research; but the prevalence of religion in international relations – an example of internal conflict spreading to the outside?
The author talks about the return of religion to politics, triggered by ‘moral relativism’ and a need for a new moral standard, and its consequence for liberty. He offered a solution of what Qian Mu would call ‘passive liberty’. I wonder whether some might call that ‘sin of omission’. 读过此文的诸君说不定会给我贴上危险人物的商标，也说不定会因此把我拒之门外了，大叔写文章写的真不是时候。接触了新事物，某些原则也要跟着改变，这本来是很正常的事情。如果西方真的讲政教分家，那所谓的moral relativism应该只对宗教信仰有影响。用政治手段维护宗教思想是对自己信仰缺乏自信的表现，而且法律如果用来维护道德就不能很好的维护自由了，如果Tinbergen Principle可以用在政治上的话。西方成天讲法制，说中国古代的人治的种种不是，其实无论道德也好宗教也好法律也好都是作为行为准则，当然有互相影响的地方，政治完全脱离宗教是不可能的。我觉得关键是要明确法律的目的，就是社会自由的最大化，其他别的目的当然只能为这个主要目的服务。这挺像佩恩说的政府是社会中的恶所衍生的，法律也是为了抑制它所存在的，而不是为了其他的任何目的。孔子说做事前要先正名，现在是时候为法律正名了。