In Romania the State is separated from the Church or not? What are the consequences of constitutional and legal from Romania regarding freedom of conscience, thought and religion in terms of denominational neutrality of public institutions?
Although in recent years he appeared in Romania a jurisprudence regarding such themes and the Constitutional Court, the courts or the National Council for combating discrimination considered by itself that the Romanian State has a secular character, the situation is complicated, in reality. Both the Constitution and our laws are profoundly undemocratic from this point of view, that is unclear or conflicting with themselves. And a true democracy cannot be build through the confusing laws inapplicable or predisposing to the abusive interpretations.
In the Romanian Constitution is not explicitly stipulated in the separation of Church and State. Only through an interpretation of several items there is a secular constitutional spirit. in support of such an interpretation is Art. 29 para. 5 "religious cults are autonomous State girl …". That article is insufficiently clear. It really protects the freedom of religious worship of the State, but did not find the express explicit any guarantee of welfare State institutions towards illegitimate pressures of the Church. Subsequently, in accordance with law No. 489/2006 concerning freedom of religion and the general status of religions was formulated explicit separation between State and Church in the art. 9:
' (1) in Romania there is no State religion; the State is neutral to any religious faith or atheistic ideology. (2) religious denominations are equal before the law and the public authorities. The State, through its officials, will not promote or encourage the granting of privileges or create discrimination towards any cult. "
But the same law empty of content this article by granting religious privileges, severely limiting freedom of speech and consfintind very tight links between Church and State.
To be functional, the principle of the separation of Church of State but should be clearly defined. For example, the text regarding religion in the first amendment to the American Constitution, the separation of Church and State statuata (Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion, year, or prohibiting the free exercise part; …) has an interpretation on the part of the u.s. Supreme Court, which he does at least the following: "neither a State nor the federal Government can not establish a church. No one can give in support of laws, of all religions, or prefer one religion to another. No one can force or influence a person to follow or to give up a certain Church against his will or be forced to declare their belief or disbelief in a religion. No person may not be punished because of religious beliefs or declaration or nonreligioase, for the presence or absence of the Church. No charge regardless of the amount, large or small, can not be directed towards supporting religious activities or institutions, whatever name and shape chosen for learning or teaching religious sequel. Neither a State nor the federal Government can not, openly or secretly, participate in the activities of organizations and religious groups and vice versa "(Everson v. Board of Education, 1947).
In the absence of such a clarification of the meaning of neutrality of the State institutions towards religion, land is prepped for abuse. About all what is said by the Constitutional Court of the us (and many other issues) regarding the understanding of the principle of the separation of Church of State is, to us, either by the Constitution contradicted either by legislation or by the actual practice of State institutions.
For example, the Romanian Constitution although it guarantees the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion (article. 29) Il violate herself when stipulates that Romanian President (article. 82), Prime Minister, Ministers and other members of the Government (article. 104) may not be only people who believe in God or that, although I do not believe in God, consenting to lie as you would think. To read such article 82, validation of mandate and sworn:
(2) the candidate whose election was validated lodge in front of the Chamber of Deputies and the Senate, during the session, the following oath: "I swear to me and learn all the power and prowess for the spiritual and material propasirea of the Romanian people, to respect the Constitution and laws of the country, to defend democracy, the fundamental rights and freedoms of citizens, sovereignty, independence, unity and territorial integrity of Romania. So help me God! ".
"So help me God!" is the foreign legal and philosophical foundation of the Constitution. To enter such a formula in a constitutional text represents a serious violation of the principles of democracy and discriminatory. For a faithful nonteist, as well as a Buddhist, for an atheist, an agnostic, a decorator, a-first Texas legislature, an indifferent or for a person who does not wish to declare publicly Their religious vow option, in this form, limit the right to stand as a candidate of the same Constitution.
Among the many other abuses contrary to the spirit of a liberal Constitution include excessive financing of cults (Salvation Cathedral, for example Race), recently declared of public utility in order to be able to thus increase the privileges, especially those of the Romanian Orthodox Church, religious indoctrination of pupils in public schools, eliminating the theory of evolution from the biology curricula, nurturing ostilitatii the face of modern liberal society and religious intolerance through religion textbooks approved by the Ministry of education and research collective prayers in schools, and State institutions, the army, the association with orthodoxy, including the presence of religious symbols within them etc.
A sign that Romania, however, assume it really democracy and liberal values that individual from the tyranny of the majority appear would consist in a substantial legislative and constitutional reform that would clarify the principle of denominational and neutrality of public institutions. The main problem, not easy, is to create civic pressure or politics can lead to such a reform. Doing that means to keep the Romanian society in the marshes of jumatatilor measure of the country's democracy to anyone …