Evaluate the view that religion is an important source of moral values in contemporary societies. (33 marks)

Evaluate the view that religion is an important source of moral values in contemporary societies. (33 marks)
Over the past years, there has been a great differ in the views of society and how people see religion and how important and influential it is to our moral values in contemporary societies today. This essay will look at why various different theory ideologies and their ideas about religion, and how it influences us day to day in our lives.
The definition of a religion can vary depending on who you ask. The simplest definition of a religion is that for a religion to become a religion, there must be a belief of the supernatural and must also be a belief in God. The functionalists hold a different perspective on religion. Functionalists see religion as being there to fulfil the needs of society for example, functionalists feel that religion sets certain norms and values for society and gives people morals. Durkheim see's religion as something that contributes to society, rather than to any specific belief in god or any supernatural life form. For functionalists, society is a system of interrelated parts with basic needs that must be met in order to survive. Religion plays a key function for society as it creates social solidarity and a value consensus. Durkheim says that the key feature of religion is not a belief in gods or the supernatural, but a fundamental distinction between the sacred and the profane; as long as you see what you worship as sacred then Durkheim says that it is fine to be a religion. Durkheim believes in the collective conscience - a set of shared norms, values, beliefs and knowledge. Like in Durkheim's study of Totemism, it was proven that shared rituals bind individuals together, reminding them they are part of a group and reinforcing the idea of 'togetherness' in society. Moreover, other functionalists such as Malinowski, Parsons and Bellah, all share the same set of ideas that Durkheim has. Malinowski agrees that religion promotes solidarity however, he feels that it does this by helping individuals cope with emotional stress that would undermine social solidarity. He feels like religion does this in two types of situation - in situations where the outcome in uncontrollable and uncertain and when an individual is at time of life crises, without religion, situations like life crises would cause disruption to society and moral values would be lost. Similarly, Parsons also sees religion as helping individuals cope with unforeseen events and uncontrollable circumstances like Malinowski however; Bellah agrees with these views but takes a different approach. Bellah, as the Neo-Funtionalist, sees religion as a belief system that attaches sacred qualities to society itself such as a civil religion for example, in America, their 'civil religion' means both loyalty to the state and a belief in god and is expressed in certain rituals such as the pledge of allegiance to the flag. Functionalism therefore emphasises the positive functions religion performs on moral values in contemporary societies but neglects the negative aspects such as religion being a source of oppression of the poor or women. It also ignores religion as a source of division in modern societies where there is more than one religion therefore making it hard to see how religion can unify people and promote integration.
On the other hand, Marxists view religion completely differently. Marxists feel that religion is only there to soften the blow for the proletariat. Karl Marx feels that religion is used to discourage people from attempting to change their situation. Marx believes that religion creates a false conscience that the poor will be much more favoured and will be rewarded in the afterlife, offering them an illusion of hope. He also believes that religion acts as an opiate to dull the pain produced by oppression, and does little to solve the problem as it makes life more bearable therefore, restricting change. Marx also sees religion as a product of alienation, becoming separated from or losing control over something that an individual has produced or created therefore, justifying social inequality. Evidence of the legitimation of inequality can be found in the 'Hindu caste system' - it is a system of social stratification based on the ascribed status that is passed down to you from your parents. It teaches a 'doctrine of karma' which tells you that if you behave well in the world, after death you will be reincarnated into a higher caste. By doing this, the caste system is reinforcing inequality and assuring that those at the bottom (poor) stay there without questioning their position by giving them false hope of a better life after the afterlife, providing they behave well and conform to society and it's rules and morals. On the other hand, Neo-Marxist's such as Engles, see religion as a radical force which takes an active role in effecting revolutionary social change - it helps the working class man fight the middle class man, i.e. Capitalism. Another Neo-Marxist, Antonio Gramsci, agreed with Engles and said that if the socialist age were to come, it would require proletariat action - the communist society would need the middle class man so by killing capitalism and the middle class man, working class would suffer/loose. In addition, feminists also view religion differently. Firstly, Liberal feminists view religion as being unequal. They feel this way because the church is unequal in the sense that there are very few women who hold a religious job. Jean Holm argued that while many religions have stressed the equality between men and women, in practice they are not. Although women have their own parts to play in religions, it is usually subordinate to the role of men. For example, in Japanese folk religions, the women are expected to organise public rituals however, it is only the men who can take part in the public performances. While most feminists see religion as being male dominated and as a patriarchal institution that reinforces oppression onto women, there is feminists who disagree. Nawal El Saadawi notes that while religion may be used to oppress women, it is not the direct cause of their oppression but instead believes it is the result of patriarchal societies forming in the last few thousand years. According to Karen Armstrong, where in early religions they often placed women at the centre e.g. 'earth mother goddess', it was the rise of monotheistic religions that allowed the uprising of all single male powerful gods - which here supports Nawal El Saadawi's point.
Postmodernist sociologists take a dynamic view on religion. Postmodernists believe that society is fragmented and people gain their identity through a result of their selection of lifestyles. In contemporary society, religion is now becoming more ‘privatised’, people may now select from a belief system which they favour most and shape them into personal philosophies. In the past, religion was not open to negotiation. Giddens believes that modern societies have moved into a new phase of ‘high modernity’ and that there is increased reflexivity – people are becoming more willing to change their beliefs, practices and institutions because of new knowledge and experience. As a result of this, traditional beliefs are questioned. Local communities become less significant and religious beliefs are less likely to be reinforced. Bauman suggests that modernity was a gigantic exercise in getting rid of individuals responsibility by putting ethical problems onto one side. This raised problems with morality and ethics, leaving individuals with no external rules to govern their lives meaning that all moral values are lost. For example, with many existential questions and how they tend to be separated from everyday life in high modernity, and in the absence of rules about moral values and how individuals should behave people are left with only two possible ways of reassurance – seeking justification for their own personal choices from ‘experts ‘ in particular fields or to rely on a ‘mass following’. Following a crowd so you don’t look too out of step or unfashionable compared to others.
To conclude, religion plays a huge role of retaining moral values in contemporary societies. Functionalists say that religion is a good thing that helps society come together as a whole one living organism sharing the same moral values and norms which keep everyone in their place and stops and outbreak of a religious revolution. The same can be said with Marxists however, Marxists see religion as a way of stopping a religious revolution through keeping the proletariat poor and the bourgeoisie rich. They find the bourgeoisie use religion to create a false conscience that the poor with be favoured in the afterlife. Moreover, feminists see religion as acting as a smoke screen stopping something they really desire like equality with men. In addition, postmodernists say that with the rise in choices of more religious lifestyles, people have the freedom to choose which path to take, without one set on rules, individuals with no external rules to govern their lives, no norm or values to follow. Without religion, people would do stuff for them and not for society.