File talk:Map of state religions.svg

The Finnish (both Protestant and Orthodox) and Norwegian (Protestant) Churches have a special role as being supported by the respective states' governments and constitution. They also carry out several official duties; the christening and marriage by the Finnish Protestant and Orthodox Churches are legally valid and they both are allowed to tax their members, which the state tax office does for them. In Norway, the Church's employees are state officials and the Church is directly state-funded. The Churches (Finnish Orthodox and Protestant and Norwegian Protestant) are also locally agreed as state churches, which is also proven by their constitutional position and funding. While not "state religions" by their own words, the churches enjoy such governmental and constitutional benefits that they are de facto state churches (=state religion). If they aren't viewed as state churches, so shouldn't the Danish, English nor Icelandic either as they enjoy similar, in some cases even smaller benefits than the Norwegian and Finnish churches. AFAIK the definition of being a state religion are the clear governmental and constitutional benefits over other religions, instead of being what they say (also the Wikipedia articles this map is for describe Norway and Finland as countries with state churces). Thus, Finland and Norway should be added to the map. XoravaX 00:17, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

Georgia

Can somewhat tell me what evidence is there that Georgia, apparently alone among the post-Soviet states, reestablished a state religion on independence? —Quintucket (talk) 11:41, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

When I went looking for supporting sources as explained in the section below, the source I found in support of that was this one. Since then, I have found that other sources disagree -- e.g., see info here. ----

I removed it per the sources I found, but could be wrong. (Also removed Judaism as the state religion of Mauritius, so if you put Georgia back, please don't just revert.) Kwamikagami (talk) 21:10, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

Supporting sources

I've boldly expanded the Summary section and added a Wikipedia-style References section on the image description page, and I've cited a few supporting sources there. Some of the sources cited came from a discussion at es:Wikiproyecto Discussion: Illustration / Mapping Workshop / Requests#Map "La Alpujarra Thahash". This grew out of a still-ongoing discussion at w:Wikipedia talk:Verifiability#Verifiability policy for images offered and used to illustrate article content, which has since been archived here). If I'm being too bold for Wikimedia here, feel free to correct me. In any case, input from Wikimedians is solicited for that Wikipedia discussion. Wtmitchell (talk) 04:44, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

Georgia has no official religion according to the Constitution...--George, 11:22, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

Finnland

Please check again. if the map is true --92.205.48.86 16:31, 14 September 2013 (UTC)

Finnland has no state church. Card is wrong for Finnland.

Could you elaborate? There is a reference given for the conclusion that Finland has a state church, but it seems to be down right now. Meanwhile, I can argue that the en:Evangelical Lutheran Church of Finland is established by the Section 76 of the Constitution of Finland. The church claims on its own website that it's not "in the precise sense of the term" a "state church", and seems to hint that any claim of contrary is "propagandistic" -- all while failing to argue how exactly a church established by a country's constitution is not a "state church".

So please first define a "state church", and then argue how exactly is The Evangelical Lutheran Church of Finland not a "state church"? In 2012 the Finnish Broadcasting Corporation seemed to agree that there still is a "state church" in the country, and the legal status of the church has not changed since. --hydrox (talk) 00:05, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

Actually, Finland has two state churches – evlut and orthodox. NOW the map is wrong indeed. MMN (留言) 21:49, 24 December 2017 (UTC)

Ernio48: your reference (archived from the original) seems to say: "The Church Act of the Lutheran Church and the confession and structure of the Orthodox Church is regulated through an Act of Parliament. Therefore one may conclude that there still are two state churches in Finland despite a gradual process towards fewer constitutional or other official links between the State and the two churches." How does the blank status given in the map reflect this? Finnusertop (留言) 01:11, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

Norway

After church reforms in Norway in 2012 in Norway no longer more is a state church. --188.96.191.216 22:03, 23 September 2013 (UTC)

According to our article it still is. Kwamikagami (talk) 21:09, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

Sounds much like the case with Finland. The state churches in the Nordic countries these days seem to like to make pretty bold claims that they are not actually "state churches", instead making up funny new words like "national church" or "people's church". This is probably because many people in the Nordic countries these days are strong proponents of the separation of church and state. At least Finland has compulsory church tax (levied by – you guessed it – the state), so the church is willing to go to some lengths to avoid people resigning from the church membership, e.g. if they find the idea of a state church disagreeable, because losing members means less income for the church. The church itself is thus a very poor source for defining its own relationship with the state, because it benefits tremendously from this symbiosis, and benefits even more if it can simultaneously claim that the symbiosis is not of a state church type, while that type of church-state symbiosis (like state carrying the church tax and establishing the church in its constitution) by definition implies a state church. So external sources thus far presented agree that at least the Finnish state church is a state church, contrary to what it itself claims. --hydrox (talk) 04:15, 28 December 2013 (UTC)

The state-church relationship seems to have changed now. [1] Shellwood (留言) 21:10, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

Western Sahara

AFAIK, the Polisario constitution has no state religion. Kwamikagami (talk) 21:23, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

inconsistencies with File:Secularmap.PNG

These should really be in sync. Perhaps one could go into more detail, but they shouldn't contradict each other. We've also had an objection to including Israel, but I don't know enough to judge/fix. Kwamikagami (talk) 21:34, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

Things to be fixed:

1) Norway- has now removed its former official religion (see here: [[2]])

2) Israel- Nowhere in official documents does Israel declare Judaism as its official religion. It does declare itself a "Jewish state", but Jewish in this sense means identifying as a Jew, being descended from a Jew, etc. It is the secular definition of Jewishness that Zionism used (indeed, many of the founders and Zionism's major figures were in fact totally non-observant or even atheist), that didn't refer to whether the individual actually practiced the old religion. While there is some degree of religious influence in the law, this is not the same as officially having a state religion. See this for more info: ([[3]]).

3) The text says that almost every Eastern Orthodox country has a state religion. This is not actually the case for most of them. While they do have national churches, these churches are not all established as the state religion. --Yalens (talk) 23:57, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

Greenland and Faroe Islands

According to Danish constitution:

Section 1 [Scope]

This Constitution applies to all parts of the Kingdom of Denmark.

and

Section 4 [State Church]

The Evangelical Lutheran Church shall be the Established Church of Denmark, and, as such, it shall be supported by the State.

Both Greenland and the Faroe Islands are constituent parts of the Kingdom of Denmark - thus the Church of Denmark is also the established church of mentioned parts. That's what the constitution says.

Thailand

Buddhism is not the national religion of Thailand. Because the supreme law of the country, such as the Constitution of the Kingdom of Thailand. Not stated in writing.

So it does not matter "Buddhism is the national religion of Thailand.". And also allows them to have freedom of religion as well. The freedoms outlined in the Constitution of the Kingdom of Thailand BE 2550, Section 37.

Please remove the yellow color from Thailand. Lephill (留言) 18:37, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

A person shall enjoy full liberty to profess a religion, a religious denomination or creed, and observe religious precepts or commandments or exercise a form of worship in accordance with his belief; provided that it is not contrary to his civic duties, public order or good morals.

In exercising the liberty referred to in paragraph one, a person shall be protected from any act of the State, which is derogatory to his rights or detrimental to his due benefits on the grounds of professing a religion, a religious denomination or creed or observing religious precepts or commandments or exercising a form of worship in accordance with his different belief from that of others.

— Section 37, Part 3 Rights and Liberties of an Individual, Constitution of the Kingdom of Thailand B.E. 2550 (2007)

Lephill (留言) 11:37, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

A person shall enjoy full liberty to profess a religion, and shall enjoy the liberty to exercise or practice a form of worship in accordance with his or her religious principles, provided that it shall not be adverse to the duties of the Thai people, neither shall it endanger the safety of the State, nor shall it be contrary to public order or good morals.

— Section 31, Chapter 3 Rights and Liberties of The Thai People, Constitution of the Kingdom of Thailand B.E. 2560 (2017)

Lephill (留言) 05:15, 31 October 2017 (UTC)