Question

I wanted to ask your opinion about an issue I found myself discussing over the last few days –

Should a person of faith expect the broader public, which does not believe, to respect his values even when they contradict democracy, on the understanding that from the perspective of a religious person, religious values take precedence over the value of democracy?

For example: suppose there were a democratic decision forbidding the circumcision of an eight-day-old baby. Would a religious person have an argument to explain, in a reasoned way, why his religious values take precedence over the value of democracy—not on the grounds that the Torah is true, but on the grounds that if I believe it is true, then even if you do not accept my proofs that the Torah is true, logic still says that you should understand that for me Torah comes before democracy and take that into account.

This question interests me because if there is no such argument, then basically, so long as I have not proven to everyone that the Torah is true, I cannot expect people to accept my religious conduct. For example, I cannot expect a secular person to understand that it is okay for me to go to yeshiva and not to the army because I believe that Torah protects the Jewish people.