Can one ignore a worldview? Of course not, the very idea is ludicrous. It is not possible to divorce one's deepest beliefs from everyday life, only applying them in certain circumstances or to important decisions.

What is a worldview? It comes from the German Weltanschauung, meaning world (Welt) and view (Anshauung). Merriam Webster describes it as "a comprehensive conception or apprehension of the world, especially from a specific standpoint." The American Heritage Dictionary puts it this way:
1. The overall perspective from which one sees and interprets the world.
2. A collection of beliefs about life and the universe held by an individual or a group. Both are known as Weltanschauung." To simplify, one's worldview is the way one sees the world and the events in it.

Everybody has a worldview. It is not possible to exist without having a standard by which one interprets everything around him. One's worldview is shaped to a large extent by his circumstances, experiences, and education.

A worldview permeates every thought one has, every action one takes. It is dictatorial in the way it controls a person and every aspect of his life. Someone who was poor as a child will weigh monetary cost against everything he does or every activity he participates in. Someone who was abused as a child will have a hard time opening up to other people in certain circumstances. Someone who was brought up to see a cause, a people, or a government as evil or good, will find it nigh impossible to change his viewpoint later on, no matter what the evidence is. The examples given are rather large examples very evident in the world today. But a worldview governs one to the point that he doesn't even think about most things he does. In this way it can betray him when he espouses viewpoints in which he doesn't really believe, and then turns around and acts contrary to what he said. Many people may not always realize it when their espoused worldview contradicts their real worldview. The doctor who smokes or drinks excessively (these things are bad for your health), the Christian who supports abortion (his God commands him not to murder), the politician who abuses his office to further a truly good cause (he is a servant of the people), and the atheist who thinks there is any ultimate purpose in life, or that he is anything but a brilliant amoeba (his worldview precludes all possibilities to the contrary on both counts), all are examples of this.

A person's worldview is religious because it is the driving force in his life. It is his standard, what he follows, what he obeys, and it dictates his perceptions of the world around him. In effect, one's worldview is one's religion. This is easy to notice and point to in openly religious people (the Christian, the Muslim, etc...), but perhaps not so easily noticed in others. Yet this does not mean they are not religious, but merely that their religion avoids the outward trappings and public gatherings that one often associates with a faith. For the atheist is just as religious as the Muslim. True, he doesn't attend a mosque, follow a written creed, or adhere to certain given teachings, but that doesn't mean he does not follow his beliefs any less devoutly than the Muslim. For the atheist has a worldview, and this is that there is no proven God (so life probably ends at death), and that this life is all there is (so we must make it fulfilling). Based on his beliefs of what is fulfilling, he will obey his worldview to the letter, and go out and live what he perceives a fulfilling life: be it in community or public service, perhaps by making friends and having a large family, or maybe by partying and living it up. The Humanist, Christian, Hindu, Agnostic, Satanist, Nihilist, and all those who's personal beliefs have no categorical name; all these people are deeply religious, their God is their worldview, and they follow it without swerving right or left.

When one is forced to avoid religious issues and arguments in the writing of a paper, one is effectively shackled against writing anything persuasive at all. He is told "avoid religious issues and arguments." He asks himself "how?" For that begs the question: one cannot divorce one's worldview from one's life, and all worldviews are religious. He is maybe instructed to write about a political cause, or perhaps a subject so insignificant that it doesn't involve religion or a worldview. But how can this be? If he were to take the example in the handbook, of arguing that people should ride bicycles to work, it would still end up being religious. For why would he have an opinion on why people should ride bicycles to work? Because his religion, his worldview dictates how he thinks. The factual benefits are that riding bicycles to work helps keep us healthy and stress free, and that it's good for the environment. The Christian and Muslim would say people should promote and follow these ideals to honor the God they believe created both body and creation (they are stewards of each, they must take care of them). But the Atheist and Humanist would promote the same ideals for entirely different reasons: the earth is our only home, we must preserve it for our posterity.

So what alternative is left to a person, to anybody? He has been basically boxed in to the point that he cannot write any persuasive paper at all. For again, his religion defines the entirety of his perception of the world, and all that is in it: he cannot state any opinion without also speaking his religion. By being banned from expounding on religious issues or arguments, he has been banned from stating any opinion on anything, be it one associated with an established religion or not. Perhaps he could write a paper trying to show how he cannot really write a paper because of this crucial problem: that he cannot use religious issues or arguments (which is by now, well-known to be impossible). But that can only work once. So his potential as a writer, and his career in his class has been strangled, all because he cannot divorce his worldview from reality.