Like Button

Saturday, August 25, 2007

Politics and Religion

In a recent episode of Hardball, Chris Matthews was complaining about the president. (No surprise there, eh?) He was stunned. The president had indicated that he believed in God, and he believed that God wanted people to be free, so the president wanted to stay in Iraq until they were free. It seemed, Chris thought, that the president was making decisions based on his religion. How could that be?!

It's not just Matthews. Lots of people are suggesting that it is imperative that we leave religion out of politics. You'll even find Christians making that argument. Politics and religion shouldn't be mixed. It is borne, I suppose, on the fear of a theocracy. We can see what nations run by religion look like in many Islamic countries. It's not good. But nothing in Christianity lends itself to a theocracy. It doesn't work. Christianity is a relationship with God, not a way to govern the world. There is a radical, biblical disconnect between the two.

Theocracy may be the fear, but it's not theocracy that is being protested. It's the mere suggestion that someone is allowing their religious beliefs to determine their choices. When Bob Vernon, a Christian and an Assistant Chief in the LAPD, went to his pastor to ask what he should do when confronting abortion protesters, he was fired. It didn't matter that his pastor told him to enforce the law. The mere fact that he asked made it bad. You must not mix government with religion. When George Bush was asked who his favorite philosopher was, he answered Jesus Christ, and the press went wild. A fanatic running for President!! You must not mix government with religion. Some have even suggested that religion be outlawed from politics. How that would be enforced I don't know, but it has been suggested.

I'm trying to figure out the suggestion. First, religion isn't a suit one puts on to go to work. You can't put it in a closet and take it out on Sundays. To suggest that it be banned from the public square is to insist that anyone with beliefs be banned from the public square, since you can't leave them at home. More importantly, the only logical basis for a moral system is the belief in a moral Lawgiver. While religion may not play a major role in national fiscal policy or taxation rules, it is the only source of instructions on matters like murder, rape, and child molesting. If you demand that religion be removed from the lawmakers of the land, then you remove any basis for moral choices. Business ethics go out the window. Rules against experimenting on children have no ground. Laws founded on issues of morality that affect the society have no foundation. In short, banning one's religion in the realm of government bans the basis for the majority of the role of government.

There is little doubt that President Bush is doing what he believes to be right based, in part, on his religious views. There is no denying it. But so is every other politician in office. Some have little religion and little to act on. But when Congressman Keith Ellison took office, he took the oath of office on the Quran, and very few complained about that.

Religion is the basis for many aspects of life, and forms our perspectives on much of life. The call to eliminate it from the public square in general and politics in particular is nonsense. You could just as easily ban breathing. Even if one's religion is no religion at all, it shapes your thinking and forms your values. Until the freedom of those functions is taken away, religion will be a fundamental part of all government ... and ought to be. The question isn't whether or not it should be; the question is what kind of religious views will have what kind of affect. That's not the same question.

2 comments:

Jim Jordan said...

Hi Stan
The no-religion in the public square is a liberal construct. They just don't agree with the outcome so they use this canard of "no religion" to silence their opponents. "Hate crime" laws are another way. Deep inside every liberal is a yearning to breathe totalitarianism.

Can you name one instance when the "no-religion" ploy was used to thwart something that wasn't biblically sound?

Ironically, Ellison used Thomas Jefferson's Qur'an in his swearing in, the same Qur'an Jefferson used to understand the minds of the Muslim radicals attacking our ships...so he could defeat them. Ellison is perhaps the most ignorant candidate ever elected to office in the US.

Stan said...

On Ellison ... so true. I posted the very same thing back when he did it. Too bad so few actually look into the claims.

Hey, Jim, while I'm at it, I just wanted to tell you I read your stuff every time. I don't comment much, but I'm there. Good stuff. Keep at it.