Topic: Government Regulation
A Meditation Concering Church and State It is possible to argue that church and state are not necessarily separate. If they are not, it is possible that they could unite. God help us all.by Kishi
(Centrist)
Sunday, February 3, 2008
Today's column is centered on an issue that I feel is very near and dear to my heart. Yes, theism. I know what I said earlier, that I would write politics because this is a political place. I argue that this is political on the basis that, for better or worse, religion plays a part in our politics. It determines what sort of policies get a voice, what can be realistically passed. For Heaven's sake, the Evangelical movement counts as a voter bloc. The fact that politicians can court these religious groups and get serious political momentum from them illustrates the role of religion in our politics.
The reason I'm thinking upon this now is that, during one of my recent discussions with my conservative friends, it was brought to my attention that the Constitution does not actually act to separate Church and State. Furthermore, he went on to posit that our earliest documents as a nation claim their rights as coming from God.
I looked it up, and apparently it's true. They were wrong on some of the finer points: the talk of God is confined to the Declaration of Independence, and it is not our Constitution; nor does the Constitution acknowledge a deity. But the general point was correct - the state is forbidden from interfering in matters of religion, but there's nothing saying that religion can't interfere in matters of the state.
So the separation of Church and State does not actually exist in our Constitution. We can have a theocracy, at least in everything but name. It cannot legally pass laws in favor of one religion or the other, but such a body can pass laws in keeping with the religion's views on political and social issues. That includes making an amendment that could abolish the freedom of religion, and another that could instate one religion over the others.
Wait a minute. That means that a theocracy then could legally pass laws in favor of one religion, which could include passing that religion's moral agenda or suppressing alternate points of view.
But wait! That couldn't possibly happen, could it? The last time the Constitution was used for specific legislature was Prohibition, and we all know how that turned out.
Except that we live in a country that identifies itself as eighty percent Christian, as of 2001. Add in the fact that the majority of that group probably doesn't understand the issues at hand, which is normal in this country. Add in the odds that the majority of them will favor the advancement of their religion. If eighty percent of our population felt strongly enough to identify themselves as Christians, they probably feel strongly enough about it to let it influence their decisions, at least insofar as morality is concerned. They could let it influence more. The Evangelicals don't have a monopoly on faith-based reasoning.
It could happen. This is the kind of country where Huckabee could talk about rewriting the Constitution to meet 'God's standards' and people agree with him. That's the dual beauty and horror of this country - any voice can be heard, even if it means drowning out all others.
So, as an admitted theist, let me speak plainly: theocracy scares the living crap out of me. And here's why:
Theocracy works on the basis of a uniform interpretation of a given set of scriptures or holy writ. That means that there can be no disagreement amongst the ruling class of bishops or caliphs or brahmins or whatever. That means favoring one sect of a given religion over all others. The only realistic way around that is to set up a ruling council composed of all the sects, but let's be honest with each other: how likely is it that the sects, each of whom look at their interpretation as absolute truth, are going to bend for each other?
Let's look at Christianity, just because it's the easy example. Christianity has at least nineteen different sects present including Catholics, Baptists, Lutherans, Mormons, and Jehovah's Witnesses. You can see the problem already. Christianity can't even decide which avowed Christ-followers are really Christian or not. Catholics won't bow to Lutherans, Baptists won't bow to Mormons or Jehovah's Witnesses. Or Catholics. Maybe Lutherans, and that's a maybe.
So let's say you go with the efficient route and use one denomination specifically. Who gets picked? Which one is the most likely to treat the other points of view fairly? Sure, you could elect one, but that just leads to tyranny by the sect with the largest voting base. You'll never see an Eastern Orthodox president or a Methodist or - ironically - an Evangelical.
Remember: people don't vote based on issues, they vote based on name recognition and similarity of ideal.
If that's permissible, then our government will be in a position to dictate morality and to endorse prejudice against people of all creeds and faiths that disagree with the state. It gains the power to dictate our very thoughts, consequentially stripping us of our freedoms.
And as a Zen Christian, I simply will not stand for it. I love my country, and the union of church and state is unholy and evil. Love may endure evil, as St. Paul says, but it does not abide evil. The state exists for the purpose of preserving its people - all of them, no matter what they believe.
Did you like this article? If you did, Thumb It! 6 thumbs so far
2008 Kishi, all rights reserved.
Published: Sunday, February 3, 2008
Last modified: Sunday, February 3, 2008
The views expressed in this
article are those of Kishi only and do not represent
the views of Nolan Chart, LLC or its affiliates. Kishi is
solely responsible for the contents of this article and is not an
employee or otherwise affiliated with Nolan Chart, LLC in his/her role as a columnist.
Posted By: Danny Haszard
Date: 2008-02-03 11:45:40
Jehovah's Witnesses once fighters for free speech are now totalitarian because they try to cut you off from others who do not have the same beliefs, including family.
They will extol and preach "God's Kingdom" and this sounds attractive,what they hide from you is their Watchtower sect version that Jesus has already had his second coming in 1914 and is working "invisibly" through them. They have won 37 of their 46 U.S. Supreme Court cases, assuring us all of freedom of speech and assembly and equal protection under the law.
The sad irony is that the Watchtower Society *daily* abuses the human rights of thousands of its members. It denies current members the right of free speech by forbidding them to speak to former members, even close family members.
And it denies former members their right of freedom of worship by refusing to allow them to leave the religion with dignity, should they come to disagree with Watchtower's practices or doctrines. The 'religion' of Jehovah's Witnesses controls every aspect of its members' lives.
The Watchtower is a truly Orwellian world now.~Danny Haszard
Evangelical Christians are the biggest idiots in the world when it comes to personal freedom. They literally think that the founding fathers were good Christian men. If you tell them that Thomas Jefferson owned his own personally edited Bible and Quran. empregnated a concubine slave (how biblical of him!), and grew tobacco and canibis in his garden, they think that you are lying. These people are big time anti-personal freedom thinkers. They absolutley would hate to have a Ron Paul in office.
Good points overall. However, I would beg to differ with the statement: "Christianity can't even decide which avowed Christ-followers are really Christian or not" in reference to JWs and Mormons. Any knowledgeable mainstream Christian knows that cults such as these preach an entirely different Gospel and an entirely different Jesus than the one of Scripture. (2 Corinthians 11:3, 4). Any Christian who knows what the cults teach and how it is at deference to Scripture, is not fooled into thinking these groups are the least bit Christian or followers of the true Christ of the Bible. The only ones who are not able to see the distinction are simply uneducated on the issue.
Candy P your in a cult too! LOL All religions teach stupidity. Why was it ok for King David, Saul, and Solomon to have multiple wives, but it was not ok for any christian to practice polygamy?
@ Candy P: I would agree with you, except that any Mormon or JW you talk to is going to claim to be a Christian. That's the basis for the disagreement between the branches. 'Any knowledgable mainstream Christian knows that cults such as these preach an entirely different Gospel and an entirely different Jesus than the one of Scripture.' But JWs and Mormons are no more or less mainstream than any other denomination on average. The figures are all comparable. So we basically have mainstream branches trying to figure out what this whole Christianity thing really means.
Kishi: The term Theocracy literally means 'God Rule', not 'religion rule' as you so appropriately fear. Religions mark on government and rulership has equaled or exceeded any secular cruelty and corruption. Religion and national rulership both divide and separate. True Theocracy is Rulership by God from heaven over the earth, will unite all people under God, and totally remove human error, bias, prejudice, and greed. Rather than something to fear, this pure form of God rule is something to welcome, embrace, and hope in.
@Polego62: You are right in the literal meaning of the word. However, in this world, words tend to have two meanings: literal and symbolic. The literal meaning of the word is its pure meaning. The symbolic meaning is what the word stands for today.
Let me give you an example: pro-choice and pro-life. Literally, the words mean 'for choice' and 'for life.' But they symbolize 'for abortion' and 'against abortion,' respectively. The world doesn't work on the literal definitions of words, just on what they symbolize.
Theocracy, 'God Rule,' in its literal meaning is nothing to fear. You're correct. However, theocracy symbolizes 'Rule by those speaking for God.' And I've observed that people justify some pretty harsh things in the name of love and peace and all that. That's what theocracy is as of now.
The true measure of whom is a Christian is to observe who will observe and follow what Jesus taught--in other words who is no part of this world and shows love towards all. Those who tolerate the practicing of sin in the group are in no way better than those who expel the unrepentent sinner with the hope that they will repent and return. Jesus spoke often about the real theocracy..God's Kingdom.. the Lord;s Prayer taught his followers to pray for that Kingdom to come and rule on earth as in Heaven.. and that rulership will not be what men today term a 'Theocracy' while misruling their nation. Thy Kingdom Come......
The funny thing is, while Christianity is proclaimed as the religion of choice by most americans. Over 99% have never read the entire bible. Most don't know firsthand what the bible teaches, only what their preacher tells them. In fact it's so absurd that many people believe that Jesus actually carried a King James bible. Isn't that a hoot.
The teachings of Jesus are so far removed from almost all christian religions, it's actually amazing they call themselves christian.
When you have a chance, read the bible book of Mark, it's the shortest of the gospels and won't take over 30 minutes to read. Does Jesus sound like a guy who would support:
- The Crusades?
- The Inquisition?
- Warfare in General?
- Politics?
- Infant Baptism?
- Commercialization of chuches?
- etc. etc. etc.
Did Jesus ever sound like he was making himself equal to his father? What was the point of being tempted by the devil, if Jesus was already part of God (Matthew 4)?
If you aren't into reading the bible, read the encyclopedia britanica on subjects like Christmas, Easter, Trinity, Council of Nicea, Marcion, Tertullian, Origen, Justin Martyr, etc. etc. etc. It's amazing how much was made up, after Jesus died.
What you will find is, the christianity practiced by "Christians" in the US, is nothing more than a mixture of beliefs designed to entertain and make people feel better on sunday. In fact the apostle Paul taught that this would happen when he said, that people would gather to themselves teachers who would tickle their ears. You can google this and find the scripture easily enough.
What I find most entertaining, is that most Muslim Americans are much more familiar with Jesus teachings than "Christian" Americans. That should tell you something.
It is very much like the current state of general political thought. People's personal religion/politics is defined by buzz words, tradition, political correctness and ethical convenience. Rarely do they look beneath the surface. Rarely do they look deeply at the history of their religious/political movement. Rarely do they study the documents written by the founders of their religious/political movement.
Want to comment on this
article? Leave your comment here. Your email address is
required to track your comment. However, we will neither
publish your email address nor distribute it to other
organizations or persons. The only reason we might use
it would be if we needed to contact you regarding your
comment. All comments are subject to our
terms of use policy.
2008 Kishi, all rights reserved.