Political News Political Books Political DVDs Political Software
»User: »Password:   Remember Me? 

Political Discussion / Politics / General Political Discussion / The religious right power ebbs

Posted:  01 Oct 2007 20:08
Thoughts?

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/226/story/20062.html
Posted:  01 Oct 2007 20:34
This is an older article, right?
__________________
1 TIMOTHY 1
15 This is a faithful saying, and worthy of all acceptation, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief.
Posted:  01 Oct 2007 20:44
Yesterday …
Posted:  01 Oct 2007 22:52
So...Can we thank Bush for getting people's minds off religious items and onto political ones?

Funny...
__________________
But the backdrops peel and the sets give way and the cast get eaten by the play, there's a murderer at the matinee, there are dead men in the aisles

And the patrons and the actors too are uncertain if the show is through and with sidelong looks await their cue, but the frozen mask just smiles
Posted:  01 Oct 2007 23:51
I know this. God's power isn't waning. He's still on the throne.
__________________
Lucas McCain the Rifleman: A man doesn't run from a fight, Mark...but that doesn't mean you should go running *to* one, either.
Posted:  02 Oct 2007 00:49
Quote:
God's power isn't waning. He's still on the throne.
I agree and i also think people are more worried about the economy, healthcare, and the war than some of the other issues... all in all like i said in other posts Dems. or REP who can tell there to me is no line just a mixed margarita going on  they all need slapped in the dang head
__________________
i'm telling you the MOAB will solve all our problems
Posted:  02 Oct 2007 04:32
Captain, I may be mistaken, but I could have sworn I read this same article over a year ago. It all gets to be a blur after all the stuff I wind up reading, but with a few date changes, the opening 2 or 3 paragraphs seem very very familiar. I may have even blogged about this on bureaucrash
__________________
1 TIMOTHY 1
15 This is a faithful saying, and worthy of all acceptation, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief.
Posted:  02 Oct 2007 16:31
Well, I think it's been trending this way since 2005 or so: People are sick of wedge issues being forced down their throats by the GOP, which has its own internal issues with homosexuality. As well, the RR has discovered that the GOP isn't going to end abortion, nor are they really going to sanction their religion.

As well, many religious people aren't in lockstep with the GOP about healthcare, the economy and the war (like hockeyman said).

This is good for all. Like James Madison said: "Every new & successful example therefore of a perfect separation between ecclesiastical and civil matters, is of importance. And I have no doubt that every new example, will succeed, as every past one has done, in shewing that religion & Gov will both exist in greater purity, the less they are mixed together"
Posted:  02 Oct 2007 16:36
Well, without getting into this too deep, let me summarize. In an increasingly secular society, this is exactly how I would expect it to pan out.
__________________
1 TIMOTHY 1
15 This is a faithful saying, and worthy of all acceptation, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief.
Posted:  02 Oct 2007 16:40
Like Madison said? That it's better to keep them separate and pure?
Posted:  02 Oct 2007 18:23
You know, Captain, you raise an interesting point.  One of the foundational ideas behind America is that our Creator is the giver of our liberties and many of the Founders felt it wasn't inappropriate for us to corporately express that sentiment. The early writings are full of discussions, scripture references (both pro and con), references to Divine Providence or even God peppered their speeches, and personal letters. In fact, no one even raised a fuss when they put a Bible verse on the Liberty Bell! If we beleive foundationally that God is the Author of our liberty, then I also don't feel that some sort of mechanism by which we can corporately express that is inappropriate now either. However, we have divorced ourselves as  a society so far from that concept that  any attempt to do now some of the things that were done then would cause spastic convulsions. Ironically, I think that many of the discussions we have here are closer in spirit to what the Founders intended than what passes for social discourse in the public square.
  Now, keeping them separate and pure. Absolutely, but not so much because I fear the tyranny of the church over the government, but rather the latter. The state naturally seeks to extends it control over people's lives, and in spiritual matters, is way out of its jurisdiction. For example, the Bible Institute I attended (but didnt finish) refused accreditation because to do so would have been a slippery slope to need government approval on curriculum. That, in my opinion is a good example of  separation to keep them both pure.
For a quick example, I have no problem with a politician saying "I believe Jesus Christ is the only way to heaven and that someone, if they are so inclined should find a good church and attend it." I would vehemently oppose the same politician saying "I will now dispatch the National Guard to enforce church attendance." I would not be opposed to a church informing its members about political issues of the day (in fact this has great historical precedent). I would have a problem with the state requesting copies of sermon transcripts or wanting to approve of sermons in advance. I hope those are clear enough examples.
__________________
1 TIMOTHY 1
15 This is a faithful saying, and worthy of all acceptation, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief.
Posted:  02 Oct 2007 18:49
Well put …
Posted:  02 Oct 2007 20:38
Preacher Man, I think we are pretty close to being right in sync on this. The thing is as you have said our founders wanted the government to stay out of the church. I don't think they intended the church to stay out of government to the degree that modern liberals are advocating. It's like telling Christians you can't vote if you go by the moral values you've aquired in church or your belief in God. Religion is something you take with you no matter where you go be it on public property or the voting booth.


__________________
Lucas McCain the Rifleman: A man doesn't run from a fight, Mark...but that doesn't mean you should go running *to* one, either.
Posted:  02 Oct 2007 20:42
Quote:
I don't think they intended the church to stay out of government to the degree that modern liberals are advocating.


You don't think? Therefore, you are making a guess, despite overwhelming quotes to the contrary. That's plain stupidity.

Again, James Madison (from earlier in the post):
"Every new & successful example therefore of a perfect separation between ecclesiastical and civil matters, is of importance. And I have no doubt that every new example, will succeed, as every past one has done, in shewing that religion & Gov will both exist in greater purity, the less they are mixed together."