We talk all the time about making sure not to mix politics and religion, it’s dangerous. It has even come up several times in this blog that we should not use religion to support our own political views. While, in no way, am I condoning an acontextual twisting of scriptural passage to support an otherwise weak argument, I would like to suggest that “religious” views and “political” views are not, nor should they ever be, completely separate.
When the President of the United States takes office, he promises his country, “I solemnly swear that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution...so help me God.” If politics were indeed meant to be wholly separated from faith, why would George Washington have added the phrase “so help me God” to the end of his presidential oath, and almost every president since then repeat it.
In support of Washington’s addition to the presidential oath, John Adams said, 'We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion... Our constitution was made for a moral and religious people.”
We revere the founding fathers as men endowed with enough courage and foresight to establish a country that can be ruled by moral principles. So why then should we shy away from making political decisions based on religious and moral principles? If we are ever to achieve sustainable economic prosperity, won’t it be based on the moral notion that success is gained through hard work, and that everyone deserves a fair chance? If we are to have a healthy nation, shouldn’t it be because we believe that no human life is more important than the next? If we are to have a country with a strong foreign policy, shouldn’t it be based on the idea that all humans are God’s children, that he is no respector of persons, and so neither should we?
I realize that I am not making specifics argument about policy plans. I’m not quoting numbers, nor am I even supporting one party in favor of the other. What I am saying is that if what we are striving for is “Liberty and Justice for all,” should we not elect every president based on his ability to lead us as “one Nation under God”?
5 comments:
I'm glad Heber was willing to talk about the issue of religion and poltics, especially since it's so "dangerous." I wonder if the "danger" is only compounded by the fact that most, if not all, of the contributors to this blog subscribe to a particular religion that preaches unity of mind, heart and purspose and yet, clearly, we disagree on many things related to politics. When we then venture to mix that religion with our political views in an effort to prove ourselves right or the other wrong, it does indeed get "dangerous." And yet I think Heber's points are valid and important for us to think about, especially during election season. I agree that our religous beliefs should play a role in our political decisions, and a central one at that--after all, shouldn't those beliefs be central to all that we do? However, I also believe it's not only helpful, but absolutely necessary, to discuss our political views with each other and talk about our differences, otherwise why would I have started this blog? Unfortuantely, I think we've seen both successes and failures as we've tried to mix the two on this blog. Any ideas how we can have more of the successes and fewer failures?
I don't have any ideas...
But I do just want to thank you Jed for changing the American Idol blog to a political blog.
I feel like this blog has been a very educational experience for me and politics is not something I usually engage in. But I have been drawn to this blog and like to hear about other peoples opinions. I appreciate you and your brothers and anybody else who has taken the time to break down some of the mumbo jumbo the politicans throw out there into everyday language that is much easier for me to access.
I feel like that if/when Obama wins the election I now understand much more what his ideas are and what to expect from him...something that I would have probably glossed over in the past. I have never really taken the time in any previous election to try to understand a candidates stances on things and it is nice to be enlightened. You are all very eloquent.
I think this is a great post that was so very well written and thought out.
Do we get to go back to AI when their next season starts :)
Good job, Heber. Those who want to take out any reference to God or religion, such as eliminating the phrase from the pledge of allegiance, or taking "in God we trust" off our money, wouldn't agree, but then they haven't read the Constitution.
Thanks Jenny. It's sometimes difficult to tell how helpful the blog is to people so it's nice to hear that it's been informative and helpful to you. I know I've really appreciated your contributions.
Oh, and of course we're gonna talk about AI once the new season starts! No matter what happens, The Citizen Post will never forget how it got it's start. :)
Post a Comment