A Founding Freedom
I've often expressed my dislike of the so called "Religious Right" on this blog and as there is a "Blog Against Theocracy" movement going on this weekend I think it's a good time to explain those feelings. This is a post I've been planning for some time but I'm trying to throw it together today to be a part of this movement. I apologize in advance if it doesn't quite work out as planned.
Think back for a minute about who the first people to settle in America were (hopefully your thinking of the pilgrims because I don't want to have the whole Viking debate). Why did they come here? Because they wanted to practice their religion without being persecuted. The framers remembered this when they set up the separation of church and state to ensure that no religious group would feel oppressed in the United States.
Just think about it, over 200 years ago a group of people came here because they didn't want the government to tell them what religion they could subscribe to. Now flash forward to present day where we've got the 10 commandments in federal courts and James Dobson on the radio telling us not to vote for someone because they aren't Christian enough. What the Hell happened? Where was I when God started endorsing candidates?
When did it become alright for religious figures to tell people who to vote for? I'm fine with people choosing a candidate based on their values as long as they make the decision themselves but when we have some religious groups that are nothing more than thinly veiled political action committees claiming to act in the name of God I have a problem.
Our country has became that which we had hoped to avoid. The founding fathers envisioned a place where people of all religions could coexist, not just people who believe in Jesus.
Read More: Blog Against Theocracy
5 comments:
I would ask the question a different way, "When did it become WRONG for religious figures to tell people who to vote for?"
If James Dobson says you should vote for someone, is he forcing you to vote that way? Even if he says you'll go to hell for voting that way (I've never heard him say that), does that force you?
You have a right to listen to him or ignore him and decide yourself. That's why I, as a self-described conservative, read a self-described liberal's blog. Not to find things to disagree with, that's a wast of time. But to look at things from the other side.
I suggest you listen to Dr. Dobson. He's a very intelligent man. Read his thoughts, put yourself in his shoes and then go research the issues. Then decide you like or dislike his ideas.
Why should people be intolerant of the Religious Right? The pilgrims fought for a choice of religion. Not for banishing religion.
A lot of my problem with the religious right comes from events like the fuss that was made over the person that wanted to be sworn into Congress using a Koran. There were some that just seemed to find that unacceptable and those are the type of people I really have a problem with. Why do they find it okay for Christians to swear in on the Bible (which I have no problem with) but refuse to allow that right to other religions?
As I said before I have no problem with someone choosing a candidate based on the values of their religion. I do however find it a problem for someone to recommend a candidate while acting in a religious role. If a preacher wants to make a recommendation about a candidate that's fine with me as long as he isn't doing it in his sermon. If Dobson wants to make a recommendation he could do it a lot better than just saying that the person wasn't a devout Christian (as he's currently doing with the Thompson guy from Law & Order). He could instead say something more specific about why he feels that way.
I'm not calling for the banishment of religion in any way, I just want to insure that the government respects all religions equally.
You said: "I do however find it a problem for someone to recommend a candidate while acting in a religious role. If a preacher wants to make a recommendation about a candidate that's fine with me as long as he isn't doing it in his sermon."
Again, why? Why must someone in a religious role give up his right to speak about a politician? Why can't a preacher talk about a candidate (or the law even) in his sermon?
The first amendment says that "CONGRESS shall make no law." No restrictions on the man of the cloth.
I sometimes disagree with Dr. Dobson and I often disagree with Rev Al Sharpton. But I wouldn't preclude either from speaking their mind.
Incidentally, Jesse Jackson has probably spoken about politics from the pulpit more times than James Dobson.
Interesting points. I can't really disagree with you about Jesse Jackson. I'm about head out the door though so a full reply will have to wait a little bit (but one is coming).
Why can't a preacher use his sermon to endorse a candidate? I guess he can but he then needs to start reporting how much the offering plate brings in to the FEC. Why should a church be allowed to operate outside rules of other organizations that collect money and use some of that money to spread a political message? The same goes for Dobson's "Focus on the Family".
Sure the first amendment only bars Congress from passing laws about religion but that doesn't automatically give any religion the right to start deciding what should and shouldn't be law. How is a Christian (the main argument on the against side has been the Bible) law against gay marriage any different from an Islamic law about women being covered in public?
Post a Comment