Religion and Politics
Both liberals and conservatives have become quite adept at mixing
religion and politics in our current society. One also continues to
observe an ongoing practice of civil religion demonstrated by
presidents and office-seekers on both the left and right. Generally,
the leftist merger of religion and politics has received greater
social acceptability because it has been cloaked in such rights'
causes as civil rights, women's rights, or economic rights (the social
distribution of wealth). The advocating of these rights issues have
provided an appearance of transcending religion, keeping the left
relatively free from criticism of any church and state overlap.
Christian Conservatives, however, have found it more difficult to
reasonably combine faith and politics because they have more overtly
recognized that their political positions are grounded on faith
assumptions. This has resulted in numerous attacks by both
non-Christians and Christians alike against the conservative attempt
to merge religion and politics. Three arguments have been used most
frequently against the conservative mixture of religion and politics.
In what follows each of these arguments is stated and then refuted.
The first argument is that politics is too worldly. The essence of the
argument is that politics is part of this world's system, and Christ
clearly taught His followers to "love not the world," and to flee from
worldly activities. There is a danger of becoming caught up in th...
... middle of paper ...
...hermore, in the Bible there is much political activity by
God's servants. The judges and kings ruled under God. The prophets and
Moses were quite political. Daniel served in the civil governments of
Babylon and Persia. Joseph governed in Egypt. The Apostles spoke of
following God's rules rather than men's.
In conclusion, to be obedient to Christ requires political activity.
Jesus is quite clear about the need to overcome social injustices. If
Christ tells us to confront the forces of evil, but society tells us
not to, and even makes a law against bringing religion into politics,
then who should we follow, the state or Christ? In the broadest sense,
we are called to political activity because we are responsible to
apply Christian principles and standards to all areas of our society,
and politics is one of these areas.
I vividly remember sitting in my ninth grade world history class, only six short years ago, when my teacher announced that next week we would begin a four week study on world religions. A nervous murmur swept through thirty students, all thinking the
The message of political alignment is a vast and varying concept, one that will be debated for as a long as party divisions exist. This divide however exists in not just the Christian community. We begin with the metaphor of a shepherds flock, blindly following what an individual says over ones own thinking. Boyd furthers this concept of alignment and how “many who left sincerely believe there is little ambiguity in how true Christian faith translates into politics. Since God is against abortion, Christians should vote for the pro-life candidate, they believe- and the preacher should say so” (Boyd 2). This blind adherence to one topic, one issue is unfortunately a failure on an intellectual level of all people, whether Christian or not. The
In the 2011 article ‘The True Meaning of Separation of Church and State’ by Bill Flax, “Faith is no civil contract, but a personal matter not to be profaned by politics.” These are the exact intentions of the US Constitution and the federal government. The goal is to allow citizens religious freedom that is uninhibited by federal regulation. This essay describes the fundamental reasons why faith groups and institutions should not be allowed to form political parties. This will be done by defining what religion is and how it applies to moral living. Second, this essay will cover the US Constitution and why it also defines moral living. Finally it will define why religion and government in the United States do not belong together. This essay is designed to only examine the US government.
One of the biggest misconceptions of today’s society is that politics is run by pure fact and argument, with no spiritual aspect. However, Amanda Porterfield verifies in her novel Conceived in Doubt that this statement is pretentious and false. Amanda Porterfield takes us back to the time of early government structure and development. This era in the United States is in a stage of constant change and reformation. The United States could even be argued as blind by their religious views, affecting their morals and well-being for the future of the nation. In her novel, Porterfield stresses that the government is in no way free of the church’s principles and deserts the attempt to break the bond.
Christianity’s role in America has rapidly changed over the last decades. Although it is still the most popular religion in the country its power over the people has decreased significantly. However, there are still many misconceptions towards American Christianity and in order to understand the unique nature of this religiously diverse country; one must understand its history and its citizens own views on the matter.
I sincerely hope my intentions in writing this message will not be misunderstood. Jesus was not a political figure, and I am not attempting to present Him in that manner. Nonetheless, the Bible does tell us that civil government is to be an instrument of God in bringing order to society (see Romans 13), and in order for it to accomplish this, it is important that it be modeled after the message and example of Jesus.
In his 2006 “Call to Renewal Address”, Barack Obama gives his thoughts on the role of religion in democracy through a response to earlier accusations of his un-Christianness during his 2004 Senate race against Alan Keyes. He addresses both his accuser, who suggested that Obama's views disrespect his faith as a Christian, and his liberal supporters, who urged him to ignore these statements because “a literalist reading of the Bible was folly” (2). In his speech, Obama recommends a middle ground between these two views, in which “the religiously motivated translate their concerns into universal, rather than religion-specific, values” (7), as the only way to connect religion and politics in a “pluralistic democracy” (7). This attempt, motivated in part by the role of religion in his own upbringing, is his way to “bridge the gaps that exist and overcome the prejudices each of us bring” to debates in which “faith [is] used as a tool of attack, … to belittle [and] to divide” (8). However, contradictions in his speech prevent his vision from becoming a useful model for religiously-motivated political action. Moreover, the fundamental nature of religion, which he admits “does not allow for compromise” (7), makes such a vision impossible.
Religion has always been an important part of America and America’s history, from the time the pilgrims travelled from their homelands, to now. Religion, especially Christianity, is a prominent force guiding nearly all aspects of American life. Religion is involved in societal issues, economics, and politics. Often times, it is a dominant factor in politics and can eliminate someone from any chance of a political career or it could have the opposite effect and boost someone to the top in politics. People often vote for candidates who will best represent them and if constituents want someone who is similar to them and feel will protect their religious liberties, they will likely vote for them as opposed to other candidates. This has caused a rift in America as of late because it appears as though there is a growing difference in opinions and mindsets of people across party lines. Due to this rift, democrats relate more to a liberal ideology whereas republicans are more conservative. Republicans have generally been more focused on candidates’ religion as opposed to democrats. Conservative republican focus on religion has hurt Obama in his support from church goers because they want a president in Washington who lives their life like many think a Christian should. Support for Obama among Christians has been mixed.
In present day United States there is an abundance of problems which attribute to many unhappy citizens. One of those problems being the great influence that religion has on politics; some might say that it’s taking over. While many conservative republicans and devout Christians might argue that allowing religion to influence our politics helps boost the morale of a morally-challenged population, religion, when mixed with politics, only causes deep divides between different political parties and allows unconstitutional laws to be made.
Since the early 1980's, there has also been an increase in the number of people
In the 18th century to 19th century, there were many great influential leaders of Christianity that influenced many individuals belief systems. During this time period three great movements included the relevance of liberalism, Neo-orthodoxy, and Evangelical views. These views in particular had great influence over how individuals applied biblical scripture to their everyday life.
Religion can be defined as a system of beliefs and worships which includes a code of ethics and a philosophy of life. Well over 90% of the world 's population adheres to some form of religion. The problem is that there are so many different religions. What is the right religion? What is true religion? The two most common ingredients in religions are rules and rituals. Some religions are essentially nothing more than a list of rules, dos and don 'ts, which a person must observe in order to be considered a faithful adherent of that religion, and thereby, right with the God of that religion. Two examples of rules-based religions are Islam and Judaism. Islam has its five pillars that must be observed.
For many years we have heard about the separation of church and state. Despite being written as part of the First Amendment in the Constitution, can the two really be separated? What law actually dictates the separation of church and state? The truth is that the government has never passed a law implementing a separation of church and state. What is actually written in the Constitution is: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances." America is one of the few nations in the world whose sole existence is due to religion. The pilgrims were the first to settle in America. They came in search of religious freedom, as did many others after them. Many of America's early documents, laws, and freedoms were based on religious beliefs. We could look at several similar examples. The fact is that freedom of religion, speech, press, peaceful assembly, and to petition the government are all covered in the First Amendment. The first of these firsts is the freedom of religion. This most likely means that when the authors of the Bill of Rights prepared the first ten amendment to the Constitution, the first thing on their minds was protecting or possibly creating a freedom of religion; but what about the separation of church and state? If our founding fathers intended the separation we are now levied with would their earliest documents contain phrases such as "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness…" This is part of the Declaration of Independence. Here is another example from Lincoln's Gettysburg Address, "…that is this nation under God shall have a new birth of freedom, and that government of the people, by the people, for the people shall not perish from the earth." Even in the Pledge of Allegiance the nation is referred to as "…one nation under God…" Religion also plays an important role in politics. As once stated by Ronald Reagan "politics and morality are inseparable, and as morality's foundation is religion, religion and politics are necessarily related.
Religion, a word shrouded with mystery, confusion and complexity. For some it is the answer to everything, a path to guidance and hope. For others it is the reason for all evil or just a manmade phenomenon for people who refuse to understand that everything happens for a scientific reason. Whatever the case is, it is a topic that is quite controversial and much debated among scientists, cultural theorist and conspiracy theorists. Religion plays a major role in functioning and forming social and psychological behavior of a society. It is connected more towards the emotional side of a person and everyone has their own perspective about it. Therefore religion has become an important part of human identity.
The role of religion in politics is a topic that has long been argued, and has contributed to the start of wars, schisms (both political and religious), and other forms of inter and intra-state conflict. This topic, as a result of its checkered past, has become quite controversial, with many different viewpoints. One argument, put forth by many people throughout history, is that religion and the government should remain separate to avoid any conflicting interests. This view also typically suggests that there is one, or several, large and organized religions like the Roman Catholic Church, which would be able to use their “divine” authority to sway the politics of a given state by promising or threatening some form of godly approval or disapproval. By leveraging their divine power, individual figures within a religion, as well as the religion as a whole, could gain secular power for themselves, or over others. A second view, which was developed by many theologians through history, suggests that that without religion there would be a general lack of morality in the people and leaders of a given state, which would give way to poor political decisions that would not be in the interest of the people and perhaps even God (or the gods). This argument, however, does not address the fact that morality can exist without religion. In sociology, it is commonly accepted that social norms, which include morality, can result from any number of things. Religion, laws, or the basic desire of survival can all create these norms, so it suffices to say that as a society, our morals reflect our desire to live in relative peace through the creation of laws that serve to help us to survive. The argument of whether or not religion and politics should mix...