Go to The Reverend Kooka Speaks About Religious Bulls#!t
- Add a comment
- Go to WHY DO PEOPLE TAKE THEIR RELIGION IN TO POLITICS?
darrkethoughts
the founding fathers, although acknowledging "providence", or "their creator", did a whole lot more than follow "their religon". Thomas Paine, Benjamin Franklin, others, did not ascribe to the "Christian" religion as we understand it, yet they basically created the framework of our freedoms.
Had the founding fathers really been "Christian", they should have ascribed to the theme of the times, which was "the divine right of kings" -- but they didn't. They didn't see any divine right there, so they fouinded a Republic.
Democracy does not come from the traditional Christianity, but from the Greeks -- and the indigenous Americans, these latter being the source of much of our country's principles.
Our founding fathers wanted to create a country that was FREE from the shackles of religion; and even the Christian leaders of the time wanted that separation, konwing that it protected them (even to the point of wanting postal service to continue on Sunday).
Religion's purpose? -- that can be debated -- but it seems to be a relationship with the religon's god; and, as a result, with other people and how we iteract there, on a personal basis.
Religon's purpose has nothing to do with government. The ideals can be transferred, yes; but -- the two are and should be separable.
posted by
Xeno-x
on April 10, 2006 at 7:08 AM
| link to this | reply
I don't think it's possible
to seperate the two. Everything I believe politically has it's roots in my religious beliefs. If I had to define religion it would be something along the lines of "the way people should live". And politics is an outgrowth of that. I think the problem is not people who base their political thoughts on religion, but on those who blindly follow anyone who claims to have the same religion. There are too many assumptions there. Just beause Bush will (maybe) throw the Christian right a bone on this abortion thing, look at all the other stuff they let him get away with ... war, lying, etc. If people could apply their beliefs to single issues instead of trying to take the easy way out and get one person or party that "fits" them then we'd get a lot farther.
posted by
DarrkeThoughts
on April 9, 2006 at 7:15 PM
| link to this | reply
I agree
posted by
kooka_lives
on April 9, 2006 at 6:05 PM
| link to this | reply
kooka_lives -- I was watching CNN a few weeks back when President Bush was
in China.
While there, he made a public statement that went something like this; "I hope that the Chinese government will grant religious freedom where it will allow all Christians to practice our religion openly and free from persecution."
If I were a citizen of the USA, I would be up in arms about such a statement made on foreign soil. There is no "our" about it for a duely elected public servant, as his constituents are comprised of all religious and non religious denominations, groups or individuals. If he were to also represent me, he had better add the words "all beliefs" or just shut up.
posted by
gomedome
on April 9, 2006 at 1:25 PM
| link to this | reply