Many in this nation, inside and outside the church, have taken positions on the relation of our religion and our nation. There are some easy generalizations that can be made about some groups. For example: there are those that say America is a Christian nation and there should be some kind of theocracy here (morality laws). Then there are those that say no it is not and there must not be any established religion in politics (and for some, even vacant of religious people). Some people may find it a bit surprising that I take neither one of these positions, but then again I don't know, maybe some people really do know me. For those that do know me, it won't be a surprise when I say that I have the solution. I do :) now let me share it.
Overwhelmingly our founders were Christians, or atleast were heavily influenced by Christianity. To say that this nation is not atleast influenced by Christianity is just absurd, and I think those who say that should be barred from voting (based on their low intelligence level of course). However it is just as clear that our founders wanted to avoid establishing an official religion (1st Amendment). What does that mean? Well, the first thing that must be noted is that this (1st Amendment) deals with Congress. It does not restrict the states from establishing an official religion or religiously based laws. The NC Constitution actually has a provision that prevents Atheists from holding public office. Nevertheless the general opinion of our founders, and subsequent leaders, is that the People should not be restricted in any way by religiously based laws. That's the real intent behind the establishment clause.
Does this mean that our political leaders cannot be religious? Absolutely not. Does it mean that their religion cannot affect their lawmaking votes? Again, no way. Religion will affect everything we do, but what they cannot do is force their religion on the public in a way that limits reasonable freedom. What do I mean by reasonable freedom? What I mean is that a person should be free to do whatever they want, so long as it does not have a direct impact on other people. Obviously we do not have the legal freedom to go out and kill or steal, because those actions are detrimental to others. On the other hand, we cannot take some action, which may have some minor impact on this, which then has another impact on that, and somehow use a chain of impacts to justify it being illegal. That's why the word 'reasonable' is employed.
So what about symbolic gestures, the pledge of allegiance, or having prayer in public school? This is where it becomes a gray area. Obviously the actions of government on these types of issues is going to reflect the position of most Americans. To say that the Constitution prohibits these things is very much a stretch, and as I've already mentioned, the states are free to administer some level of religion. Nobody forces you to pledge allegiance, or to say 'under God' if you do pledge. Nobody forces kids to partake in prayer, if a public school were to have a prayer. There is nothing in these actions that establishes an official religion, atleast in the way our founders saw it. They remembered quite well how the church and the government were married together. If the Pope called you a heretic, you would get the ultimate punishment. To them that was what an established religion-state was. A far cry from simply having a prayer in school, I think we can all agree. Anyways, I will leave that up to each person to decide, since its really not a big deal either way.
So what we should conclude is that our nation has a definite Christian influence, but is also definitely built in religious freedom. And it really makes perfect sense. One of the primary doctrines of the Christian faith is the doctrine of free will. It may be in the Old Testament that God established his theocracy and gave a rather detailed law to Israel, his chosen people. Jesus, however, did not do that for his Church. A church is something that is trans-national, and therefore must be atleast somewhat detached from politics. Its why Jesus said "love your enemies" and "give to Caesar what is Caesar's". Jesus was not trying to establish a nation or kingdom, but rather his Church, which could be called a spiritual kingdom. So for this reason, freedom of religion is a very Christian idea. We Christians are to evangelize, which does not mean forcing or coercing, but simply telling people about the Truth.
Now I know that some may be thinking about how against Islam I have been. I am against Islam in more ways than one. I do not think we should allow them to build a mosque two blocks from Ground Zero, and I also believe we should put some restrictions on Muslim communities. So how can I justify that if I believe in religious freedom? How would that be constitutional? The big thing about Islam is that it absolutely does NOT teach religious freedom in any way. I know there are some idiots out there that will want to dispute me on that. Go ahead and argue that I'm wrong about Islam if you want, but I will not hesitate to expose your ignorance. But what it means is that Islam is hostile to our Constitution. And as I've mentioned before about Islam, it is not so much a religion as it is a political ideology. The Constitution does not give freedom for anyone to attack the Union or force their religion. At the core, Islam seeks to do both. So what we should be doing is prosecuting or kicking out anyone that threatens to do either of these things. If someone wants to practice a corrupted version of Islam, what some have called moderate Islam, that would be just fine. But if someone practices the fundamental version of Islam, where Islam is to dominate the world by any means, then I think we should be keeping a closer eye on them and possibly be restricting their actions. I also believe that we have complete Constitutional authority to do so. The freedom to exercise religion does not include "religion" that subverts the Constitution.
It isn't a simple answer one or the other way. The relation between politics and religion is delicate. But as a Christian and an American, I am in a fortunate position. Of all religions, Christianity is the most compatible with the Constitution, and of all government types, the Constitution is the most compatible with Christianity. Though in a way, Christians do so much better when we are under persecution.
No comments:
Post a Comment