This oughtta make Jake happy 
Some people say that you shouldn’t mix Religion and Politics, but while I believe strongly in the separation of Church and State (for the Church’s sake, mostly), I also agree with Mahatma Gandhi:
“Those who believe religion and politics must be separated understand neither.”
Anyway, I started my multi-part “manifesto” (thank Jake for that, not me) with a high-level overview of my religious beliefs because they define (hopefully) the rest of my ideology. I say this because I’ll attempt to back up my political statements below with religious reasoning. Like the Religion 1 post, however, I’m not explaining that in depth, since I’m not expecting this to be a completely air-tight argument, rather a statement of belief. Here goes!
I figure I’ll start with what a lot of people believe to be the “important issues.” Keep in mind that I’ll be speaking theoretically, and that I do not endorse either of the major parties in power here in America.
1. Separation of Church and State. I love this, only because our government started out separated from the church. Rather, our governments in this world have been operating separately from God for millennia, and I therefore don’t wish to risk the church falling victim to the influence of the state. I ultimately believe the church to be of higher moral and legal authority than the state, and this because I believe that generally the church derives it’s authority from God.
2. Sanctity of Life. This one is huge, and encompasses several concepts.
- a. Abortion - I’ll just say, see Psalm 139:13-16. That sums it up for me.
b. Euthanasia - I believe that doctor-assisted-suicide is not suicide. It’s a euphemism for murder. I don’t care if the patient is consenting - the doctor is performing the killing, this is not suicide, but homicide.
c. The Death Penalty - This one’s tough. I’ll begin by saying I’m against it. Why am I against it? Doesn’t God call for the killing of certain peoples in the Old Testament? Sure He does, but that’s when God is the government. Though it’s not scripturally condemned, I don’t believe that any government not directly ruled by God has the moral authority to execute any level of criminal, especially considering the equally egregious crimes of the state itself, in my nation’s case…
3. Homosexuality. You know, lot’s of liberal theologians claim that the Bible doesn’t condemn homosexuality, or that it’s only the Old Testament, or that it’s only written by men, and not really God-inspired. Well, I believe that they either haven’t really read the Bible, or if they have, they’ve skipped a lot of obvious scripture. Either way, I also believe that the Bible is inspired by God, and that despite two testaments, there is one Bible breathed by a God that doesn’t change between halves of the Good Book. So in short, I believe homosexuality is unnatural and sinful.
HOWEVER…I don’t believe that homosexuality is any worse than any other sin, such as lying or killing. The implications are that I should not accept homosexuality as a valid lifestyle, but I also should not treat homosexuals any worse than any other person, least of all my really sinful self.
Wow…that about does it for Politics 1, I believe. Reading only the above, I’m likely to be branded a fundamentalist conservative…Just you wait, I haven’t even touched on War, Protectionism, the Economy, Social Justice, or Social Welfare
4 Comments
Most of these should have been under a “Morality” post, I believe. While we have legislation (or the desire for legislation) in regards to most of these, your opinions about them here are concerned strictly with your beliefs about each item, rather than with a government action. Church and state excepted, of course.
While I agree that these are essentially moral issues, it’s difficult to deny that these have also become major political issues as well. I address them from a moral/religious standpoint because that’s my foundation.
I suppose it’s more implicit that I’m saying what I think about the political involvement here…and in the next political post, further relevance of this post to “politics” will be seen.
I am glad to see that you finished up against abortion, and suicide with a consistent ethic of life, something the catholic church is big on. I believe in a dual position however which is somewhat complicated. Primarily it only affects the second of your points in that section. I also believe while life is most important, compassion is key too.
Ergo…the gal on life support who can’t possibly feed herself and has no quality of life….and no forseeable chance to be “fixed” within her lifetime. Pulling the plug so to speak is compassion. It is also trusting in God to do his work of mercy with that person. An example of how your idea might go wrong goes like this. A doctor discovers a drug that allows people to live indefinitely and with a healthy activity level and look. Do you choose to do so? as a christian? I don’t….but removing one’s self from the drug by asking the Dr. to do so is not “murder” by either one of us, but rather an act of faith, a belief in something better.
It might be said that compassion could be extended the same way if a 12 y.o. girl were raped and brutaly murdered. Say the girl’s mother wants the death penalty. Those “in the action” are not acting on compassion but vengance; and that is the Lords.
In the words of Ghandi, and is evidenced by the current situation in Lebanon, “An eye for an eye will make the whole world blind”. We must above all as Christians I believe try to understand and love and to curb our natural tendencies towards anger and revenge.
But defintiely glad you added to the “Manifesto”, a good birthday present to me.
As to your original purpose I agree “Church and State must be seperate in their legal nature always, but in the sense that morality/religion can’t influence it on an individual level is ludicrous and will never be….unless the frenchies take over that is….
Another question, what is “the church” in your mind these days?
I see the “churches”, and it makes me sad, but I must confess it probably works better that way in a pragmatic sense.
oh well gotta work…Jacob
I’m with Jake on the “plug-pulling” issue, and I don’t think that’s the doctor-assisted suicide that he was talking about. I think he was referring not to removal of life support, but introduction of a substance that does the actually finishing. Natural causes versus a drug that gets the job done. I don’t think that the Lord would be pleased with that, regardless whatever intended mercies the doctor intends.
Post a Comment