The Rise of Church and State in America

[MichaelHarris]

The Rise of Church and State in America

With President Bush’s recent announcement asking Congress for an amendment to the Constitution regarding same sex marriage, we enter tumultuous times. The battle between the conservative right and the liberal left in this renewed culture war has found its battleground, the Constitution. Throughout America’s history there have always been "morality swings", beginning with the Temperance Movement in 1869, to the modern day Prohibitionist Party, the religious conservative right has sought to change the values of America. From the Scopes Trial in 1925 to the present, the "traditionalists" have fought the "modernists" in a battle for morality. The Georgia Board of Education’s recent decision to remove the word "evolution" from the high school curriculum is evidence of this ongoing battle between the right and left. The Super Bowl halftime show and the recent removal of Howard Stern from the Clear Channel radio network have added fuel to the fire in this culture war. Using the Bible and its many “Laws”, the religious Conservative right wishes to dictate morality to the rest of the populace in the courts, from the pulpit, and in the Constitution. The Bible contains countless barbaric and tyrannical laws, most handed down by God. The religious right would have us believe that these laws were written by mortal man, thus rendering them fallible, but as we shall see the majority of these laws were derived from the word of God. The same is true for the atrocities mentioned in the Bible. These were not acts committed by mortal man alone, they were acts commanded by God. The conservative right fails to see the hypocrisy of this “picking and choosing” of God’s Laws to enforce. On one hand they condemn homosexuality and same-sex marriage while ignoring laws such as, "Anyone who curses his father or mother must be put to death." (Exodus 12). Religious conservatives would argue that Biblical Law is obsolete and no longer valid today. Using their own argument couldn’t it be said that the condemnation of homosexuality also be obsolete? Our forefathers saw the need to separate church and state, the laws of God, and the laws of man. One can only imagine a Constitution based solely on God’s word.

In 1988 Jimmy Swaggart stood before his congregation and confessed his sin of adultery, then turned to his wife and said, "I have sinned against you and I beg your forgiveness". On March 19, 1987 Jim Bakker, caught in an adulterous affair claims he was, "wickedly manipulated by treacherous former friends and colleagues who victimized me with the aid of a female confederate... Vulnerable as I was at the time, I was set up as part of a scheme to co-opt me and obtain some advantage for themselves over me in connection with their hope for position in the ministry." Jerry Falwell, called in to rescue Bakker’s PTL Ministry was quoted as saying, "God sent me there to bring an abrupt end to the immorality and financial fraud of this 'religious soap opera' that had become an international embarrassment to the Christian gospel." These three men, well known crusaders against homosexuality and same-sex marriage never once mentioned Deuteronomy 22 in which God says to Moses, "If a man be found lying with a woman married to a husband, then they shall both of them die, both the man that lay with the woman, and the woman: so shalt thou put away evil from Israel". Would these so-called Christian leaders support an amendment against adultery? Which argument, outlined above would the religious right use?

In 1619 a Dutch slave trader exchanged his cargo of Africans for food in Jamestown. These Africans became indentured manservants and maidservants. The conception of a racial-based slave system did not develop until the 1680's, in fact the word slave did not appear in Virginia records until 1656. Between 1830 and 1860 the Abolitionist Movement was born. The American Anti-Slavery Society, established in 1833, flooded the slave states with abolitionist literature and lobbied in Washington, D.C. Writers like J.G. Whittier and orators such as Wendell Phillips lent strength to the cause. Northern evangelists recognized the moral urgency to end the sinful practice of slavery. These evangelists did not use the word of God to fight slavery. They recognized the injustice and chose to fight this battle outside the bounds of God and the Bible. At a time when modern evangelists want us to turn to the Bible for laws governing man we must look back to the Bible and its position on slavery. "If a man beats his male or female slave with a rod and the slave dies as a direct result, he must be punished, but he is not to be punished if the slave gets up after a day or two, since the slave is his property." (Exodus 21:20) How far would this new Christian right want us to go in basing laws and amendments on scripture? The evangelists of old saw the evil in slavery and its place in the Bible; they saw the benefit of a separation of church and state. Can the new religious right deny the Biblical positions mentioned in the Bible concerning slavery? If they choose to recognize slavery as a barbaric practice why can’t they accept same-sex marriage? Is this an argument of Biblical Law being obsolete? It’s this hypocrisy that upsets the liberal left.

On November 2, 1920 over 8 million women voted in America for the first time. In 1848 Elizabeth Cady Stanton penned the Declaration of Sentiments declaring, "men and women are created equal," and proposed that women should vote.

"The history of mankind is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations on the part of man toward woman, having in direct object the establishment of an absolute tyranny over her. To prove this, let facts be submitted to a candid world.
He has never permitted her to exercise her inalienable right to the elective franchise.
He has compelled her to submit to laws, in the formation of which she had no voice.
He has withheld from her rights, which are given to the most ignorant and degraded men - both natives and foreigners. Having deprived her of this first right as a citizen, the elective franchise, thereby leaving her without representation in the halls of legislation, he has oppressed her on all sides. He closes against her all the avenues to wealth and distinction, which he considers most honorable to himself. As a teacher of theology, medicine, or law, she is not known. He has denied her the facilities for obtaining a thorough education - all colleges being closed against her. He allows her in church, as well as State, but a subordinate position, claiming apostolic authority for her exclusion from the ministry, and, with some exceptions, from any public participation in the affairs of the Church."

America saw the injustice shown to women during this time, sentiments based in past religious beliefs. Followers of a separation of church and state realized that the treatment of women as "second class" citizens outlined in the Bible was archaic, cruel, and unjust. "A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent." (1 Timothy 2:11-12) In picking and choosing Biblical Laws, as the conservative right does, would they have us return women to a subservient role? Does an amendment stating, "A woman’s Place is in the Home" suit their needs?

As the conservative right attempts to change the Laws of the Land its important to see where their reference material comes from. The Bible is a good book, a history of mankind for some. What it should not be is a book of laws for modern mankind. The Bible should not be an infallible source of morality. We’ve seen the barbaric, and tyrannical laws God placed on man and the struggle to overcome them. We’ve seen the shackles of slavery broken, and the power of the Woman’s Movement and their accomplishments. With the hypocrisy the religious right shows in their “picking and choosing” of Gods Laws how can we know what is right? We know what is right by relying on principles based on a modern moral philosophy in which mankind respects rights of others.

Michael Harris, Christian with a Conscience

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

1. Thank you, Michael

A very thoughtful and well-worded argument. I might add that Jesus said "Render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's and to God that which is God's" which I have always interpreted as indicating that Church and State should be seperated. And since we are to be more concerned with the beam in our own eye rather than the mote in our neighbor's, people should be concentrating on correcting their own faults so that they can get closer to God. Tolerance and understanding are hallmarks of Christianity and all the world's major relgions. Maybe Falwell et al should consider these things.

[MichaelHarris]

2. Your very welcome

:)

[ithacan]

3. this is so important!!

I think there are so many Republicans who do not yet realize that their party has been hijacked by the Religious Right, whose goal is to turn the US into a theocracy.

Reporters must ask Bush, in a live press conference: "DO you believe in the separation of church and state," and they must press for a clear answer.

(For details on how the Religious Right has taken over the GOP, see http://www.TheocracyWatch.org/ )

[MichaelHarris]

4. Too bad only 2 people read it.

Newbies don't get alot of read time LOL

[donhakman]

5. They only think they care.

my response to post 3


Caring is the single most important and redemtive quality in a human being.

For an artist or lay person alike, caring is obvious in their work as it is with its absence.

No matter how a person comes to express their caring it is a beautiful thing. There may be people who need conscience to be taught. If that is in a religious format they will be better for it. If it is in a secular format they will be better off for learning.

I would hope that it is a rarity for a person to have no innate conscience but evidence in the world may prove me naieve. Perhaps mortality itself is to blame when a rich person still can never have enough wealth to stave off death.

Were key Republicans hypocrits in the use and misuse of religion?

In my opinion they were criminal.

What some might call hypocrisy regarding religious controversy I call abduction, kidnapping or rape of religion.

Usurping and twisting a faith, defiling caring and losing one's conscience to a political end is the fundamental crime.

The problem is that the very people who may have no innate conscience and who are religiously trained, think the whole world must revolve around their paradigm to the exclusion of all others.

Letter by George Washington:

“Religious controversies are always productive of more acrimony and irreconcilable hatreds than those which spring from any other cause. I had hoped that liberal and enlightened thought would have reconciled the Christians so that their religious fights would not endanger the peace of Society.” (Letter to Sir Edward Newenham, June 22, 1792)

In the paraphrased words of Shiela Samples the God people can be the most souless and dangerous people in thier warping of simple caring:

"The God People

The Religious Right is also obsessed with power and control, and the majority of its members are living proof that, like the ancient Euripides wrote -- "Whom the gods wish to destroy, they first make mad." God walks with them; talks to them and issues militant edicts to us through them. Most are Republicans -- proud "born again" Christians who speak deleriously of "God's will and the blood of Jesus Christ" -- but their true religion is cold, hard politics.

They walk the halls of Congress, and are by far the most powerful voting bloc in America. When they speak, presidents listen -- constitutional amendments are proposed, freedoms are lost, liberties dry up...

According to a project by TheocracyWatch.org, " The Rise of the Religious Right in the Republican Party," they propose bills that are "anti-women, anti-labor and anti-civil rights. Their legislation opposes finance campaign reform; environmental protection; gun control; social justice for the poor; public education; teaching evolution; human sexuality; and a separation of church and state." The report says their bills "show a disregard for the U.S. Constitution, and finally, Democracy itself. Bills coming from the Religious Right favor the wealthy and large corporations. The ultimate political goal is to make this country a Christian nation." (Emphasis added)

We smile and shake our heads at the outlandish claims of TV evangelists Pat Robertson, to whom God confided recently that "Bush will win the 2004 election in a blowout," or Jerry Falwell, who believes the "idea that religion and politics don't mix was invented by the Devil to keep Christians from running their own country." We even giggled when Attorney General John Ashcroft assured graduates at Bob Jones University that "America has no king but Jesus."

Trust me -- these people are not funny.

For example, Tom Delay, Texas Republican and House Majority Leader, once told a group of evangelical Christians that God was "using him" to promote a biblical worldview. "Only Christianity offers a comprehensive worldview that covers all areas of life and thought -- every aspect of creation," DeLay said. "Only Christianity offers a way to live in response to the realities that we find in this world. Only Christianity." (Emphasis added) Like his counterparts, DeLay believes that fundamentalists should "overturn the separation of church and state and bring government under religious control."

And listen to Gary Potter, president of Catholics for Christian Political Action -- "When the Christian majority takes over this country, there will be no satanic churches, no more free distribution of pornography, no more talk of rights for homosexuals. After the Christian majority takes control, pluralism will be seen as immoral and evil and the state will not permit anybody the right to practice evil."

But few are more frightening than Oklahoma Senator James Inhofe who strode to the Senate chamber shortly after 9-11 to announce that the attacks were punishment by God because we were not sufficiently in awe of Israel. Inhofe said God told him Israel is "entitled" to the West Bank, and the U.S. should not pressure Ariel Sharon to stop killing Palestinians.

According to Inhofe, God angrily slung three airliners full of unsuspecting souls into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, incinerating more than 3,000 innocent citizens, and furiously rammed another plane into the Pennsylvania countryside -- because America was not sufficiently subservient to Israel. Inhofe believes America got what it deserved, and we should heed God's "wake up call" lest He strike us again...

Brother James Inhofe -- just one reason we sleep with the lights on in Oklahoma...

The Chosen One

From Jesus is my philosopher to God is my co-pilot, George Bush has been nothing if not ghoulishly entertaining. Far more talented writers than I have gone completely berserk while attempting to explain what makes Bush tick. It's simple, really. The answer is Nothing. Nothing makes him tick. That's why he's the perfect foil for the warhawks and religious zealots.

Bush is a swaggering, paranoid, hubristic bully, consumed by an irrational sense of his own worth. Just your normal, run-of-the-mill Texas good ol' boy Republican -- with money. After carousing, falling down drunk, and failing at every business enterprise his daddy set up for him -- at the tender age of 40, Bush was "born again" and became the Lord's own most visible high-stepping 12-stepper. Fourteen years later, he was President of the United States. In his defense, I have to say Bush is acting no differently than any other 14-year-old spoiled bully would be expected to act under the same circumstances...

And he's a Believer. Bush believes what they tell him he believes, such as he was chosen by God to lead the Christians in a righteous war against Islam. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia even blames God for his own deadly vote that thwarted democracy in 2000 and seized power from the people. Believing that Bush is serving by divine appointment, Scalia wrote in a May 2002 article, God's Justice and Ours that the government has a higher authority granted to it by God. He said unequivocally, "Government carries the sword as the minister of God, to execute wrath upon the evildoer..."

Much of Scalia's, and therefore Bush's, belief is based on, and his core speeches drawn from, the 13th Chapter of Romans, which admonishes citizens to "obey the government, for God is the one who has put it there." Punishment is swift and sure for those who refuse to "obey" the laws of the land, for the scripture says, "the policeman is sent by God to help you. But if you are doing something wrong, of course you should be afraid, for he will have you punished. He is sent by God for that very purpose..."

Bush shrugs aside wimps like Matthew, Mark, Luke and John who can't seem to get beyond love, kindness, helping the vulnerable, caring for the needy and the sheer compassion expounded by Jesus in His Sermon on the Mount, and seem to prattle on endlessly about salvation. Bush is also wont to deep-six most "Thou Shalt Nots," because, in Romans 13, it clearly says all ten commandments "are wrapped up in this one -- to love your neighbor as you love yourself..." It is the only law Christians need to obey -- other than, of course, those of the government and its Ashcroftian Mr. Policeman whom God has sent to punish them...

Americans who look at Bush and see either compassion or morality are severely suffering from optical delusion. This is a man who sets himself up as a purveyor of truth and knowledge, but who sees "thugs and killers, brutal dictators and barbarians" behind every tree, and is committed to not let "terriers and rogue nations hold this nation hostile." This is a man who declared war upon Islam --calling it a "crusade" -- from the pulpit of the National Cathedral rather than the Oval Office. This is a man who enjoys what he is doing in God's name, and who promises that he will not stop killing until the entire world is "safe."

The world cringes as George Bush, militant neocons and the completely mad religious right steer the Bush Ship of State toward the jagged shoals. God has left the building.

Is it any wonder the lesser gods are shrieking with laughter"

- Sheila Samples is an Oklahoma freelance writer, a former US Army Public Information Officer and Axis of Logic contributing editor.