It's a tough call.
Religion and politics have been intertwined since the beginning of recorded history. Only in America did we establish a constitution that attempted to build a wall between Church and State. That wall is of various height and has served us well. It has not prohibited various religious groups and individuals from attempting to influence public policy. Martin Luther King, for example was an ordained minister, as is Jesse Jackson, Jerry Falwell and others. But it has prevented America from becoming a theocracy.
Unfortunately, some on the right have attempted to lower the wall to a point not envisioned since the birth of the Republic. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas reasoned that while the Constitution prohibits the Federal Government from establishing a national religion, nothing prohibits states from doing so:
caselaw.lp.findlaw.com
That kind of logic terrifies me.
It seems that we are on a slippery slope. The Catholic Church traditionally maintained a discrete silence in political matters... setting forth its broad moral positions on the issues while letting lay members incorporate Church positions into public policy as society at large saw fit. The result resulted in many contradictions but nevertheless a workable balance.
Now, as we saw during the 2004 campaign, it seems the Church is embodened to demand that it's lay members who are members of the legislatures or judiciary vote in favor of laws that comply with specific Church tenets. The Catholic Church is not alone in this - others denominations have done the same. There is a religious revival movement in America that seems to be gathering steam. One success seems to encourage another step - to the point where some traditional religious leaders feel comfortable demanding that their flocks vote for specific candidates.
It seems odd that what organized religion has been unable to accomplish through traditional means it now attempts to accomplish through direct legislative action.
Where and how do we draw the line? I don't know. The line has never been clear - and that's a good thing. "In God We Trust" is on our money. The Presidential oath concludes with "So help me God." It is right that religious groups encourage society as a whole to follow a moral path - Martin Luther King's "I Have a Dream" speech comes to mind - but at what point do the organized religions cross the line?
I don't know, but naming specific candidates from the pulpit sounds like it's over that line. Publicly excommunicating church members based on legislative votes seems like it's over the line. The church can do it, but why should society grant such organizations tax-exempt status?
As I said, it's a tough call, but I suspect it's an area where the majority of conservatives and liberals who love our nation and way of life will eventually seek common ground. I doubt very many among us want a theocratic government.
Probably the only way to reel them in is to threaten to revoke tax benefits, then on some other multiple time of infractions, whether the second or third or forth, revoke it for a year, then 5 years, then forever. |
