where religion and politics meet

Everybody has a worldview. A worldview is what you believe about life: what is true, what is false, what is right, what is wrong, what are the rules, are there any rules, what is the meaning of life, what is important, what is not.

If a worldview includes a god/God, it is called a religion. If a bunch of people have the same religion, they give it a name.

Nations have worldviews too, a prevailing way of looking at life that directs government policies and laws and that contributes significantly to the culture. Politics is the outworking of that worldview in public life.

Our country’s worldview used to be Christianity. Now we are told it is and has always been secularism, which is practical atheism. This issue divides our country, but those who disagree are divided as well on how to respond.

Our country could not have been founded as a secular nation, because a secular country could not guarantee freedom of religion. Secular values would be higher than religious ones, and they would supersede them when there was a conflict. Secularism sees religion only as your personal preferences, like your taste in food, music, or movies. It does not see religion, any religion, as being true.

But God, prayer, the Bible, and the Ten Commandments were always important parts of our public life, including our public schools, until 1963, when the court called supreme ruled them unconstitutional, almost 200 years after our nation’s founding.

Our country also did not envision a multitude of different religions co-existing in one place, because the people, and the government, would then be divided on the basic questions of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

Our Constitution, which we fought a war to be able to enact, states, among other things, that our government exists for us to form a more perfect union, ensure domestic tranquility, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity. It could not do this unless it had a clear vision of what it considers to be true, a vision shared with the vast majority of the people in this country.

I want to engage the government, the culture, and the people who live here to see life again from a Christian perspective and to show how secularism is both inadequate and just plain wrong.

Because religion deals with things like God, much of its contents is not subject to the scientific method, though the reasons why one chooses to believe in God or a particular religion certainly demand serious investigation, critical thinking, and a hunger for what is true.

Science and education used to be valuable tools in the search for truth, but science has chosen to answer the foundational questions of life without accepting the possibility of any supernatural causes, and education no longer considers the search to be necessary, possible, or worthwhile.

poligion: 1) the proper synthesis of religion and politics 2) the realization, belief, or position that politics and religion cannot be separated or compartmentalized, that a person’s religion invariably affects one’s political decisions and that political decisions invariably stem from one’s worldview, which is what a religion is.

If you are new to this site, I would encourage you to browse through the older articles. They deal with a lot of the more basic issues. Many of the newer articles are shorter responses to partiular problems.

Visit my other websites theimportanceofhealing blogspot.com where I talk about healing and my book of the same name and LarrysBibleStudies.blogspot.com where I am posting all my other Bible studies. Follow this link to my videos on youtube:


If you want to contact me, email is best: lacraig1@sbcglobal.net

Thank you.

Larry Craig

Tuesday, April 1, 2014

Democrats and non-Democrats

Democrats and non-Democrats
A letter to a newspaper columnist

You are right in seeing the basic difference between Democrats and Republicans as centering on the issue of government, but then you seem to miss the subtleties of the rest of the distinctions.
I should add too that the divide isn’t really so much about Democrats and Republicans as it is about Democrats and non-Democrats.  Our political system pretty much limits the choices to two parties, so a lot of people are Republicans by default, like me.  This is why in the Presidential Republican primary last time there were Tea Partiers and Libertarians as well.
Democrats believe that government can and should solve every problem of society.  This can be done by making laws and spending money.  It doesn’t matter how much it costs, how or if they will pay for it, or how it affects everything or everybody else.
The stated goal is to help people; but when the doors are closed, I am sure it is acknowledged that they are trying to buy the votes of a particular demographic with government money, which is really taxpayer money.  But then they don’t actually have to have the money.  They can just borrow it, and then when the debt becomes an issue, they say the answer to the problem must be balanced.  Cuts alone won’t solve the problem.  So raise taxes and they will promise to cut spending, which, of course, they never do anyway.  Because they can’t think of one thing to cut or any way to reduce spending. 
But they can promise to reduce the rate of spending increases in the future, because they know they don‘t have to keep those promises.  By then, they can simply state that their promise was unrealistic, things have changed, and the debt is so bad that we need to have more revenuers.  Cuts alone will not solve our problems.  And the cycle is repeated.
The state of Illinois was $7.6 billion behind in paying its bills at the end of last year, and what does Governor Quinn do?  He proposes a new pre-kindergarten program for every child and a state subsidized mortgage program for first time home buyers with a $7500 forgivable loan.  These Democrats are so compassionate with other people’s money.  I only spend what I can afford, but they are not limited by my sense of responsibility.  They are only limited by their imagination and public gullibility, aided by a supportive press. 
But then there is another way they can achieve their goals.  They can make other people do what they want, like employers and insurance companies.  They frame the issue as a matter of rights, or fairness, and so we as a society have to do this thing because it is the only humane thing to do.  Rights used to be things that the government couldn’t stop you from doing or what they couldn’t do to you.  Now rights are things that a person is entitled to, that we as a society have to provide for that person, except when it comes to guns, of course.

Now Republicans have not always been immune from these practices, but Democrats have found their stride in the last ten years or so.  The Tea Party and the Libertarian Party are reactions to the Republican Party’s inability to respond to this mass bribery of the public.  Current election rules discourage third party candidates, because a candidate doesn’t need to have a majority vote to win an election.  If they did, the Republican Party would break apart very quickly.