where religion and politics meet

Everyone has a worldview. A worldview is what one believes 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.

Countries also have a worldview, a way of looking at life that directs government policies and laws and that contributes significantly to the culture. Ours used to be Christianity. Now it is secularism, which is practical atheism.

Some of us are trying 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.

A religion is not a culture, though it creates one. It is not what you prefer, like your taste in music or your favorite movie. It is what you believe to be true. Because it deals with things like God, much of its contents is not subject to the scientific method, but the reasons why one chooses to believe in God or a particular religion certainly demand serious investigation and critical thinking.

Every human being has the duty to search for and learn the truth about life. Education and science used to be valuable tools in this search, but science has chosen to answer the foundational questions without accepting the possibility of any supernatural causes, and education no longer considers the search to be necessary 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,

For now I want to focus my writing now articles specifically addressed to Christians. So most of my new posts will be on my other website listed below. I will continue to write and post short responses to newspaper columns and letters and even other articles as the inspiration hits me.

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.

Tuesday, August 26, 2014

Why the residents of Illinois should be outraged

The Sun-Times ran an article Thursday (August 21) which should outrage every person living in Illinois, not so much for what it said but what it means.

Very briefly, the article told of criminal and other legal but still wrong actions with the intent of eliminating any other candidates in the governor’s race but Pat Quinn and Bruce Rauner. 

As an Illinois resident, the powers that be only want you to have two choices for governor.  You don’t like Pat Quinn, a member of the political party that has bankrupted the state, then vote for Bruce Rauner, a newcomer that most people wish they knew more about.  You don’t trust Rauner or don’t like him, because he is super-rich, then you have Pat Quinn, who we all know very well.  And we all know that he will continue to drive the state deeper into insolvency.  He has already promised new government programs that we can’t afford but that we ‘really need’ like universal preschool.

The problem with most elections in Illinois is that the more people who run for an office, the less votes a person needs to win the election.  If there were a third party candidate for governor, the winner would only need 34% of the vote, or just a bit more than one out of three.  No one should win an election who doesn’t get a majority of the votes.  The Presidential election is an obvious exception, because it is the states who elect the President and not individuals, but the principle should apply to each of the states.  A third party candidate should not split the vote in a state and allow somebody to win who didn’t receive a majority of the vote.

Our lawmakers are supposed to look out for the people, but this system was clearly allowed or introduced, because a third party candidate was seen as only taking votes from one party so that the other party would have an easy win, thus robbing the people, you and me, of a true democracy.

The fact is we should have more than two choices for governor and any other office in the state.  If any one candidate doesn’t receive a majority of the vote, then we need a runoff election.  That’s expensive, so then we need to be able to vote in a way that allows second choices to be tabulated the first time, like having first and second choices on our ballots.

Not only is our political system broken, but the way we are supposed to fix the system (elections) is broken as well.