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.

We are being told today that the United States is and has always been a secular nation, which is practical atheism.

But 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 even more basic, our country was founded on the belief that God gave unalienable rights to human beings. But what God, and how did the Founders know that He had? Islam, for example, does not believe in unalienable rights. It was the God of the Bible that gave unalienable rights, and it was the Bible that informed the Founders of that. The courts would call that a religious opinion; the Founders would call that a fact.

Without Christianity, you don’t have unalienable rights, and without unalienable rights, you don’ have the United States of America.

A secular nation cannot give or even recognize unalienable rights, because there is no higher power in a secular nation than the government.

Unalienable rights are the basis for the American concept of freedom and liberty. Freedom and liberty require a high moral code that restrains bad behavior among its people; otherwise the government will need to make countless laws and spend increasingly larger amounts of money on law enforcement.

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.

As a secular nation, the government now becomes responsible to take care of its people. It no longer talks about unalienable rights, because then they would have to talk about God, so it creates its own rights. Government-given rights are things that the government is required to provide for its people, which creates an enormous expense which is why our federal government is now $22 trillion in debt.

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 generally 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 particular 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:

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCb-RztuRKdCEQzgbhp52dCw

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

Thank you.

Larry Craig

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.