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:

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

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

Thank you.

Larry Craig

Friday, January 30, 2015

Health care, immigration, and the Republicans

The Herald printed a long letter (January 10) on immigration, Obamacare, and Republicans that needs answering.  If it made it into print, someone high up at the Herald must have thought it was worthy.

The reader finds the Affordable Care Act a resounding success, though it had a rough start.  She believes that it proved the insurance companies were unjustified for high insurance costs that they blamed on the insured having to pay for the uninsured.  And now people are able to buy, as in afford, their own health insurance. 

I recently saw figures that said 87% of the people on Obamacare get government subsidies.  That means that other people are paying toward their policies.  So, in the past, insurance premiums were higher than what they could have been if people didn’t have to cover for the costs incurred by the uninsured.  Now instead of people having to pay for other people’s costs for their health care, now everybody has to pay for other people’s insurance premiums.  Is that better?  No.  Actually it is far worse.

In the first case, the costs were paid for.  But our government runs on borrowed money.  It doen’st have all the money that it spends.  So that means to pay for, I mean subsidize, all these insurance premiums, it has to borrow money.  If out interest rates ever go back to normal, as in to rates such as they always have been, we, as in our country, will be paying anywhere between a half to a trillion dollars a  year just in interest payments on what we owe.  This is because our government wants to provide for everybody’s needs and provide security for every problem from the cradle to the grave.

So if people now have medical insurance now that didn’thave it before, it is only because everybody else is paying for it.  The old way was better, because the costs were paid off, but now it’s like a credit card that will never be paid off.

As for immigration, the Senate bill was over 800 pages long.  More and more Republicans are rejecting this massive comprehensive bills, because nobody can read them, they don’t and can’t get debated in full, and there are always things hidden in them that most people won’t like when the bill is passed.  They realized it is more responsible to debate and vote on a few ideas at a time.  But the Democrats in the Senate last term wouldn’t take up any of these bills.