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

Friday, January 15, 2016

The right and wrong way to end gerrymandering

The Sun-Times (Jan. 15) urges people to sign a petition and to rally around a measure meant to end gerrymandering in our state.  I believe the plan it supports is not the answer.  The commission drawing up the map contains politicians, and you can be sure that you will find them trading and negotiating over the maps. 

There is only one way to get a fair map for our representatives and state senators, but the courts have already ruled against it.  The only way to get a fair map is that the only information the people drawing the map should have is where people live. 

We think of gerrymandering as being about political parties.  But it can be used for any demographic, such as age, wealth, religion, race, ethnicity, education level, level and kind of government dependency.  If politicians can’t draw maps by party affiliation, they can draw it by any number of means that can reflect how a group of people vote.  The courts have already said that gerrymandering is acceptable to ensure a black majority voting district.

Maps will continue to be used to favor or disfavor certain groups.  Maps will be drawn to minimize white voting power, maximize minority voting power, ensure that a certain minority group gets to elect somebody from their group, even by the likelihood that an area tends to be pro-life or pro-choice. 

If you believe any of these actions are justified, you will never end gerrymandering.  You will only change one form for another.  The only real solution is to draw maps based entirely on numbers and natural boundaries, like cities and neighborhoods.  Suburbs should remain intact as much as possible.  Any commission that requires political party members will not solve a political problem but only make new ones.