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, March 1, 2016

fixing gerrymandering

I have a question for the Sun-Times editorial board, minority political leaders, the courts, and everybody who says they oppose gerrymandering:

Which arrangement is better for minority representation?  Trying to cram as many of the same minority into as few districts as possible to ensure a minority representative is elected who then faces a legislative body with very few representatives who have those same minorities in their districts in numbers that they will be accountable to, or

having many legislative districts with minorities in them where representatives need to address their issues if they are to win elections.

Courts have already ruled that it is both desirable and necessary for districts to be drawn that create minority districts, however contorted those districts are, in order to ensure a minority representative. 

This means that whoever draws up legislative districts will have access to all manner of voter information and demographics, and since these citizen boards to be entrusted with drawing these ‘fairer’ districts will have politically affiliated people on them, we will need another board to watch over the work of the first board to ensure fairness.

The only fair and right way to draw legislative boundaries is to allow access to only the information about where people live and about all the natural boundaries that often unite or divide voters’ interests, like city boundaries, rivers, mountains, forests, etc.  Districts should not change their shapes and sizes too much from census to census, except for expanding or shrinking the district because of population changes.  The general shape of the district should remain relatively unchanged.

No comments:

Post a Comment