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

Friday, June 24, 2022

Pride Month

June is Pride Month, so I tried to think of all the things that I’m proud of, but it wasn’t much.

I am proud of my country, but a lot of people are saying today that there is nothing to be proud of.  I think they just don’t know what we really have here.

I have a graduate degree, and I’ve written a few books.  I’m happy about that and maybe a little proud too.

I am a white, heterosexual male.  I know these kinds of things are important to a lot of people today.  I am happy that I am a white, heterosexual male, but proud?  That doesn’t seem like the right word.

I am proud of my two sons and their families.  I could just say that I am happy they turned out well.   But they are my sons, so I will say that I am proud of them.

But Pride Month wasn’t created so that people would reflect on things they are personally proud of.  It was created, because some people felt that they were being marginalized and even persecuted for their lifestyle.  Pride was their response.  They said that they are proud of their lifestyle, and they have been devoting their lives ever since to making their lifestyle more acceptable to people everywhere, which is certainly understandable.

But there are a few things here I find concerning.

It’s become popular for people and companies to show support for the people in this lifestyle by simply proclaiming PRIDE with all the appropriate colors, and I think we are sending wrong messages.  People and companies are even being pressured to celebrate Pride Month, and when they do that, they are not merely affirming their support and care for a formerly marginalized group, they are essentially applauding this lifestyle and not just the people.  They are essentially teaching our children that this lifestyle is commendable, noble, just, and good.

Everybody is insisting that we must all embrace this lifestyle without any discussion of its merits or demerits.  Even raising questions about it or wanting to discuss it is immediately derided as hatred, so we are never able to even talk about it. 

We have melded personal identity with lifestyle such that we can’t even discuss the lifestyle without that discussion being understood as a personal attack on the people involved.  There are probably some people reading this article who will call me hateful for even talking about any of this. 

If I scream at a person in the street who doesn’t see a fast-approaching car, I don’t hate them.  I am not even mad at them.  I have information I want to convey that they might find useful very soon.

Now here I think there is a slow-approaching car that is just as likely to hit them, and I don’t need to yell at them, but, yes, I certainly would like to talk to that person before it does.

The federal government has even weighed in on this issue.  It issued new guidelines on sex education for our public schools, beginning from the earliest ages.  It asserts that there is no such thing as normative sex, and all that the various forms of sexual activity are like flavors of ice cream.  One is not better than another.  We must try them all to see which one or ones we like best.  And we need to decide on this at a very young age.  There’s no time to waste here. 

We are asking our children, long before they have ever given any thought about having children of their own, whether they would want or should adopt this lifestyle.  One significant problem with this lifestyle is that it cannot create children by any of the normal means.  Only one partner in these relationships can be a natural parent to any children.  That means that we are intentionally removing one of the child’s natural parents from that child’s life.

This is not good, and we shouldn’t pretend that it is.

They also want us to teach our children that the doctors who assisted in their birth were mistaken to declare a gender for that child.  This is something that they must decide for themselves, and the sooner the better.

Schools all across our country are essentially trying to recruit students to this lifestyle when they declare that all sexual activity is equal in value.  Sex is not taught as a part of establishing families or even as an expression of love.  It is merely a pleasurable experience that children need to be taught about to avoid certain adverse consequences.  One form of sex can result in pregnancy, but we have a cure for that, so you need not worry about that, if you do choose to have that kind of sex.

And we are teaching our children with words of praise for this lifestyle long before they have given any thought to the long-term repercussions of their decisions. 

I don’t think this is wise or good for our children.  I think we can and need to do better.

This is not fair to our children and can even be considered a form of manipulation.  This must be removed from our public schools.  This is a lifestyle choice that only adults are fully capable of making. 

All the major religions that have talked about this issue have been uniform in their disapproval of it, though more and more church leaders today are becoming more accepting of the practice. 

At the same time, Christianity, for example, teaches us to love our neighbors as ourselves and to do unto others as we would have others do unto us.  All people are created in the image of God and are worthy of our love and respect. 

But it also believes that this lifestyle, in any of its myriad variations, is not what the Creator of all intended, and it wants to be able to have that conversation in our society.  It can be hard at times to discuss the lifestyle without the people involved feeling diminished. 

The problem is that people have been trying so hard to normalize this whole thing that Christians have been responding to the lifestyle where they would prefer being able to love the people first and talk about those things later. 

I can’t speak for every individual Christian here, but in general, it is the Christian who understands more than anyone else the intrinsic value of a human being and the importance that God puts on us to love our neighbors as ourselves. 

We wish we could talk in backyards with lemonade rather than with placards and protests.  But, yes, we want to talk.

Thursday, June 23, 2022

Christianity and America

Christians are finally waking up and getting involved in politics.  For a long time, they were too busy working, raising a family, being involved in church activities, Little League, all kinds of kid and family things than to spend a lot of time in politics.  But they are slowly and finally waking up. 

For much of their history, they believed that to change or improve society, you change and improve individuals.  And since their mission anyway was preaching a gospel of personal salvation, they often didn’t concern themselves with more structural parts of society, like politics does. 

Now they are slowly seeing that you need both.  When society legalizes something, it becomes acceptable or more acceptable, whether gambling, abortion, drug use, and other things.  And they find that society, including in our public schools, is promoting values that Christians have problems with, and they don’t believe that is the place of the public schools to do that.

But the bigger question is: what is the place of Christianity in our society, or, more accurately, what is the place of Christianity in the United States of America?

Our founding document is the Declaration of Independence.  It speaks of rights and a creator.  These rights are not the natural rights of the philosophers.  They don’t need a god to give them, but the Declaration said that God did give them.  God created human beings, and He gave them rights. 

An atheist cannot believe in unalienable rights.  For an atheist, there is nothing higher than we already see.  An atheist can’t actually believe in any rights but what society decides to give to people. 

But the rights our country was founded on precede and supersede government.  And this is not a religious dogma here.  The Founders didn’t say that they believed that God gave these rights. They said that He did.  It was a fact.  As sure as the sun rises in the east.

But how did they know this?

Not all religions believe in this.  One major religion does not believe in a right to life, and several don’t believe in a right to the pursuit of happiness.  It was the Bible that informed our Founders about what God did.

But make no mistake.  Without Christianity, you don’t have unalienable rights, and without unalienable rights, you don’t have the United States of America.

In fact, John Adams, our second President, said that “our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people.  It is wholly inadequate for the government of any other.” 

The First Amendment says that Congress cannot establish religion, which at that time meant that the United States could not have a State Church like, say, England has, where the Queen is the Head of the Anglican Church.

The court called supreme was wrong to say that our government cannot favor one religion over another or that it must remain neutral toward all religions.  Practically speaking, that removes all religion from public life, and many have insisted that includes theism as well. 

But then our country was founded on something that God did that affects everyone of us.  And we need to know about that.  We need to teach our kids about that.  In public schools.  And this is not some generic god that nobody believes in but the God of the Bible.

Be thankful for Christians and for Christians to be involved in politics.  Without them, you will lose your rights. 

Some will say that Christians are forcing their beliefs on other people, like, for example, in the case of abortion.  No, they are merely asserting that abortion is not a right, at least not a Constitutional right.  Like all other measures that our lawmakers decide, the public weighs in on an issue, and our lawmakers decide what they want to do.  Christians have as much a voice on an issue as anyone else. 

Christians will say that others are imposing their beliefs on them.  This is why freedom is messy at times, and why I would contend diversity is not a strength, but a weakness.  It divides us.  But that is an issue for another time.

the televised January 6 proceedings

I happened to hear bits and pieces of the January 6 panel on television recently.  (Jan.6 panel eyes July hearings, June 23)   Another person in my house was watching it.

I just have one comment that needs to be made.  This was like a court where the prosecution makes its case, calls its witnesses, but then there is nobody on the defense, nobody to cross examine witnesses, nobody to fact-check anything that was presented. 

I’m sorry, but this isn’t right, and we shouldn’t pretend that it is.

 

evidence of election fraud

A Tribune reader asks: Where’s the proof?  (New mantra: ‘Where’s the proof?’, June 23)

He’s asking, of course, about the proof that the election was fraudulent. 

I would say that the evidence is out there and compelling.  But you’re not going to find it on the major news channels or even in the newspapers.  I think too many people in high places like and prefer the results that we got, and if charges of fraud are true, the corruption has to run very deep, and there are too many of those deep people who are able to keep things quiet.

But start with the various anomalies in the election.  Elections are studied to death, and some things just don’t happen.

Like a Presidential candidate losing, yet his party gains seats in the House.  A lot of them.  Doesn’t happen.

A sitting President getting more votes than the first time and still losing. 

You can track the vote counts in real time, and in each of those swing states, there were vertical spikes in the counts.  That is technically impossible.  And then after those vertical spikes, I believe in all those states, all future votes had the exact same ration of Biden to Trump votes.  Statistically impossible.

People who worked in polling places testified under oath that they saw stacks of mail-in ballots with no creases that looked like they were ran off a copy machine.  They saw a lot of ballots that only had the Presidential race.  Where did those come from?

But there is video evidence of people stuffing ballot boxes with ballots in the middle of the night.  The same people going to, say, 20 drop boxes in the middle of the night and depositing large quantities of ballots

Start with the documentary 2000 Mules, as in, 2000 people stuffing ballot boxes.  The organization True the Vote is working now to get their findings out to the public.  It’s coming.  There are a lot of people who don’t want to hear any of this, so it’s not as easy as some of us would like.

 

 

Sex education and sextortion

The Tribune printed a strong letter urging strong sex education programs in our public schools.  (Weak sex ed leaves teen boys, young men vulnerable to sextortion schemes, June 23)

If all that our public school sex education taught was how to avoid being sextorted, that might be a worthy class that they could spend a half hour on somewhere along the line, with classes on how to manage a checkbook and compare insurance coverage plans for your car.

Illinois has embraced the federal standards of sex education which teaches that there is no such thing as normative sex, all sexual activity is of equal value, students may not be the gender they were told from childhood, the sex information on their birth certificates may not be correct, sex is something that is not connected with marriage, love, or family; and they need to decide as early as possible what gender they are so steps can be taken now before puberty kicks in and thoroughly confuses them as to what sex or gender they really are.

I submit that sex education as currently taught in our public schools is actually doing more harm than good.  I grew up before we had all that.  We had the basic instruction that most of that is best left for when you’re ready to get married.  Some of my friends didn’t get the memo, but sex education now is actually encouraging sexual activity rather than discouraging it.  How else will a child know their true gender if they don’t experiment?

No, the problem is overstated, and the cure is worse than the problem here.

the root causes of violence

The Times ran a major article today about “the root causes of violence.”  (Let’s build a world without the root causes of violence, June 23)

I admit I didn’t see them in the article, though there was something in there about experts who know the child’s name and the governor spending $250 million.  Yep, that should do it.

The best part of the article was its quote from Frederick Douglass: “It is easier to build strong children than to repair broken men.”

That is your answer to violence.  The problem, of course, is that we have millions of broken men in our society and it will take time for these children to grow up. 

I submit that the way we build strong children is the same way we repair broken men.  Unfortunately, the article didn’t say what Douglass thought about doing that, nor did it offer any of the author’s own insights.

I would say that we need to teach our children the value of human life.  Frankly, that’s a religious theme.  A secular society can’t teach that.  We have had several atheistic societies in the last century that killed tens of millions of their own citizens, because either they didn’t go along with the program or were deemed an unnecessary burden to society. 

That same religion will teach those children to love other people as they love themselves, to do unto others as they would have others do unto them, and, oh, that God will hold them accountable for how they treat others in their lives.

We used to do this throughout our society, and guess what?  We didn’t have a violence problem.  This is all a new thing that we are seeing today.

Saturday, June 18, 2022

what is a right to privacy?

A Tribune reader was all up in arms about the Supreme Court striking down ‘the right to privacy’ that a previous Court found hidden somewhere in the 14th Amendment.  (Striking down ‘right to privacy,’ June 17)

Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

There are other sections to this Amendment, but they deal with more specific issues unrelated to anything here.

There are several problems here. 

First, the 13th through 15th Amendments to our Constitution were directed at the issues of integrating former slaves into our country.  It has nothing to do or say about LGBTQ rights, birth control, or abortion. 

But secondly, there are a number of controversial issues in our country in the last few decades, but because they are controversial, Congress doesn’t get enough of a consensus to make a law about it, so people want the Supreme Court to make a ruling on it. 

And they are trying too hard to find things in the Constitution that were never in the minds of anybody who wrote it or any of the 27 Amendments.  You have to look at the issues an Amendment was written to address in order to interpret it.  And you can’t use it to address totally new, unrelated things.  That’s up to Congress.

The idea of rights is well overused.  The Founders added ten Amendments to the Constitution that defined some of the inalienable rights given to us by God.  Because Congress legalizes an activity doesn’t make it a right.  And I would be very careful before I would declare anything else beyond those a right. 

Rights are generally things that you can do without the permission or regulation of government.  If your ‘right’ requires other people to do things for you, like giving you money, I don’t think we can call that a right. 

If there are other things you want to call a right, I don’t think the 14th Amendment has anything to say about it.  Ask Congress to pass a law.