|
csl7037 -> RE: America as a Theocracy (6/26/2008 12:52:29 PM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: davemiller7
We don't advocate a theocracy in the US, but the Church of the Un-Godly Secular Humanists advocate the elimination of Christianity from politics and everything else.
-Dave
Can you blame them? A scriptural argument is pure nonsense to an unbeliever. In the eyes of the Left (and most people in the middle) the Christian Right has been talking nonsense for decades. We do this to ourselves and Obama makes a great point (and I can't believe I just said that!). If we can coherantly make an argument against abortion that makes sense to unbelievers but just try to peddle political power and basically blackmail politicians with whipped up glossy-eyed religious fanaticism, we marginalize ourselves. Granted this is what is done on both sides but is it any wonder we're at the impass we are at? And moral issues are not political issues - they're issues of the heart. We can and should be involved in the process. But if we want things to truly change, it's going to take changing the hearts of the people in this country. As Christians, we really should know better. If we'd rather rely on our own political prowess and our collective "flesh" to bring about a change in people's hearts instead of humbling ourselves before the Lord and lifting up our nation, we're truly no better than those who would impose Sharia law on the rest of the world given the chance. And our efforts are just as misguided. That will only drive hearts further the other direction.
quote:
ORIGINAL: Jhud
And secular arguments aren't 'superior' to religious ones - indeed; in many cases they are horribly inferior. There is no secular argument for example demonstrating that people are endowed with certain inalienable rights. Had those writing the Declaration relied on 'secular' arguments, they could never have proffered such a notion. And while some might argue the writers of the Declaration were 'Deists', the point is that they still weren't secularists, and they made a religious argument.
So our country is derived from certain religiously inspired arguments, and Obama is ignorant for not realizing this, and Dobson is right for catching him on it.
That being said, there is no reason for a Christian not to make a non-religious argument if such a thing will convince sufficient numbers of people to support certain positions - there of course exist such arguments against abortion and homosexual marriage, and Christians should know how to employ them or forever be stuck in the political backwaters.
You truly could make logical, practical arguments for "inalienable rights" and the foundations of this country. And, in the religious understanding (very much influenced by Deism & Reason) at the time of the writing of the Constitution, the prevailing religious argument would actually not necessarily have coincided with what they wrote. They were much more inspired by the abuses of the Crown than by the Bible, IMO.
But you make an excellent point and you make it well to what I said above - we've relegated ourselves to the "political backwaters" and Dobson is largely to blame for the current mess.
|
|
|
|