Pages

Tuesday, October 18, 2022

Preserving Liberal Democracy is the Only Guarantee for the Protection of Religious Liberty

It's been a byword for quite some time that being a white, Evangelical Christian is the equivalent of being a Republican. And while support for Republican candidates for office, regardless of their religious beliefs, moral character and integrity, and their actual support for the issues that Evangelicals consider important, has been strong among white, Evangelicals, it's not as widespread as the impression leaves one to think it is.  

I'm a white, male, past 60.  I was raised in a Southern Baptist church, in a home with two parents who grew up in West Virginia as working class, 100% pro-union Roosevelt Democrats.  My Father was a naval veteran of World War 2, who was aboard the the U.S.S. Missouri in Tokyo Bay when the Japanese government signed the surrender.  I can only remember one time, in 1968, when he broke from the Democratic party to "hold his nose and vote for George Wallace" as he said at the time, then regretted doing so.  He was a chemistry major in college, but trained as an air conditioning mechanic in the Navy and worked in civil service in the headquarters building of a military base, keeping their air conditioning equipment running.  My mother was the housekeeper at a 16 unit motel in my hometown until she got into the child care business as my sister and I got a little older.  She never voted for a Republican, that I recall.

It was these two individuals who passed their Christian faith to me, by example.  They never did a lot of talking about it, or preaching at anyone, they just lived by those values and, as the Apostle Peter said, "So they may see your honorable deeds and glorify God," which were words my Father frequently quoted to me.  As a result of their influence, the faith that I have is one that focuses on living according to values, more on doing, less on telling.  It's not the kind of faith that those who have rejected Christianity or who rely solely on intellect criticize as some kind of imaginary fairy tale with a magic book and the land of pie in the sky by and by.  In fact, some of the most progressive thinkers, educators and politicians whom I encounter, because I put myself in position to be encountered, find discussion and dialogue with me helpful and inspiring. 

It's been this manner of living out my Christian faith that has brought me to the conclusion that liberal, progressive politics are most compatible with the way I live my life.  I'm free to do this specifically because the founders of the country, flawed and imperfect as they were, used the efforts and sacrifice of their life and labor to endow me, and all other Americans, with religious liberty and freedom of speech and expression.  It's in that establishment clause in the first amendment.  And one of the virtues that is an integral and essential part of the Christian faith is the care and respect that is shown to other people.  It's not exclusive to other Christians, Jesus made it very clear that one's neighbor can be someone from a different cultural, religious, social, ethnic and racial background.  He drew a line under his emphasis of this point by declaring it to be one of the two greatest commandments given by God, to "love your neighbor as you love yourself."  

All of the Evangelical Branch of the GOP's Eggs are in One Basket

If you ask any Evangelical Republican why they vote the way they do and support the candidates they do, it will come down to their position on abortion. That, and the mythological "grooming" of students in school by a non-existent LGBTQ "conspiracy" is justification, in their mind, for jettisoning their Christian values, the character and virtue that Jesus made the very essence and substance of Christian faith and practice, for a hard-line political stance that doesn't do anything to lead people to the salvation experience that Christians claim is the whole aim of the preaching of the gospel.  

It has turned the Christian gospel into hard-line political rhetoric and toward giving in to the temptation to use worldly power to achieve ends that are not consistent with those in Jesus' message.  And it has led to Christians either sharing their loyalty to Jesus with politicians, or abandoning Jesus altogether in favor of the politician and his power.  

"God sometimes uses evil people to achieve his ends," is the cry of some apologists for the most corrupt, evil man ever to serve as President of the United States.  Yes, on a few occasions, during the Old Covenant with Israel, he did use evil rulers of foreign nations as a means of punishment and judgement.  But he never demanded that his followers share their personal loyalty to him with an evil ruler.  That statement is heresy, and the fact that most Evangelical church leaders won't call it out is a sign that politics has put most Evangelical Christians into a serious and dangerous state of apostasy. 

There are those among Evangelicals who use the idea that God will judge the United States by removing its prosperity and destroying the country if politicians continue to allow abortion to remain legal.  There's absolutely no biblical support for that and no Christian doctrine which teaches that a nation can collectively commit a sin, under the covenant put in place by Jesus Christ.  Neither the United States, nor any other nation, has been offered a covenant relationship with God along the lines of the Old Testament covenant which established Israel as a theocracy.  There's no Christian doctrine which extends privilege or prosperity to any country on the basis of the number of Christians it has within its borders, or its cultural morality and the values that its citizens hold.  

No One is Preventing Ministry From Taking Place

There were plenty of opportunities for Christians who wanted to see the abortion numbers drop to take steps to make that happen, even while the Roe decision was in place.  Churches and denominations have set up hundreds of crisis pregnancy centers, a good thing as long as they do the right thing.  But most of them are grossly underfunded when it comes to the work they need to perform, and most of them are not much more than places which hand out a few bags of groceries, a few clothing items, perform a free ultrasound and then direct the women who come into "counseling" that turns out to be little more than preaching on why abortion is wrong. 

Real care and concern would go beyond that.  I seriously doubt that preaching about why abortion is wrong, and labelling someone who decides to go through with it a "baby killer" is effective in bringing down abortion numbers.  What might really work, because there are a few places that do this and it does work for them, is to provide some pre-natal medical care, support for housing, or actual temporary housing, job skills training, other life necessities like a good diet, help with the birth process and support for as long as necessary afterward, including with adoption or keeping the baby.  None of that is easy, and there's no guarantee of success.  But if sanctity of life is that important, then who is going to help?  Christians shouldn't expect the government to do what they're not willing to do themselves. 

There's nothing preventing Christian churches or denominations from doing this.  Christians literally spend billions of dollars each year on religious entertainment and on the interest on loans to build buildings that sit empty most of the time.  Why could they not engage in a ministry that helps women who are in desperate need of help, and who, if their circumstances were different, might make a different decision?  Maybe then they would be able to see that this decision is not something that the government can make or should make.  

Both the Clinton and Obama administrations provided this kind of support for those who chose it, and it did lead to a drop in the abortion numbers.  But Republicans cut and kill those kinds of programs.  So it's not about the sanctity of human life, it's about the politics, getting the votes and having the power.  

Why This is a Religious Liberty Issue 

Believing that a fetus in the womb has the same rights as an infant who has been born is an inherently religious principle.  And while Christianity is not the only religion which believes that human life begins in the womb, or at conception, that is a conviction and belief that is almost exclusively religious in nature.  The constitution guarantees a woman the right to carry a pregnancy to full term regardless of the circumstances, if she chooses to do so.  

There are those who believe that the right moral choice is to always carry a baby to full term, regardless of the circumstances of its conception.  But even among Christians, there would be differences of opinion about what is the right thing to do in circumstances such as a ten year old becoming pregnant as the result of a rape or incest.  Ultimately, I'm not the one who must live with the circumstances of making that choice.  That's between the woman who faces the circumstances and the choices and God, if she believes in him.  And in a liberal democracy, people have the right to choose not to believe in him, and to make life choices based on what they believe.  

On the other side of that issue is the fact that in a liberal democracy, the right to complete religious freedom is guaranteed.  That means I can practice my Christian faith in the way that I feel is pleasing to God and in accordance with his will, I can associate with other Christians in a church which shares common beliefs and practices related to the Christian faith, and no church, denomination or group is required to be licensed or have a permit from a government entity in order to gather together and worship.  It means that I do not have to accept specific beliefs or participate in specific religious practices in order to participate as a citizen, either in choosing who serves in the government, or if I decide I want to serve in it.  

As long as I don't cross the boundaries of interfering with the rights of any other citizen, I am free to speak of my faith publicly, including with the intention of informing others of my beliefs and benefits and to evangelize them, with their permission.  I also have the right to make my own decisions, influenced by my faith, and as a citizen to bring the influence of my faith into the public square, to influence and persuade government to respond and to be respectful of my rights.  

Christianity has existed, and prospered, under a wide variety of political systems.  It has suffered and been diminished under others.  But under the protection of the American constitution, the Christian church, and more specifically, the Protestant Christian church, flourished and expanded as it had not done anywhere else in the world up to that point.  It was able to do so under the same liberal democracy that gave people the right to be atheists, agnostics, Muslims, Buddhists, Mormons or Jehovah's Witnesses.  

Why would I ever want to cast a ballot for a politician who is committed to taking that away?  






No comments:

Post a Comment