I've read quite a few posts recently referring to atheists as communists, marxists and 'lefties'. From my knowledge of the U.S. it seems as though being a christian somehow also involves being right wing in terms of politics. This doesn't tie in with my experience in my own country where christians are probably spread over the political spectrum (as are atheists).

What is it about the U.S. that ties religion so closely to politics, and in particular right wing politics?

I'm also open to the idea that my perception is completely wrong here.

Mainly it is just group identity issues which in a two party system leads to polarization.

I wrote a bit of a silly post a while back looking at the connections between different ideologies on the right and notes the consistency between religion being an inherently traditionalist/conservative force and so more likely to be aligned with the party on the right of a progressive/traditionalist spectrum. http://progressiveproselytizing.blog...tion-have.html

Christians are spread across the spectrum, but most do not participate in politics as Christians. But there is a vocal fundamentalist tendency that makes a point of inserting religious rhetoric into politics, so they are very visible. The religious right is drawn more strongly to the Republican Party. But in the South, you have a lot of people who vote Republican for president, but vote Democrat locally because Southern Dems are very religious and conservative.

Here's an interesting (long) panel discussion on Christianity and politics between Chuck Colson, Greg Boyd and Shane Claiborne:


http://reknew.org/2012/06/three-gene...ical-politics/

Watched half the video today NR and it was quite interesting to see the contrast between Colson and Boyd. The ironic thing is I believe they're both right though that seems impossible. It's like one is attacking the head of the serpent while the other one is dealing with the serpent's tail.

I agree with some things all of them say and disagree with some all of them say. I'm probably between Colson and Boyd/Claiborne. But none of them are moral majority, fundamentalist flag wavers. They all have obviously given a lot of thought to the subject.

Religious institutions are political tools. Check anywhere in the world, really. The tie between religion and politics is strong because religion automatically has a huge population base in many countries. So, the religions cast their lot with the party of their choosing, that party casts their lot along with that religion, and they both gain a little bit from it.

After such a long marriage between religion and politics in the US, at this point the parties have started to reflect the people they're supposed to represent to a degree. Republicans tend to be immovable, close minded, traditional, more institutional, socially conservative, and they fake fiscal conservatism. Democrats are more open minded, less conservative, less institutional, socially open, etc.

Lastly, the Republican party has a lot of vociferous Christians, and that's basically why it's called the religious right. Those people speaking the loudest, saying they're Christian the hardest, are also saying no stem cells, no abortions, no gays, etc are the ones you see, and the ones who are repeated ad nauseum on TV. This falls down from one moron to the next until a majority of the religion is affected. If you don't agree, well, everyone you know is going to echo that stuff until you are pressured into agreeing. If that doesn't work, you become the minority, but most people are weak, especially those who cling to religion, so it's probably going to work.

On a more theoretical level, I would say that the reason that religion is more associated with the right in the U.S. has more to do with a difference in political ideology than a lack of religion among American liberals. Many people in the religious right reject the idea of public reason, which is a central part of the modern liberal democratic tradition in political philosophy. That is, they don't think that laws should be justifiable to everyone in the country, but are willing to countenance laws that can only be justified on the basis of accepting a particular religious tradition.

If i had to guess i would say the abortion issue is what keeps most hard line christians on the right wing side

My pet theory is that Roe v. Wade created radicalized, single issue voters out of the religious community. They vote Repub in order to get a Supreme Court that will overturn Roe. Add in Gay marriage, a general feeling that American society has been coarsened and things like Fox New's annual 'Attack on Christmas' spectacular and we have a large portion of the population that feels set upon.

If you search around you'll find plenty of liberal christian attitudes but groups like Focus on the Family are really powerful.

It's ironic that the liberals think they should have the right to overturn everything on the basis of separation of church and state.

The separation of church and state was John Locke's idea and he only intended it to include Protestants and deal with Protestant sectarianism.

Of course, if you read the OT you will see the God of the bible has a lot of ideas on aliens and foreigners. When I read the OT it always seemed to me that He encourages His people to welcome them.

So maybe God has used the Liberals to broaden Locke's idea on the separation of church and state.

What's ironic?
And what does one's political persuasion, whatever that means, have to do with upholding the constitution, when it applies?

It's just that no one these days understands what Locke intended by the separation of church and state.

The intent behind his concept has been expanded beyond boundaries he never intended. His ideas sprung from Protestant sectarianism. He didn't even consider groups outside of Protestantism when he formulated it.

But ideas have a way of expanding or going in places their originators didn't intend them to go especially when the ideas go mainstream.

So it makes me wonder if God allowed the idea expecting it to widen in the first place.

Locke neither invented the concept or the term secularism. There's no doubt his work influenced the Constitution, but whatever his views would be of it are completely irrelevant.

It's plain to see why you'd hold him in such high regard though:

I never mentioned secularism. I mentioned the separation of church and state which is a different idea entirely.

And I don't particularly admire Locke one way or the other as I have only grazed his ideas and haven't spent a lot of time on him.

But I do think God could have used Locke.

Read the bible. God is always making use of people in it.

Secularism is the principle of separation between government institutions and the persons mandated to represent the State from religious institutions and religious dignitaries.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secularism


Doesn't this violate their free will?

There are passages in the bible that show God using opposing groups to judge or modify another group's behavior.

He even brings foreign groups against His own people when His people are acting immorally.

It doesn't violate their free will because they voluntarily surrender to God because they know He can shape them into being better people.

You should read Dr. Jones on the free will question. He understands and explains it much better than is available from mainstream views. God's views are always more intricate and refined than most people realize. It takes a lot of study and co-operation with God to even start to know them. Maybe that's why dogma is emphasized so much. That everyone gets a starting place with God is so very important and valuable that we really can't risk losing it so we are naturally dogmatic. Dogmatism has survival value for the human race.

First I'll take it that you concede the point on secularism.

But for the second point I want you to stay focused on God's use of John Locke. Did John Locke come to his own conclusions freely or did God intervene directly? If you think God intervened then how did he do so without violating free will? If you don't think God intervened then how did God use him?

Oh we're arguing again?

Why don't you put understanding ahead of winning for awhile.

I haven't studied Locke enough to locate a firm opinion on this question. I'm just aware God can use opposing forces outside of ourselves to educate us. Could God using sects against each other have caused Locke to form his separation of church and state idea. Isn't it suppose to be a peace promoting idea though a lot of people are currently using it to sow division between groups?

Isn't gravity an educational force everyone knows without everyone being able to explain it?

Don't we know what goes up must come down from tossing an apple upwards without even reading Newton's explanation? Don't we have pattern recognition (magical thinking) to know the apple will come down with or without Newton's explanation?

[IMG]http://forserialmist.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/emoticon-0153-*******eart.png[/IMG]

I've been enjoying the winning but, if it gets boring, I'll give understanding a whirl.

I see. You don't HAVE to post every thought that pops into your head.

What did I say in the other thread about Gish Galloping questions?

Actually I do have to say everything that pops into my head. Though I'm working at interpreting better.

Haven't you noticed my evangelical/preacher/teacher streak?

The bible says for preachers to not hold back but to let God speak freely through them. It may be in the Book of Acts iirc.

I consider that a lot of the things I speak about as not being my own thoughts. They're inspired so their source is from another source than just myself. Of course, you'll call me crazy that's a reaction to be expected from an unbeliever but such is the nature of revealed religion. Christians actually believe that God indwells them so why repress His free expression? We should never do that it just impedes progress.

If you make this quote into your location for one week I will donate £10 to a charity of your choice.

Ask God to inspire you to a short proof of the Goldbach Conjecture.

I'd be willing to add on if the entire quote will fit.

I'm interested to hear an answer on this too, but I suppose Splendour will say something like "God will reveal what he wants to reveal, when he wants to reveal it."

Oh this is a wonderful suggestion but what if I can't make the whole quote fit?

I'll be glad to appear to be an idiot if it gives you a good work to carry to Judgment Day. Maybe Jesus will transfer you from the goat to the sheep line if you do this.

40 “The King will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.’

The Sheep and the Goats
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/...46&version=NIV

This is the charity I selected for you to donate to:
http://www.smiletrain.org/

Yeah it looks like it won't fit but I will stop at nothing*for the lols



Does that work for you Splends?

*