Religion and Politics
It’s impossible to divorce religion and politics; but that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t try.
Did you enjoy this post? Why not leave a comment below and continue the conversation, or subscribe to my feed and get articles like this delivered automatically each day to your feed reader. If you don't have a feed reader, you can always have these articles delivered to your email inbox every day. Click here to sign up.
Trackbacks & Pingbacks
No trackbacks/pingbacks yet.
Comments
Leave a comment
Line and paragraph breaks automatic, e-mail address never displayed, HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>
Good to see you back mate, and I like the new style of short posts.
It is indeed impossible to fully divorce religion and politics, because not only is there no practical way to stop politicians- much less voters- from having their votes informed by their personal beliefs, but it would be fundamentally wrong to try. What we can do is attempt to change those beliefs by rational persuasion, but in the meantime both the electorate and the elected have the right to their beliefs and the right to vote based on them.
This is where the courts come in. People are entitled to vote based on their beliefs, but that does not mean they are entitled to have laws passed that violate the constitution. If a law is passed that, say, abridges the constitutional rights of a minority, it does not matter by what margin the law was passed or how fervent its supporters. The courts must strike it down. That’s not judicial activism. That’s the judicial system’s job.
@George
Great point, RE: your last paragraph. It’s also worth noting that, while democratic in nature, our country operates as a republic. The legislature should be the first line of defense against unconstitutional laws (protecting the people from themselves), the Presidential veto being the second, and the judicial system being the last.