On “A Theocracy”

Alexandria has a post up discussing the idea of a “Christian Theocracy”.

First of all, I’d reference my prior post on South Park. Having observed Radical Islam for a few years, can we really say that Christianity is the same? All the abuse and mockery that show has heaped out on Christ, had it been heaped on Mohammad would have led to a fatwa. Go out into Boise during Gay Pride Day where the Pride Parade marches down the street and I’ll wager you’ll see few, if any protestors picketing the parade in one of the most Conservative cities in the nation. People bent on creating a theocracy will force everyone to live their way at the point of the sword.

I wrote about this last year and will share what I wrote again:

Giving this issue some thought, it occurred to me that the left banties about the word, “Theocracy” quite a bit, but doesn’t understand it. If they did, they’d understand that a theocracy can’t happen in America and they would actually understand the first amendment.

Lets examine Iran. In Iran, Islam isn’t the official religion, Shi’ite Islam is. Sunni Muslims are considered to not be “followers of True Islam”.

What were the founders concerned about when they wrote the first Amendment? They were thinking of the Church of England in Britain which like the Catholic Church in other countries persecuted dissenting churches. This is what led to Jefferson’s statement on the Seperation of Church and State.

Jefferson’s words are found nowhere in the Constitution. Jefferson didn’t sign the Constitution, but was an ambassador in France. Still, the greatest problem with the left is perhaps that they’ve confused “The Seperation of Church and State” with “The Seperation of God and State.”

The founder’s concern was not with the dangerous influence of religion, but of the ability of one religious group to squash another through wielding political power in that union of Church and State. God, himself, religion itself was considered a good thing.

Washington said “religion and morality” are indispensable supports. President Adams in 1798 said, “Our constitution was made only for a religious and moral people and is unsuitable for any other.”

John Adams wrote to Thomas Jefferson on June 28, 1813:

“The General principles on which the Fathers achieved Independence, were the only Principles in which that beautiful Assembly of young gentlemen could Unite, and these Principles only could be attended by them in their address, or by me in my answer. And what were these Principles? The General principles of Christianity in which all those Sects were United;…

“Now I will avow, that I then believed and now believe that those general principles of Christianity are as eternal and immutable, as the existence and attributes of God…”

(Sources for these quotes, “Our Sacred Honor, Editted by Bill Bennett”)

Benjamin Franklin in his call for prayer at the Constitutional Convention:

I have lived, Sir, a long time and the longer I live, the more convincing proofs I see of this truth — that God governs in the affairs of men. And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without his notice, is it probable that an empire can rise without his aid? We have been assured, Sir, in the sacred writings that “except the Lord build they labor in vain that build it.” I firmly believe this; and I also believe that without his concurring aid we shall succeed in this political building no better than the Builders of Babel: We shall be divided by our little partial local interests; our projects will be confounded, and we ourselves shall be become a reproach and a bye word down to future age. And what is worse, mankind may hereafter this unfortunate instance, despair of establishing Governments by Human Wisdom, and leave it to chance, war, and conquest.

So, this all goes to prove that God was not viewed as some enemy to be aborred, any danger that had to be checked was seen in large churches that took over government and persecuted other sects through the influence they excercised as part of the state.

Is there a danger of such a thing happening in America? Those who think so are either ignorant or dishonest. Lets take a look at some simple facts:

I’m a member of a Church of God (Anderson) with Pentecostal heritage. Brandi Swindell goes to the Vineyard. Anthony Harper at the Treasure Valley Christian News is Baptist. The Barrets who are a family that’s strongly active in local Conservative pro-life/homeschooling activism are Reformed. Nationally, James Dobson is a Methodist, Alan Keyes and my good friend, David Oatney are Catholics. Also, part of the religious Conservative movement is Rabbi Daniel Lapin. Many Conservatives such as Ken at Oblogatory Anecdotes are mormon.

Now, exactly how is such a disparate group to form a state church? James Madison said the key to guaranteeing our security is that “ambition must be made to combat ambition.” You have this group of people we call the Religious Right, but for those who look past the label, you see there’s a lot of complexity that can never fit together into a theocracy. There are more than 700 sects of Christianity in this country. The difficulty in mobilizing voters across that many denominational lines as well as non-denominational groups should suggest something.

Russ, has in the past admitted that he didn’t know much about the difference of the last days views among Christians. If you understand the differences between different sects and groups, you begin to understand how limited the agenda of religious conservatives must be.

For example, fundamentalists tend to oppose gambling, while Catholics don’t view it as a vice. Mormons tend to be hardline against tobacco and alcohol and willing to right that into law, while the Reformed don’t view tobacco as a sin. The threat of any religion or any group coming to force the opinion of everyone to conform to all is almost nil because the “Religious Right” is divided on so many issues. There’s a basic understanding on the importance of the sanctity of human life, the family, and the acknowledgement of God in the public square.

Theocracy