Tuesday, July 3, 2012
The Wall Comes A'Tumbling Down
Aside from specifically endorsing political candidates or ballot measures, many of us conservatives have been saying the same thing for decades. We have been called “religious zealots” and “fascists” for doing so. But when Michelle speaks, the sheeple listen. And let's face it, Michelle wasn't talking about moral issues, she was talking about following Barack Hussein Obama, the self-appointed messiah. That takes the moral ground out from under her argument and turns it into the very politicization of religion that the Founders actually intended to prevent when they instituted both secular government and freedom of religion.
Says Bill Donahue of the Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights: “Michelle Obama followed in the footsteps of her husband yesterday when she called for the politicization of religion.” In the spirit of “if you can't lick 'em, join 'em,” Donahue went on to say: “Since the Obamas have taken the gloves off—in effect calling for Americans not to be restrained by separation of church and state legalisms—others should follow suit. I hope that the bishops, priests, evangelical ministers, and the orthodox members of all religions are taking note.” Amen, Brother!
Neither Donahue nor I call for the pulpits to become political forums. But quite simply, religion has a major role in our political lives. It was the churches of the 1800s that led the people toward the eradication of that great stain on American freedom—slavery. It was the churches of the mid-1900s that fostered the Civil Rights movement, eliminating de jure segregation of the races and culminating in the landmark decision of Brown v. Board of Education. We are simply saying that for most Americans, moral and religious issues are intertwined, and speaking of them in church is a perfectly valid constitutional exercise. If an issue which contains moral and religious ramifications is preached from the pulpit seems to favor or disfavor a candidate or party, so be it.
Obamacare is a perfect example of what we mean, and what Michelle doesn't mean. The Catholic Church (and my own Missouri Synod Lutheran Church) have declared the mandate/tax/penalty which requires religious institutions to participate in birth control measures such as abortifacients to be an absolute violation of religious freedom. Though it has not yet come to it, they are suggesting future civil disobedience, just as their predecessors did with slavery and segregation. They would be crossing the line by saying “defeat Obama” or "vote for Candidate X because he will vote against Obamacare.” But raising the issue is a religious imperative that leaves the congregants to draw their own conclusions using their own individual consciences.
What Michelle wants from the pulpit is “Vote for my husband. He's black, he's beautiful, and he knows what's best for you because he is in personal contact with the deity. Do this in remembrance of him, and ye shall be saved.” Of course there's that little matter of the Obamas' marriage and twenty years of faithful attendance at a church where Barack's pastor and mentor boomed from the pulpit: “No, no, no. God damn America.” Somehow, I don't think that Michelle's understanding of religion and politics is the same as mine. How about you?
I'll be around during the Fourth of July week holding down the fort while Andrew takes a mini-vacation. When you're not too full of hot dogs and hamburgers, and after your barbecue fire has safely died down, come and join me.