Politics and Religion - Mixing the two?

United States
September 29, 2008 9:43am CST
In reference to an article I just read at the Washington Post about 33 ministers flouting the tax law with political sermons:The separation of church and state has been discussed on myLot many times. Sunday, 33 to 35 ministers decided to challenge the law and endorse a candidate from the pulpit. The candidate, of course, is John McCain. The idea comes from the Alliance Defense Fund, a conservative legal group based in Arizona - surprise!- John McCain's own state. As the law is written, a minister may discuss issues from the pulpit, but may not endorse a candidate. These ministers have done so, challenging the law. One minister said he has already told his congregation that as Christians, they could not vote for Senator Obama based on his pro-choice views. Rev. Ron Johnson, Jr. had this to say: [i]"We want people when you pr*ck them, they bleed the word of God," Johnson said. Johnson said ministers have a responsibility to guide their flocks in worldly matters, including politics, calling the dichotomy between the secular and the sacred a myth: "The issue is not 'Are we legislating morality?' This issue is 'Whose morality are we legislating?' "[/i]Where do you stand on this "issue?" For me it is a no-brainer. In my opinion, no church, no minister, no priest, no rabbi should be able to tell his congregation WHO to vote for. I think these churches, the ones challenging the law, should get swift and sure punishment. That punishment should be the loss of their tax-exempt status. If they want to play politics, they have to pay. Simple as that for me. What about you? Links are below. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/28/AR2008092802365.html http://www.alliancedefensefund.org/main/default.aspx
2 people like this
2 responses
@ParaTed2k (22940)
• Sheboygan, Wisconsin
29 Sep 08
What's the difference between these ministers supporting McCain and Rev. Wright and other ministers supporting Obama from the pulpit? I'm against preachers politicizing their pulpits, but if it isn't enforced against both, what's the point?
1 person likes this
• United States
29 Sep 08
Organized efforts to defy the law. That would be the difference in point. The difference in principle is very little. I have no respect for Rev. Wright, so I am not the one to answer that.
1 person likes this
@ParaTed2k (22940)
• Sheboygan, Wisconsin
29 Sep 08
"Organized effort to defy the law" So they are up to a little "civil disobedience" here. Of course, anyone with any integrity who practices civil disobedience needs to be ready to accept the consequences. We'll see how much it is worth to them.
@anniepa (27955)
• United States
29 Sep 08
I hate to respond here and just say that I agree, it is a "no-brainer" and they should be punished by losing their tax-exempt status instantly, but that's just what I'm doing! Of course, we both know we'll hear the argument that there really isno separation of church and state and that the evil liberals want to take God out of our government. Well, my personal religious views are my personal business but "God" should be taken out of our elections! Annie
• United States
29 Sep 08
Bless you. If it's not my name being used, it's yours. Damned the evil liberals! Burn them at the stake for not wanting a religious government! Oh, wait. They've already done that in Salem.