Saturday, May 9, 2015


In one way, the lack of understanding what religion is, puzzles me. On the other hand, I understand how our innate qualities corrupt us. When it comes to religion, the quality I am talking about is peck-order. The most primitive biota assumes some order. It applies to bacteria just as well as it applies to a pack of wolves. It is the basis of Darwinian survival of the fittest. Humans are no different. However, there is an inherent conflict. We base government on the same innate quality. That being the case, there will always be a fundamental conflict between religion and government. The founding fathers established this country on the idea that the people collectively rule, which we refer to as democracy. AT the time, democracy was a radical new idea. Tribes have chieftains, religions have Priests ministers, leaders, countries have kings, etc. All of these leaders gain power based on some drive or personal strength. We elect a president and representatives, which means the power based on voters judgment of performance. The need to have someone to worship even in a democracy is so embedded in our psychic that some democratic countries have both kings and elected heads of government, but almost invariably the elected head of government has the power. Of course, this means we believe in our judgment in picking leaders when we have that option. In countries where religion dominates leadership, religious leaders select leaders; thus, a self-perpetuating system is established. Sometimes, such as happen in the Vatican, they use voting but it is highly restricted voting reminiscent of royal family ties in selecting kings. It takes drastic moves or even social revolution to upset or disrupt these chains of self-perpetuation. The founding fathers sidestepped religion in an ingenious way; they established in the constitution that people are free to worship any way they wish or not at all. They did this revolutionary change in a subtle way. It seems they knew it would be a terrible fight to make a big issue of it. In fact, it probably would have prevented them from reaching their prime goal, which was the formation of a federation of states. Leaders of each religious sect were lead to believe that they would be in charge. In the narrow world of that time, the options were one of a number of Christian sects versus no religion. The crusades were very real but far away; therefore, exotic and not worth mentioning. “Thus, in God We Trust” or calling ourselves a “Christian Nation” set well with everyone. It is confounding to me that educated people miss the wisdom found in the simplicity of the Constitution. How can people like Livingston, the owner/editor of the Personal Liberty Digest, for example, know the significance of separation of church and state if they do not understand the meaning of the words “freedom to worship”. It means an entirely secular government. Look at the Middle East to find out what it means to have religion involved in government. We tend to overlook the far-reaching nuances of that statement. The Middle East is not in turmoil because it is Christians fighting against Muslims. It means perpetual war because it involves individual dictatorships under the guise of Muslim religious fanatics. Muslims divide themselves into sects with each sect knowing they are right because they are led be “Allah” or “God”. We set back and feel content to group all the strife in that part of the world under the title of Islam and blame all the killing on Sharia Law. The truth is that the trouble comes not because it is Islamic Law but is because it is religious law, which a group of individual dictators in power maintain that power by cruelty and strife just as would happen in the United States if we were under biblical law led by a group of dictators and not under civil law. Huckabee is a preacher and not a politician. Huckabee and Livingston want Biblical Law, which would be just as bad as Sharia Law. All I can say is a pox on you if you feel the same way and end up electing Ayatollah Huckabee, who will follow the bible and not the Constitution. Everything he says is what God wants him to say, which just happens to be what he would say if he were God. URL: Comments Invited and not moderated

No comments:

Post a Comment