All Comments (7)

America was established as a Christian nation. If you read the Constitution and Federalist papers, you will see that all the men at that time were either pastors or lay members of churches. I read where Washing prayed before Valley Forge, if you ever watched Coral Ridge Hour, you could or maybe you wouldn't realize that, the pastor I watched for a long time from that church passed on about a year ago, but he had many, many proofs of a christian Nation, of America. I suggest you watch the Coral Ridge Hour from Florida, just a suggestion, God Bless gjw

Currently I am writing a research paper on the use of religion by government officials in order to gain civilian support. I have seen most of the senators use religion in their speeches. I question their intentions and am opossed to any reference towards religion by any politician. Even today i question US currency because "in god we trust" does not apply to many. It is clear to me that any use of religion in political issues is an attempt to gain support.

Humans and our actions are inherently imperfect. Any assertion that any of us actually know with certainty what "God wants" is a delusion. Anything resembling a theocracy would therefore be a profoundly idolatrous and self-serving error. A religion that attends more to strengthening and extending its power structure than to the loving service of others is very much like a theocracy.

There is no constructive place for dogma or religious crusading in public policy. There is, however, a desperate need for policy and action rooted in humility (awareness of one's limits), compassion (sharing in our neighbor's suffering and relief),charity(give unto others) and justice(fair balance of resources, opportunity and power). These are acheivable without religion, but true religious faith can provide a structure that reminds and supports us in our exercise of these qualities.

A candidate who reaches inside for faith-based strength in the service of justice and peace may well be using religion legitimately and constructively. Political debate may be constuctively informed from this position. A candidate who is using claims of faith to strengthen his/her own power, or the power of a particular religion, is corrupt and such efforts will further corrupt political debate and policy.

"Love God with all thy heart and mind, and love thy neighbor as thyself."

Thank you.

Personally I believe there would be much less chaos in the world without religion, or more accurately, with tribalism (which can be religious, nationalist, racial, political, etc.) In order to have successful pluralism people have to realize that while their religion (or national origin, or race, or politics) may be very important to them personally, it isn't necessarily important to anyone else, and it shouldn't have to be. To accept that and to live accordingly is to be humble. People elevate religion to a position in the public sphere which is doesn't deserve and where it doesn't belong and that's the real root of the divisions it causes. I do agree that it has much to do with people's egos. I don't care what you believe until you try to make me care, or insist that I should. Then we divide into tribal camps. Until people learn to put their humanity first and their religion second there will never be truly successful pluralism.

Agree with Mr. Gaddy that religion has a vital public role to play in the life of this nation or any nation for that matter.

To be religious is to be a peace maker, one who constantly seeks to mitigate conflicts and nurtures good will for the peaceful co-existence. God wants us to live in peace and harmony with his creation; life and matter. Indeed that is the purpose religion.

Indeed, it is the words that start the wars and builds communities. It is the inspirational words of Jesus, Moses, Mohammed, Buddha, Zarthustra, Mahavir, Krishna, Bahaullah, Nanak, Gandhi, Martin Luther King and Mother Teresa’s words that have changed the world.

Much of the good in the world has happened because of religion, without which there will be much chaos.

My definition of religious pluralism is, if we can learn to accept and respect every which way one worships the creator (or cause of creation to include our Atheist and Agnostic friends), then conflicts fade and solutions emerge. Religion in never the source of conflict, it is the ego of the individual that is the source of all conflicts, destruction, wars and genocides. It is those individuals who did not understand the purpose of the religion, which is to bring peace to an individual and balance to a society, so all can co-exist in relative peace and harmony. God wants us to co-exist.

Religion is a beautiful thing, but we have to understand the purpose of it, then it will not be a conflict.

Mike Ghouse
www.foundationforpluralism.com
http://foundationforpluralism.blogspot.com
www.MikeGhouse.net

Explain please, why does Obama end his speeches without the usual "God bless you" kind of statement like Senator McCain?

Did you notice that while giving a speech at the site of a closed auto plant he said, "...moved to China" and the little quiver in his voice when he said it? That factory was moved to Mexico. It doesn't have anything to do with the Latino vote does it?

It's an ill wind that blows nobody good. It's an awesome wind that blows everyone good. The only thing we can say for sure is the wind is still blowing. Thank God for that.

I know it. You know it. We know it. The Bible is a proved hoax. It's time for a NEW sacred scripture that's a little more inclusive. No, we won't be giving up God but the Devil must go.

The ones who need that the most are the Devil worshipers, all three great faiths. We can't expect Devil to give up without a terrible fight. We can only hope nukes are not necessary.

Maybe if we honored the constitution, do away with the notion of 'recognized' religions that would make the transition easier and maybe unnecessary? Without such, 'recognized' religions it is impossible to write a law that uses the word religion -unless the law contains unrecognized words.

I know, those clever politicians will use alternate words that mean religion like charity or faith so we can expect a little discord as the fact that the Bible is a proved literary hoax makes it's way to the public square.

That was an excellent essay, Mr. Gaddy. As an atheist I find it very comforting to read such reasoned opinions from an Evangelical. I think you do a great service to your fellow believers by reminding those of us who don't believe that religious faith isn't necessarily mutually exclusive from appreciating and defending our secular heritage and its importance. That's an easy thing to forget these days. Currently the intrusion of religion into politics and government is at a level greater, and the nation more bitterly divided, than I've ever seen before. That correlation surely isn't a coincidence.