Has the conservative right gone too far?

I guess being a Democrat is enough to get you kicked out of your own church.

www.citizen-times.com.../20050506/NEWS/50506020/1001

This is EXACTLY why church and state are supposed to be separate. I know this doesn't speak for every Republican Baptist, but good grief!

I'm a republican by principle, moderate democrat by practice. Plz tell me I'm not the only one who thinks this is a BIG step in the wrong direction.

Tell me your feed back, I wanna know if anyone agrees with what has been done, and if so, provide justification.

And please, dont turn this into a "thats what I hate about religion" or a "thats what I hate about republicans" type thread, as we all know this group of nutters doesn't represent the rest necessarily.

I also understand that the church was run by what appears to be an unsavory character, even so, it seems as though the rest of the church members agreed.

Hope you find this article interesting.

Galvatron

[edit on 6-5-2005 by Galvatron]

Indeed they have Galvatron. Between this and trying to make the judiciary rule according to the bible, the only motive I can see is eliminating the seperation of church and state.

They go too far by pushing creationism down south as well. We need to get religion removed from politics.

Even though i disageee with dems on pretty much everything, This is NOT right, Church and gods house is open to EVERYONE who wishes to learn, not just those who share your political views.





[edit on 6-5-2005 by C0le]

I agree, that is taking it too far. The seperation of Church and state is a must in the US and other civilized countries. The US is not a country of Chrisitans, we are a country of all, all people, religions, colors and creeds

hence the nickname The American Melting Pot.

It is ok for politicians to practice and exercise values found in Christianity (which are the same for most religions).

The preacher heading a church the uses a certian political affiliation as a membership requirement is nothing but a big hypocrite.

I think we misunderstand the separation of Church and State in this country.

To me, it should be that the Church does not comment on the State and the Federal State does not comment, judge or legislate the Church.

Regardless of my political leanings, I would be thinking of finding a new place to worship God.

What some people are refering to the seperation of church and state is not in the constitution, this is what you are refering to

Congress shall pass no law respecting
an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.

Which basically means, the gov, isnt going to favor/force any religion over the next, everyone is free to practice whatever they want, without fear of beaing killed or jailed.

This doesnt apply to the church as far as the constitution is concerned, as it would being going against itself.

The news video/interview is actually in my signature at the moment.

Don't overload it all at once, or somebody save it on another host if it goes down.

But it's pretty bad. Nice little seniors kicked out of church. I read about people clapping when the pastor did it. Awful. Hateful church politics.

At least 40 other members stood and left in protest though.

This administration wasnt born overnight. This unfolding horror story was years in the making. Now, some would love to give credit to Bush...No credit deserved there. He's the puppet, the one being guided by the hand to give the illusion.. In order to breed more hatred they HAD to bring church and state together, dont you see?
It all plays out like a good horror show, i have to give the powers that be credit for that. Its a masterpiece. They know their people, they know they can brainwash easily...Just look around. The job is done and probably easier than they ever imagined
Everything is going as planned. That fear we all have? Brain washing. Thats what they want.
What a brilliant script. Stephen King couldnt have done it better

Wonder what the ending will be like...

Originally posted by C0le
What some people are refering to the seperation of church and state is not in the constitution, this is what you are refering to

I don't believe I stataed anything about the Consitution.
I believe I said I didn't think the gov't should get involved in religion. The fed gov't should keeps it's nose out of religious affairs...period. I think any legislation concerning religion should be at the states level and should not get kicked to the fed. level.

This doesnt apply to the church as far as the constitution is concerned, as it would being going against itself.

Again, I did not mention the Constitution.

Please, pardon me, but how does it figure that religion should dictate politics.
Religion is about belief, faith, morality, etc. Religion can show you how to live your lives, be a good citizen, but not tell you how you should vote.

Originally posted by DontTreadOnMe

I don't believe I stataed anything about the Consitution.
I believe I said I didn't think the gov't should get involved in religion. The fed gov't should keeps it's nose out of religious affairs...period. I think any legislation concerning religion should be at the states level and should not get kicked to the fed. level.

Oh i wasnt refering to your post perssay, i was generalizing to anyone who has posted or will post, with regard to my comment.

[edit on 6-5-2005 by C0le]

"Political decisions are all, ultimately. moral decisions." - Lord Acton

Where is the evidence that the state is busy establishing a state-sanctified religion in the U.S.?

If religious leaders expressing political opinions is somehow the establishment of a theocracy, I guess we should go back and expunge the writings and (gasp) preaching of Americans from Cotton Mather to Martin Luther King from the public discourse and ignore the principles of faith that are the basis of statute law.

The real irony of modern American scene is that an organization that advertises it's goal of non discrimination and diversity (the ACLU) is leading the legal attack on the rights and traditions of people of faith and respect for thier viewpoints.

Recognition of these by a duly elected government do not constitute an endorsement.

I never fully understood the reasoning of the so-called "Christian right".

I myself am a Christian, I try to make it to church every sunday but admit to general laziness and sometimes pass it by. Still, I have the same beliefs they do. The only difference is, I don't believe my personal beliefs should be forced on others.

For example: I am against abortion...in my own family. I would never allow any female in my family (Cousin/girlfriend/aunt ect...) get an abortion...not saying I would forcefully drag them away from the clinic...but I definitely would try to talk them out of it.

Yet, I beleive that it should be kept legal because I realize not everyone shares my beliefs, and they should not be forced to think like me.

Funny thing, that.

Someone should call the IRS.

Religious institutions, educational, charitable and every not-for-profit institutions are granted 501(c)3 status (tax-exempt) in the United States--clearly the government promotes adherence to some religion via this policy (as well as education, science, charitable gifts, etc...), however, these organizations are not allowed to endorse or oppose candidates for public office or use their resources in elections.

The law is extremely clear: NO PARTISAN POLITICKING OR YOU LOSE YOUR FREE RIDE.

However, this law is inconvenient for the prevailing powers that be and has been selectively enforced. The NAACP was investigated for showing "Fahrenheit 9/11" and Julien Bond speaking about it afterwards--putting GWB down in the process, but the thousands of churches that allowed the RNC to distribute flyers and register voters in their vestibules--as well as the literature and sermons that told congregants that they would be going to hell if they didn't vote for Bush were not.

There has even been legislation introduced with the support of the Christian Conservatives and advised by Pat Robertson (you know, the guy who "prayed away" a hurricane from his house and had God send it over to Fire Island to get the gays), HR 235--The Houses of Worship Free Speech Restoration Act, that would enable religious and charitable organizations to still receive tax-exempt status, but engage in partisan politics all they want.

It is no big surprise why....

Allowing churches to be outlets for electioneering and politicking would be a completely unregulated avenue for collecting donations in support of particular partisan causes--and candidates. And they would be tax-exempt. So much for campaign finance reform.

Originally posted by Galvatron
This is EXACTLY why church and state are supposed to be separate.

The "Separation of Church and State" (Not in the Constitution, but one man's interpretation of the Constitution) is a one way street. The state is restricted from making any laws or respecting religion. A church on the other hand is free to influence politics and the state as it sees fit, as long as that influence doesn't violate the rule that protects the church. When we get down to the basics, these Christian churches have every right to kick out Democrats, Republicans, homosexuals, Muslims, or anyone else they choose. Its a private institution.

In my opinion this action violates basic Christian doctrine, but is well within the laws of the United States.

While I do not agree with the decision of this church, they are well within their rights to do so. Being a private institution, they can restrict membership to those who believe as they do.

That said, again, I feel its a poor decision and is self-defeating. The doors of the church should be open to everyone, and if the other members feel so strongly about it, the correct course of action is to make repeated attempts to show their Democratic members the error of their ways (well, as they see it, anyway).

.
The far religious right has abandoned humanity in favor of God.

Their religion is more important than actual living breathing human beings.

If they want to check out from humanity and reality it is their choice.

If they want to drag sensible people down with them, BIG PROBLEM.

They have sold their souls for a presumed ticket to heaven.

If you can sell your soul to God or Satan, where in lies the differentiation between the two?

Call me independent.
.

I second lmgnyc's post. This church has NO right to do what it did, for one simple reason:

It (and the Deacon) are tax-exempt.

The federal government should revoke his tax privilges, and the deacon can then exclude, discriminate, and lobby his congregation all he wants, in the name of God. Personally, I think a fat, arduous audit from the IRS would be a good punishment for this guy. By all means, you can espouse moral views in a church, but the line between morality and politics is very clearly rooted in the law.


-koji K.

[edit on 7-5-2005 by koji_K]

[edit on 7-5-2005 by koji_K]

Originally posted by vor78
While I do not agree with the decision of this church, they are well within their rights to do so. Being a private institution, they can restrict membership to those who believe as they do.

I could hate agreeing with, this but I do. I quit my own church for the same reasons. I am a Democrat and believe the war in Iraq is as much a moral issue as abortion. I couldn't seem to get it through the 'people's' heads that if they don't like the laws they should change them and that all politicans are responsble.

I went a little further- I told them they were in violation of their IRS exemption and turned them in- I sent them a copy of the letter. It wasn't any 'issue' that got me, it was the 'vote for Bush' from the pulpit that I believed wrong.

Issues are what make one denomination different from another. I don't have a problem with those, they are usually plain to see. Telling people who to vote for is wrong for a preacher. If a church wants a tax emption (something from the state) then they should abide by the rules (non-political) they signed up for. (render unto Ceasar)

Want to push a political agenda then don't claim to be a church.

Okay, first off, the anti-Bush bunch don't necessarily support Kerry. There ARE more than two parties! I'm a conservative and I'm a Constitution Party member.

My former pastor got REALLY hacked off at me when I told him flat-out that Bush is an evil man! I was all but accused of supporting liberals! Um, last time I checked, the Constitution Party is hardly liberal! But I'm sure we get called liberals because we're against the war in Iraq.

Personally, I don't get how the "Christian right" can support Bush. Look at the guy's track record for crying out loud! He's not truly pro-life, he's not totally anti-gay-agenda, and he might as well roll out the red carpet for those illegals--I heard about him calling the patriotic Minute Men vigilantes! What are these people, BLIND or something?

Chuck Baldwin, who ran for VP under the CP ticket, said the Christian Right scares him too!

Yes, by all means, let's have the federal government tear apart any religious institution it wants with an IRS audit.

The reflexive fascist instincts of people that believe tax exemption is a control tool over it's servile subjects is more freightening to me than any wacko church pastor's political outlook.

Screw the government. The constitution is there to protect us from the people who who would use the levers of government power to enforce thier views of right and wrong. What goes on in this church as regards membership is none of your or the feds' damn business.