By JAKE
MOKRIS
In a speech against the original version of the new immigration bill, Sen. Hillary Clinton completely surprised me. She said that the bill would incriminate “probably even Jesus himself.�
I do not claim to know why she said that. The first thing that came into my mind was the statement’s irony: Sen. Clinton violated the “separation of church and state.� I laughed when I heard her appeal to religion to support her argument. I don’t think the potential Democratic candidate for president should get away with that.
But there is a greater issue: The role of religion in politics. Does the Constitution allow Sen. Clinton and other politicians to mention religion and use religious arguments in politics?
This issue was important in the presidential election of 1960. Some people were concerned that, since John F. Kennedy was a Catholic, he might defy the Constitution because of loyalty to the Catholic Church. Anti-Catholicism was still alive in the United States in the 1960s, so that was the main reason that this issue was applied to Kennedy. But this shows that the question of religion’s role in politics is important.
I do not believe in the full doctrine of “separation of church and state,� and I think that politicians have the right to implement their beliefs in political decisions. I do believe that the Constitution prohibits Congress from making laws that establish religions or religious practices. I am against state-controlled churches, and I am also against a church-controlled state. But the Constitution does not forbid politicians to make moral decisions based on religion.
Politicians are elected to govern the country. They represent the people who elect them to office, but politicians are also their own people. They have standards and beliefs that may differ from those of the voters. That is part of why the people elect them: politicians are the type of people who will be good at governing. Politicians follow both the voters’ position and their own beliefs (and the Constitution, hopefully). If those beliefs are religious, fine.
The office of judge is an extremely important exception. Judges have to apply the law to the particular cases that appear before them. Judges do not change the law; in their decisions, the law and its interpretation are fixed. Judges decide cases according to the law, not according to their own beliefs. (In last Sunday’s edition of The Patriot News, the opinion section included an article by Judge John E. Jones, the judge in the Dover trial, in which he explained that judges must exercise impartiality.) If a judge thinks that there should be a new law, like one that follows certain ethical beliefs, the judge can’t do anything about it except quit and become a legislator.
I hope that Americans see the irony of Sen. Clinton’s statement regarding the immigration bill. I hope further that we see her statement’s significance: religion’s role in politics is an important issue.
Jake Mokris is a home-schooled student and member of the Teen Takeover staff.
In a speech against the original version of the new immigration bill, Sen. Hillary Clinton completely surprised me. She said that the bill would incriminate “probably even Jesus himself.�
I do not claim to know why she said that...
--That's the problem --you don't know why she said that. I know it's in vogue to bash Hillary, but holy cow (whoops, sorry for bringing religion into the argument), give her a break. It's painfully obvious that she was simply making a point that the proposed law would be so encompassing as to criminalize humanitarianism ("good samaritanism" to you religious folk). If you're going to argue the merits of the bill, that's one thing, but if you're going to try to connect her proffered opinion to a Constitutional violation of church and state separation...wow!
I don’t think the potential Democratic candidate for president should get away with that.
--Shouldn't get away with using a religious reference to make a point? After the Muslim cartoon debacle, I think a lot of radical Muslims would agree with you. Now THAT is ironic!
I think over the last few years Ms. Clinton has been trying to be seen as more of a moderate, just so she can grab more votes.
On the issue of church and state, have you looked into tax exemption/ incorporation status for churches? Here's a site with some great info: http://unregisteredbaptistfellowship.com/cvs.php
It explains what a real New Testament church is like compared to a state-headed church.
I don't know whether America was ever a Christian nation, but I do know that most of America's founding fathers claimed to be Christian, and that their works show it, i.e. the Declaration, G. Washington's farewell address, and so many others.
I will differ with you, Jake, on why people were worried about JFK's presidency. You said it was "Anti-Catholics." I believe it was that more people at that time understood that Catholics give their allegiance first to their -excuse me- cult. They would first obey ROME, then the U.S. I have nothing against Catholics, some of my friends are such, but they need to be born again (John 3:7).
Here's a site Catholics might want to check out: http://www.chick.com/reading/tracts/0040/0040_01.asp
~*~ Katie ~*~
Jake,
The separation of church and religion will never be decided in my lifetime. I do not believe our lawmakers have the right to interpret our constitution to be favorable for things they think will help them get elected. I hate to say I have voted for individuals who said one thing during the campaign and did another when elected.
Jake--good post. I think you might have overshot a bit when saying that her speech was a mixing of church and state. But that's beside the point.
People today (the MSM, bloggers, everyone) seem to have taken the separation of church and state to an extreme. The purpose of the first amendment establishes the liberty of people to worship as they choose, and prohibits the state from establishing their own religion. That's it. Jefferson said that the purpose was the "build a wall of separation between church and state." The above is what, I think, he meant.
The reason it's such a big deal to have the ten commandments in front of a courthouse is because its a symbolic endorsement of a particular belief system by a government body. Politicians can pretty much say the "Our Father" at a speech and it isn't considered mixing church and state.
Katie--
I am a devout catholic. I don't worship Mary as a God. I've been on both sides of the tracks--being raised Catholic and spending 3 years as a worship leader in a non-denominational contemporary Christian church. After three years I was heartbroken by what I saw and left the Church altogether, before finally returning home to Catholicism. The pamphlet you had us read, IMO, was completely ignorant and ridiculous. To outsiders, Catholicsm may look like a "cult" as you say, but believe me when I say this--I have seen so-called "Christian" churches and attended many of their services. I see it as extremely hypocritical that you would refer to Catholicsm as a "cult" and then have us read what you said.
By her comments, Senator Clinton has implied that one of her reasons for opposing the immigration bill is the Bible. I think that the voters (especially her supporters) and the media should be asking if she plans to make the scriptures a litmus test for her support of other bills. Of course, we know that she does not use the scriptures as her true reason for supporting or opposing a bill, and that she said what she said in an attempt to get support for herself. If she did plan to consult the Bible before making a political decision, she should be consistent in always supporting the Biblical position. She doesn't do that and just uses the scriptures when it's convenient and to her advantage.
Based on the lack of media coverage of Senator Clinton's statements, the media has shown itself to be biased for the liberal/democratic position and against the conservative/republican position.
>>>>I don't know whether America was ever a Christian nation, but I do know that most of America's founding fathers claimed to be Christian, and that their works show it, i.e. the Declaration, G. Washington's farewell address, and so many others.
This is BS. Washington was a Deist. Jefferson despised Christians. And Jake Know It All never seems to have a problem when GWB wraps himself in God. But then we all know Jesus was a Republican, right?
--Geezus, are people so dense as to believe that Hillary was actually "consulting" the Bible when making the quip about Jesus? If a weatherman says, "...boy my forcast is so hot that even the Devil himself will be sweating," does that mean that he consults the Bible or Satanic cults to come up with his forcasts?? Get real. She could have just as well referred to Ghandi, John-Boy Walton or the Tooth Fairy --Jesus was referred to simply because he's the quintessential poster boy for do-gooders. Don't let your bias cloud your judgement.
--Kathy, did conservative Fox News cover Senator Clinton's statements to your satisfaction? If not, why not? If so, how many more hours/days/weeks/months did they spend on this "important" issue over what the "liberal" media spent? How much time would you like the media to devote to this issue? Should more time be spent on Hillary's comment about Jesus than on the actual issue that caused her to make the comment --immigration?
I didn't mean to offend you, Lucky. I did think that all good Catholics invoke Mary. I came across this Catholic site which spoke favorably of doing so... http://search.americancatholic.org/search?q=Mary+prayer&ie=latin1&oe=latin1&lr=&site=samp&output=xml_no_dtd&client=samp&proxystylesheet=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.americancatholic.org%2Facosearch.xslt&restrict=aco
(Sorry it's so long).
The important issue is really what your faith is in. Are you working to get to heaven, or is your reservation already made? If you're trusting in your works (i.e. baptism, church membership, faithfulness, other sacraments, etc.), you are "doing." (Ephesians 2:9, "Not of works, lest any man should boast.")
If you're trusting fully in Jesus Christ and Him alone, it is "done." In John 19:30 Jesus said, "It is finished."
I can understand your feelings toward mainstream "protestantism." I am not a part of it.
~*~ Katie ~*~