Language of faith hijacked
Posted by: Ken Salter in Politics, Religion, tags: no true scotsman, theocracyIn the 6 January 208 Op-Ed section of the Mobile Press-Register, Dr. Randy Brinson, chairman of the Christian Coalition of Alabama, wrote a “special” to the paper entitled “Language of faith hijacked.” In this article, Brinson laments that the political candidates, both Democrat and Republican, have adapted religious semantics in their political speeches and propaganda in order to pander to the religious voter. In particular he notes that “In 2006, many centrist Democrats” used this technique, “to which many credited their election success and control of Congress”
Funny, I seem to recall that the sucess of the Democrats in the 2006 elections had nothing to do with religion and more to do with the corruption in Congress, particularly on the Republican side, and the “war” on terror. No reference is given for Brinson’s statement.
Further he states:
While this may give solace to many faith-oriented political activists, it only makes it difficult for voters to decipher which candidate truly understands the link between personal faith and policy.
How pathetic that our political system has sunk to such a low where there has to be a link between faith and policy. There should be no link between them. Our representatives should not be creating policy or voting based on their personal faith. They are supposed to represent all the people, those who believe the same, those who believe different, and those who don’t believe at all. I agree with Brinson that the candidates are pandering using religious code language in order to garner votes. Unfortunately, this is because of the political power that evangelicals still wield in this country, though I hope this is on the decline.
The fact is that evangelicals hold no animosity toward any faith, but they equally disdain the fact that some want to rewrite the basic truths of the Christian faith to fit their own belief system, or equating Mormonism to another Christian denomination.
Yeah right. I distinctly remember when a non-christian was asked to give a prayer before Congress. This didn’t go over very well with the evangelicals. And as far as the “basic truths”, which truths is Brinson talking about? Why are there so many sects of Christians, not to mention Orthodox and Catholic, if the basic truths are not in dispute? And why are Mormons not considered Christians? Is Dr. Brinson falling for the No True Scotsman?
Dr. Brinson goes on to mention Mitt Romney’s changes in stance on social issues like abortion, gun rights, and gay marriage. Apparently, Dr. Brinson knows what Real Christians are supposed to believe in. Even more poignant is that focus he puts on Romney, like no other politician running has flip flopped (McCain now sucking the teat of the religious right, for example.) I wonder if it has anything to do with Romney’s religion, despite what Brinson says about the imaginary Big Tent evangelicals supposedly have.
He does get one more thing correct. The Republican party looks at the evangelical block for votes and money. And that’s it. This is now backfiring on the GOP, as the religious right is completing the take over and eventual destruction of the party.
Dr. Brinson is in league with Mike Huckabee, since he considers Huckabee a True Christian politician who is advancing True Christian values into the government. Politicians and their supporters that cannot divorce their religion from their politics are not patriots, and are not for the American Way. The wolf in sheep’s clothing is being unveiled to the American electorate slowly but surely.
