It's Secular
by
Charley
Reese
by Charley Reese
DIGG THIS
The office
of the president is a secular office in a secular government. There
is not a word in the Constitution that authorizes the president
or anyone else in the federal government to make a religious decision.
Why then are
both voters and candidates wasting their time talking about religion?
The personal religious beliefs of the candidates should be considered
irrelevant. Furthermore, people should not forget that there are
a lot more professors of religion than practitioners. What a person
claims to believe and how that person leads his or her life are
often quite different.
Laws are,
in the final analysis, words on paper. They cannot and do not control
human behavior. If they could, there would be no crimes. Americans,
especially politicians, have developed the bad habit of thinking
that there ought to be a law to cover every conceivable human action.
Consequently, there are so many laws today that no human being can
possibly know what they all are. This defeats one of the useful
purposes of laws, which is to educate the public.
As for religion,
people should recognize that all the world's religions have failed
to eliminate sin, and therefore no one should expect the government
to do that. Christianity in particular is based on the twin concepts
of sin and forgiveness. Governments are better at finding sin than
at forgiving.
Religion has
a legitimate role in our society. George Washington said religion
is the best way known to instill virtue in masses of people. That
is job enough for religion, and religion should stay out of politics
as an organization. Religious individuals, of course, have the same
rights and duties as any other citizen.
Religion itself
has enough problems to solve. Christian Zionists, for example, are
a heretical cult without any biblical foundation and with a political
agenda. Other Christians have perverted the religion into a weekly
course on how to be rich and happy. Christianity, in fact, teaches
that it is easier to pass a camel through the eye of a needle than
for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God. Militant Christianity
is a contradiction in terms.
If you are
trying to find someone actually practicing Christianity, whom would
you choose a preacher with a six-figure salary, a limousine
and a private jet or an actor, like Brad Pitt, who has committed
$5 million of his own money to build homes for people in New Orleans'
9th Ward?
In judging
human affairs, always look for actions, not words. What a person
says tells you nothing reliable; what a person does gives you a
better clue as to what kind of a person he or she is. At the same
time, don't forget the dual nature of human beings.
One can find
faults with all religions. One should not forget, however, that
the same can be said of all secular philosophies, ideologies and
institutions. Nothing human is or ever will be perfect.
As
for the presidential candidates, people should be asking not what
these people claim to believe about God, but what have they actually
done? How do their lives measure up to their speeches? Do they demonstrate
a belief in and a concern for the Constitution? Do they have a wide
knowledge of the world as it truly is? Are they catering to special
interests? Are they independent thinkers or followers?
The presidential
race is, after all, a search for a secular leader, not for a pope
or ayatollah. The United States is in deep trouble politically,
financially and economically. It will take a smart, sane and courageous
person to get us out. Opportunists and people who sell their souls
for campaign contributions may well preside over our national collapse.
December
13, 2007
Charley
Reese [send
him mail] has been a journalist for 49 years.
©
2007 by King Features Syndicate, Inc.
Charley
Reese Archives
|