Protestantism

» paper_turtle - Values

.
Brian wrote:
People vote their values.
.
The COURTS are different in that they are SUPPOSED to not vote their values, but rather apply the laws of the land.
.
The principal lawmaking branch of our government is supposed to be and - for the most part, still is - the legislative branch. The people elect their representatives to make laws. The legislative branch will, by and large, reflect the majority will of the populace
.
.
Yes, people vote their values, and yes the Supreme Court is *supposed* to interpret the law of the land.
.
Those elected to represent us are supposed to represent the values and intent of those who elected them--NOT their own agendas.
.
With regard to the Supreme Court, however, if this body were actually completely objective in its interpretation of law, then who a particular president appoints would not matter, since he/she would not be swayed by his/her own beliefs/values. This is, however, obviously not the case. Both Conservatives and Liberals have complained about certain justices and/or the opinions they rendered.
.
.
Brian wrote:
.
My point in all this is....Evangelical, conservative Christians have as much right as anyone else to speak out, lobby, organize, and vote to impact the lawmaking and policymaking process as any other group. Does everyone agree with that?
.
What I'm hearing from you is....No. They have the right to vote and take part in their society, but they should leave check parts of their religion at the door of public society. Keep their religion to their homes, churches, synagogues, etc. and only vote, speak out, lobby, organize, etc. in a way that is reflective of the overall diversity of society. That's what I'm hearing from you.
.
That is not exactly what I said; I would ask you to go back and re-read my posts from yesterday.
.
I expect politicians to be true to their principles/beliefs. Matter of fact, I would love to see more politicians actually *dare* to do this, rather than rolling over when they become afraid they might not get re-elected (this si true for Democrats and Republicans). At the same time, though, I also expect politicians to *accurately* represent their consitiuency. If the majority of voters tell Senator X they do not support measure 143, then I believe he has a duty to either respect his voter's wishes or be *very* public in supplying a good reason for not doing so.
.
This wariness about mixing politics and religion is not such a new thing. Many doubted JFK would get elected because he was a Catholic, and some people were afraid he would be unduly influenced by the Vatican.
.
peace and love,
Paper Turtle

-- posted by paper_turtle