Preach to me

[cbayer]

http://www.economist.com/news/united-states/21627672-more-americans-want-their-churches-involved-politics-preach-me

More Americans want their churches involved with politics

Oct 25th 2014 | JACKSON, MISSISSIPPI AND PORTLAND, OREGON



“CHURCHES have a tremendous amount of power and a stupid amount of money,” complains David Silverman of American Atheists, a non-profit group. He thinks the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) should crack down harder on churches that meddle in politics. Under American law, churches that explicitly endorse or oppose a political candidate can lose their tax-exempt status, but Mr Silverman thinks the IRS is often too scared to go after them.

Few Americans share his priorities. Almost three-quarters think the influence of religion on American life is waning, according to the Pew Research Centre, a think-tank (see chart). More than half of this group see this as a bad thing—including 30% of those who have no religious affiliation. A third of the unaffiliated still want politicians to have a strong faith. Knowing that they do is comforting in times of crisis, believes Michael Cromartie of the Ethics and Public Policy Centre, another think-tank.

Overall 49% of Americans think churches should speak out about political matters; 48% disagree. That has changed markedly since 2010, when 52% wanted preachers to keep their noses out of politics and only 43% didn’t. The new urge to hear pastors pillory politicians is felt mostly by Republicans, who are angrier with Barack Obama. Most Americans still think churches should stop short of endorsing candidates for office (63% oppose, 32% favour), but the gap has narrowed since 2010 (when it was 70-24%).

Some religious folk fear that the state is meddling with their faith. The city of Houston, for example, has served five pastors with subpoenas for copies of sermons they have preached about homosexuality. “If this reckless violation of religious liberty can happen in Texas,” says Russell Moore of the Southern Baptist Convention, “then it can happen anywhere.” He thinks the issue will trump all others for religious voters in November.

more at link

[AtheistCrusader]

1. That's bullshit, it didn't happen. The subpoena was withdrawn.

They made a mistake and corrected it.


This is just the last gasp of dominant evangelical political influence in the US. Whatever happens to evangelicals as a religious group, hopefully we can all agree that the divorce between religion and state is a good thing.

[Warren Stupidity]

7. No of course we can't agree on that.

Down thread religious interference is a good thing. Of course. And there should be more of it.

[pinto]

2. The examples in the piece from Mississippi and Oregon seem to imply political affiliation,

not religious affiliation. But the polling data seems to fit with publicized trends.

[kwassa]

3. Churches have less political influence than they used to, because they can't deliver votes.

A case in point would be the Catholic Church, where despite an overall conservative leadership, the majority of lay Catholics voted for Obama.

Many mainline churches now have a mix of liberal and conservative congregants, so there isn't a single political viewpoint.

The only politically homogenous churches are the conservative evangelicals, and their influence is limited by the their lack of a majority in the vote.

[NYC_SKP]

4. It's not hard for churches to avoid political speech and still have great influence.

In fact, it's possibly more effective to speak to issues and avoid mentioning parties or candidates altogether.

We can talk about being better caretakers of the planet, a collective responsibility to care for others' health, and finding leaders who truly represent the best interest of future generations and thus avoid any chance of breaking IRS rules or offending parish, temple, etc., members.

I don't know that we all use the term "politics" in the same way, so can't tell if poll respondents are looking for more explicit politicking or just for more general advocacy and activism in services.

rogue mod K and R

[cbayer]

5. I agree. I grew up in churches which were highly infused with politics.

But it was always about issues - the civil rights movement, the anti-war movement, issues around civil liberties and social justice.

There was nothing that I recall about party affiliation or particular candidates, just causes.

Rogue mod? That's a blast from the past.

[Warren Stupidity]

6. Oh churches speak to issues all the time.

Like for example abortion. Or gay rights. This of course blends right in to supporting or opposing specific candidates and policies. Speaking on issues is being involved in politics, and religious institutions in this country and many others have for the most part been advocating and agitating for the wrong side of many issues. Religion getting more involved should fill every progressive person with dread for the consequences of increased religious political activity.

[NYC_SKP]

8. "Wrong side" is a pretty subjective term. If churches didn't address issues, they'd die.

If all they did was sing or chant or repeat the non-issue parts of their myths, then it would be like seeing Cats over and over and over and over again.

No, churches and temples and houses of worship are best when they address real and current issues that impact attendees' lives.

Can that overlap with local and national politics? Sure it can.

But I don't think it's fair to suggest that if a sermon is delivered that talks about recycling and defending the environment that it's therefore worthy of scorn and can be called political.

Similarly, if a sermon addresses a need for young people to be thoughtful and avoid pregnancy and abortions at all cost that it, too, is worthy of scorn and should be considered a political sermon.

Many churches do good works and that they address issues is nothing new and nothing to be overly concerned with.

Others are not so neutral or benevolent.

[Warren Stupidity]

9. The dominant religious demographic

in this country is white Protestant, those institutions are generally very conservative, and those voters vote republican by lopsided majorities in the 65% range.

There is no question in my mind about what is the wrong side of the abortion issue or the lgbt rights issue, and the mainstream of American religious institutions are on the wrong side.

[Humanist_Activist]

10. When religious people use their religion to justify political actions...

all it does is serve to distract from the issues and devolves them into worthless theological or biblical debates.