|
The Rise of Church and State in America
Michael Harris
With President Bush’s recent re-election, we enter tumultuous times, the battle between the conservative right and the liberal left in this renewed culture war has found its battleground in the Constitution, the church, the schools, and the American family. Throughout America’s history we have always had these “morality swings”, beginning with the Temperance Movement in 1869, to the modern day Prohibitionist Party, the conservative right has sought to change the values of America. From the Scopes Trial in 1925 to the present, the "traditionalists" have fought the "modernists" in a battle for morality.
The Georgia Board of Education’s recent decision to remove the word “evolution” from the high school curriculum and adding a warning sticker in suburban Atlanta science textbooks that says evolution is “a theory, not a fact” is evidence of this ongoing battle between the right and left. A well known creationist author named, Curt Sewell writes, “The Bible says that all the sea-creatures were created on the 5th day of creation week, and land animals were created on the 6th, just before humans. Leviathan (Job 41), was probably a sea-monster, while Behemoth (Job 40), represents the dinosaurs that lived on land. They were both living at the same time as humans.” In his writings he never mentions fossil evidence such as spear point marks on bones, weapons of early man found in context with fossils, or even human fossils from the same period as dinosaur fossils, in fact he uses no science at all. He goes on to add, “ dinosaurs were certainly on the Ark with Noah and his family. They were probably juveniles, not the huge full-grown monsters whose fossilized bones are usually found today. It's likely that God also caused most of the larger creatures on the Ark to go into a state something like hibernation, so there wouldn't be a lot of activity and confusion. And at that time all humans and animals were herbivorous (plant-eaters), and co-existed peacefully, until after the Flood.” One must ask themselves, how does a creationist explain man’s early hunter gatherer status? It is these people that are influencing our government with nonsensical ideas. It’s important to note here these people believe the earth is only 6000 years old.
Using the Bible and its many “Laws”, the religious right wishes to dictate morality to the rest of the populace in the courts, from the pulpit, in the schools, and in the Constitution. The Bible contains countless barbaric and tyrannical laws, most handed down by God. The religious right would have us believe that these laws were written by mortal man, thus rendering them fallible, but as we shall see the majority of these laws were derived from the word of God. The same is true for the atrocities mentioned in the Bible. These were not acts committed by mortal man alone, they were acts commanded by God. The conservative right fails to see the hypocrisy of this “picking and choosing” of God’s Laws to enforce. On one hand they condemn homosexuality and same-sex marriage while ignoring laws such as, “Anyone who curses his father or mother must be put to death.” (Exodus 12). Religious conservatives would argue that Biblical Law is obsolete and no longer valid today. Using their own argument couldn’t it be said that the condemnation of homosexuality also be obsolete? Our forefathers saw the need to a separate church and state, the laws of God, and the laws of man. One can only imagine a Constitution based solely on God’s word.
How does the conservative right choose which of God’s laws to follow? Lets examine a few Old and New Testament passages they must have missed. From the Old Testament:
"If a man lies with a woman during her sickness and uncovers her nakedness, he has discovered her flow, and she has uncovered the flow of her blood. Both of them shall be cut off from her people." (Leviticus 20:18)
"Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy slaves. You may also buy some of the temporary residents living among you and members of their clans born in your country, and they will become your property." (Leviticus 25:44-45)
"If a man lies with a male as he lies with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination. They shall surely be put to death. Their blood shall be upon them." (Leviticus 20:13)
While the right never has a problem with quoting Leviticus when it comes to homosexuality why do they miss the others? They come from the same book they cherish so much. Would they have us deport couples who have had sex during a woman’s period? Will Jerry Falwell use Leviticus to bring back slavery? Some on the right say that the words of the Old Testament are archaic and that the New Testament is the word we should follow. Lets see what they have missed:
"Women should be silent in the churches, for they are not permitted to speak, but should be submissive, as the law also says."(1 Corinthians 14:34)
"Slaves, obey your human masters in everything; don't work only while being watched, in order to please men, but work wholeheartedly, fearing the Lord."(Colassians 3:22)
"Slaves, submit yourselves to your masters with all respect, not only to the good and gentle but also to the cruel. "(1 Peter 2:18)
Is it easier to condemn homosexuality than to keep a woman quite as Corinthians tells us to do? I know women, George Bush will have a hard time with this one. Slaves must submit themselves to their gentle as well as cruel owners? While I remember some people in Texas who would welcome this I’m not sure it would be well received in places like Detroit.
In 1988 Jimmy Swaggart stood before his congregation and confessed his sin of adultery, then turned to his wife and said, “I have sinned against you and I beg your forgiveness”. On March 19, 1987 Jim Bakker, caught in an adulterous affair claims he was, "wickedly manipulated by treacherous former friends and colleagues who victimized me with the aid of a female confederate... Vulnerable as I was at the time, I was set up as part of a scheme to co-opt me and obtain some advantage for themselves over me in connection with their hope for position in the ministry." Jerry Falwell, called in to rescue Bakker’s PTL Ministry was quoted as saying, “God sent me there to bring an abrupt end to the immorality and financial fraud of this 'religious soap opera' that had become an international embarrassment to the Christian gospel." These three men, well known crusaders against homosexuality and same-sex marriage never once mentioned Deuteronomy 22 in which God says to Moses, “If a man be found lying with a woman married to a husband, then they shall both of them die, both the man that lay with the woman, and the woman: so shalt thou put away evil from Israel”. Would these so-called Christian leaders support an amendment against adultery? Which argument, outlined above would the religious right use?
At a time when modern evangelists want us to turn to the Bible for laws governing man we must look back to the Bible and its position on slavery. “If a man beats his male or female slave with a rod and the slave dies as a direct result, he must be punished, but he is not to be punished if the slave gets up after a day or two, since the slave is his property.” (Exodus 21:20). How far would this new Christian right want us to go in basing laws and amendments on scripture? The evangelists of old saw the evil in slavery and its place in the Bible; they saw the benefit of a separation of church and state, they did not use the word of God to fight slavery, they recognized the injustice and chose to fight this battle outside the bounds of God and the Bible. Can the new religious right deny the Biblical positions mentioned in the Bible concerning slavery? If they choose to recognize slavery as a barbaric practice why can’t they accept same-sex marriage? Is this an argument of Biblical Law being obsolete? It’s this hypocrisy that upsets the liberal left.
On November 2, 1920 over 8 million women voted in America for the first time. In 1848 Elizabeth Cady Stanton penned the Declaration of Sentiments declaring, “men and women are created equal," and proposed that women should vote.
“The history of mankind is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations on the part of man toward woman, having in direct object the establishment of an absolute tyranny over her. To prove this, let facts be submitted to a candid world.
He has never permitted her to exercise her inalienable right to the elective franchise.
He has compelled her to submit to laws, in the formation of which she had no voice.
He has withheld from her rights, which are given to the most ignorant and degraded men - both natives and foreigners. Having deprived her of this first right as a citizen, the elective franchise, thereby leaving her without representation in the halls of legislation, he has oppressed her on all sides. He closes against her all the avenues to wealth and distinction, which he considers most honorable to himself. As a teacher of theology, medicine, or law, she is not known. He has denied her the facilities for obtaining a thorough education - all colleges being closed against her. He allows her in church, as well as State, but a subordinate position, claiming apostolic authority for her exclusion from the ministry, and, with some exceptions, from any public participation in the affairs of the Church.”
America saw the injustice shown to women during this time, sentiments based in past religious beliefs. Followers of a separation of church and state realized that the treatment of women as “second class” citizens outlined in the Bible was archaic, cruel, and unjust. “A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent.” (1 Timothy 2:11-12). In picking and choosing Biblical Laws, as the conservative right does, would they have us return women to a subservient role? Does an amendment stating, “A woman’s Place is in the Home” suit their needs?
As the conservative right attempts to change the Laws of the Land its important to see where their reference material comes from. The Bible is a good book, a history of mankind for some. What it should not be is a book of laws for modern mankind. The Bible should not be an infallible source of morality. We’ve seen the barbaric, and tyrannical laws God placed on man and the struggle to overcome them. We’ve seen the shackles of slavery broken, and the power of the Woman’s Movement and their accomplishments. With the hypocrisy the religious right shows in their “picking and choosing” of Gods Laws how can we know what is right? We know what is right by relying on principles based on a modern moral philosophy in which mankind respects rights of others. The solution is so very simple for “true” Christians, if you truly believe in a higher being then your judgement is not needed. If your heart is full of love for all human-kind then there is no room for judgement, for if you truly believe then you know judgement is up to a higher power, not Jerry Falwell nor George Bush, for them I quote:
You cannot serve God and money. Matthew 6:24
Michael Harris
|
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
