I ran across my bizzillionth “tax the churches, they’re talking politics” comment on a thread … probably about the redefinition of Marriage. I find it a very strange and disturbing argument, yet it comes up again and again. There is nowhere, anywhere in our Constitution or any law consistent with it that it says Churches can’t talk about politics. The dual purpose of the religious freedom portion of the first amendment is to avoid a situation where unelected church officials get official government positions and have a direct say in laws, and it is also to keep people in government from using coersion (like, say, levying huge taxes) on Churches … for instance, for publicly stating opinions that perhaps those currently in power don’t like.
There is nowhere in Constitutional or Natural law that says the people can’t vote for a law based on religious belief, or even that direct Church principles can’t be voted into law by the people.
Most churches teach that, for instance, murder is wrong, and we have laws against murder. Does that mean that a priest or preacher can’t speak out in favor of murder laws without accused of being “political”? And frankly, what is the matter with them being “political”? Are not laws ultimately a reflection of morality?
What is forbidden allowing Church officials to make binding laws on their own.
For all the talk of “Theocracy”, you have to understand that a Theocracy would be Church officials having the power to make legally binding civil law, circumventing the processes set up by the definition of the Republic (that would be the Constitution).Loading Likes...