OK, Governor Jindal, and others in the GOP, which is it?

[callmeslick]

either faith guides decision making or not. I, for the record, agree with Jindal, that it should.You can't pick and choose WHICH leaders of WHICH faiths can participate, however, which is what the Rep from SC wants:
http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show ... _fb_maddow

[Tunnelcat]

Hmmm, the Gordian Knot. Who's faith is the correct faith when it comes to activist politics? My take? None of the above should apply.

[callmeslick]

TC, I am all for people's faith informing their views of right and wrong, and helping them make decisions. That is not to say that I feel that religious viewpoints should be IMPOSED on every member of society. However, when one party insists that Christianity is the supreme guide for the US, and can't tolerate a Christian leader who takes them to task on matters like Palestinian sovereignity or climate change, it's our daily dose of hypocrisy.

[Tunnelcat]

Isn't that the problem with Christianity? Too many flavors to argue over? Cue CUDA or Thorne.

[snoopy]

One of the things I've been reflecting on lately:

Christ was consistently (and cunningly) a-political while still taking people's personal actions to task. In that vein, I can tell you how I'd like the two to coexist: I'd like our politicians to be personally informed by the character traits commended by the Bible ("Galatians 5:22-23:But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, forbearance, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control. Against such things there is no law.") and I'd like their lawmaking to be rooted in encouraging the same character traits in the members of the nation. At the same time, I'd like politicians the eschew "kingdom building" of their own in general - which means I don't want them to get too focused on any particular way, or any particular method, or any particular issue - because I think it's in a battles over the particular issues that the general goal of acting in high character toward each other gets lost. So, I guess I want our politicians to tie themselves firmly to high standards of character, and hold loosely to the latest ideas about how to get there.

[Tunnelcat]

Well, the number of those calling themselves "unaffiliated", or the "nones", is rising in this country. That doesn't mean they aren't religious or all atheists, they just don't follow or go to a particular church or denomination. There's still a lot of spirituality in our nation. But the mix of religion, power and politics is turning off a lot of people. If that's the case, why would a politician pander to a particular sect, namely Evangelical, of Christianity in the first place? It's not going to get them enough votes as the demographics and people's attitudes change. Jesus may have been apolitical, but a lot of his modern followers, especially Evangelicals, are not so restricted in their desires. They're doing Jesus a disservice.

http://www.pewforum.org/2012/10/09/nones-on-the-rise/