This Election, Religion is Taking a Hit
By Alan Stewart Carl | Related entries in Barack, ReligionAs you all are likely aware, Barack Obama left his church this weekend. While the pulpit of his church has certainly served as a stage for some rather incendiary statements over the years, this move by Obama is about more than just politics. Similar to John McCain’s recent renunciation of controversial pastor John Hagee, Obama’s decision to flee religion rather than face controversy is another sign that secularism in America is gaining strength.
I know in recent years it’s become trendy to talk about American theocrats (even American Taliban), as if our nation is just one step away from descending into medieval theocracy. But the truth is, America has become increasingly secular over the last fifty to one hundred years. So secular, in fact, that politicians of both parties are finding themselves running away from rather than embracing religion and religious leaders.
Now, Hagee and Jeremiah Wright have both said some pretty horrible things that would have likely garnered at least some coverage in earlier eras (although, with the monopolistic media of yesteryear, that’s not a given). But I find it hard to believe that any presidential candidate of an earlier era would find themselves having to make a choice between religion and the presidency –even if that religion is controversial. I mean, John F. Kennedy never renounced the Pope, even if he did have to publically promise not to put the interests of Rome before the interests of America.
In today’s political climate, those on the right tend to be the most vocal defenders of religion’s place in the public square. But it was voices on the right who most heavily pounded the Rev. Wright issue which, in turn, heightened the left’s shouts about Hagee (in the usual eye-for-an-eye political street-fighting style). The result is that both candidates have distanced themselves from religion, thus pushing religion further out of what’s acceptable in the public square.
For adamant proponents of the separation of church and state, this is a victory. For those who believe there is room for religion in our secular society, this is a defeat – even though the specific religious figures involved are poor representatives of religion’s positive potential.
In America, when politics and religion tangle, it’s religion that usually loses.
This entry was posted on Monday, June 2nd, 2008 and is filed under Barack, Religion. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
June 2nd, 2008 at 5:04 pm
After the religious excesses of the Bush administration anything less looks like a retreat. Indeed, how many US politicians (at the Federal level at least) do not openely and fervently express their faith? Sure, some of them are lying, but it the appearance of being religious appears absolutely necessary to being elected. So I certaintly wouldn’t declare a victory for “adamant” proponents of church & state just yet.
If anything I would see the separation of church and state as one of the key factors that explains why the US is such a religious country. Instead of having a central belief imposed (eg. Anglicanism in the UK) the “free market” for belief has created a wide variety of sects that offer different philosophies/ceremonies/etc. Also, from my experience with the USA (via marriage) it seems that religious organisations are an important social focus, whereas where I’m from (Australia) secular organisations, especially sports clubs, fulful a similar role.
June 2nd, 2008 at 6:47 pm
I tend to see America’s “growing secular nature” not as evidence of secularism but instead evidence of complete consumerism. It’s not the lack of faith which most people often attribute to the “secularizing” of American culture. People are just as willing and faithful as their antecedents. The only difference is that it is the material that we now worship.
Religion in America has it’s ebb and flow. When people see evidence of religion being co-opted for ill-gain the pendulum swings a little toward secularism. But the pendulum always swings back the other way sooner rather than late. Remember Reagan and the “shining city upon a hill.?” American’s are as fickle as they are forgetful.
We see what religion can do when applied by the ignorant majority. The blind leading the somewhat less blind if you will. I’m a “secularists” if for no other reason than I don’t believe anyone until I have both side’s “truths” to weigh. Only then can I decide which one sounds more plausible. More sane.
As for religion’s role in America and it’s politics. It’s noot going anywhere. It IS a politic all of it’s own.
June 2nd, 2008 at 7:41 pm
The only thing that should be said to this
is “Prove it.”. Conservatives constantly talk about how much more secular our society has become without offering up any proof. Heck, I’ve never even seen an acceptable answer for what constitutes a secular society. Is it that they can’t have organized Christian prayer led by teachers and administrators in public schools? Is it that the Ten Commandments and other overtly Christian symbols aren’t allowed in court? When does it cross the line?
And frankly, the current brand of political conservatives don’t seem to limit themselves to believing that there is a place for religion in the public square but that there is a place for using the power of the state to force others to live the way the conservative’s religion says people ought to live. Terry Schiavo, Roe V. Wade, Lawrence V. Texas and a host of other cases show that it is not respect for religion that is desired, but law based on religion. Taliban? No. A desire to be Taliban Lite? Yes, I think so.
June 2nd, 2008 at 7:56 pm
Perhaps it’s just that living in the San Francisco area gives me an odd perspective. But I don’t see people running away from religion. Not at all. (And no, I don’t see them running away from Christianity towards other religions either.)
What I do see is people being less and less impressed by individuals who set themselves up as “religious leaders.” Usually based, as far as one can tell, on a large ego, a lot of chutzpa, and a loud voice — actual faith in God or a desire to do good works strictly optional. And, not too surprisingly, the politicians are starting to figure this out and move away from them as well. Note, however, that an actual devout individual may be respected and honored by lots of people. They just have to be more interested in their faith than in their own agrandizement.
Who knows, eventually the media will figure it out as well. And, instead of seeking out those supposed “religious leaders” whenever they want a comment, actually find some men and women of God to talk to. But, since it won’t give them easy headline-making comments, they probably won’t be all that motivated.
June 3rd, 2008 at 7:49 am
Donklephant » This Election, Religion is Taking a Hit…
“… both candidates have distanced themselves from religion, thus pushing religion further out of what’s acceptable in the public square. For adamant proponents of the separation of church and state, this is a victory. For those who believe there i…
June 3rd, 2008 at 8:15 am
I think Rev. Wright is a fine example of religions positive potential, sure he said things from the pulpit that allowed opportunists on the right to exploit for political gain, but it was short term gain and Wright’s rhetoric about chickens coming home to roost differed in style but not in substance from the what Congressman Ron Paul said in the GOP primaries.
Rev. Wright, so I’ve heard has done great things for his community, so that makes him a fine example of the positive potential of religion. I say this and I’m an atheist.