Religion and Politics

Blog Draft August 1

Religion and Politics

I know this gets old. The war between religion and politics, but who made it that way? Why are we even talking about this stuff? Especially in a country like ours where these topics are free to be discussed without impinging on the other? Or does the impingement thing have to be present in these battles?

I think maybe that’s the whole point. In America you can be an insulting boor, dumping your views on others, perhaps as nasty as can be ~ because you are allowed.

Well that may be true to some extent, but standards of civility require something different. It suggests we all remain respectful of each other. When that is not present, then that’s when the freedoms come forth raging while civility makes a not so discreet withdrawal!

Cory Booker is the Mayor of Newark, New Jersey. He has said:

“Before you speak to me about your religion, first show it to me in how you treat other people. Before you tell me how much you love your God, show me in how much you love all His children.”

Every religion with which I’m familiar includes a loving God. Also a forgiving God. How then do followers of today’s religions think it’s OK to attack other people based on their religious beliefs? Are there different Gods involved, or just the one? If more than one, then which is more loving and more forgiving? And if this is all so, why is there so much distrust, anger, and yes, even hate present in our public discourse?

President Obama has said:

“I think we recognize the traditions of gun ownership that passed on from generation to generation…but I also believe that a lot of gun owners would agree that AK-47s belong in the hands of soldiers, not in the hands of criminals, that they belong on the battlefield of war, not on the streets of our cities.”

This is not a discussion of religion. It is one of politics and our US Constitution. Having the right to bear arms is one thing, but it was included in order to allow the formation of a well armed militia of citizen-soldiers in order to place a balance against the tyranny of government should it go awry. That is not the same as allowing all citizens the right to own a personal arsenal. Those arsenals are used against the citizenry by criminals, gangs and mobs, in fact, the very groups the rest of us expect the government to protect us from! Why do we make this so difficult? You want some guns? Fine. A few. Something appropriate to personal protection (handgun) or hunting/sport (rifles). What part of this equation allows AK-47s or large bore guns suitable for an army position?

Another anonymous quotation from the Internet:

“Lower income, less educated voiceless people, are so much easier to own and control.”

Is that what the taxation of higher income households is about? That the growth of the gap between the highest of incomes and the lowest needs to be supported in order for the wealthy to control the least among us? Last I heard anything like this was a Biblical exhortation that the wealthy are to care for the poor. But they don’t. And now they want government programs to be cut back so they can continue to maintain their lower tax rates? Something is not right here. It goes against everything the conservatives and republicans have been preaching all these generations. And they don’t see it? They continue to pull the wool over their very own eyes? Odd don’t you think?

From Facebook.com/groobiecat comes this quote:

“Republicans hate Obamacare because it’ll cost money. Okay, but seriously, what is it about taking care of people and paying for it that makes right-wingers so damn angry? Shouldn’t that be a national priority? Why weren’t they angry at the fact that George W. Bush got us into wars that cost over $2 Trillion and killed hundreds of thousands of people, and oversaw the worst economy in 80 years? Reallly?? At least it’s a great lesson for our kids:

                        Healthcare is bad.

                        Killing people is good.

                        Morons make great leaders.”

First of all it is not Obamacare. That is a political label made up by republicans. The actual legislation is named The Affordable Care Act which is an appropriate label. It seeks to make healthcare accessible and responsive to the needs of the American public. Nothing wrong with that. We all pay for it in so many ways. Not all from income tax, either. Many from sales taxes, use taxes, pricing schemes, insurance premiums and more, much, much more. So don’t say the poor don’t pay for their own medical care. Or that senior citizens haven’t paid their dues for their coverage either.

I’ve had talks with doctors lately and they are bewildered by the stagnation of fee schedules they can charge and receive compensation for. They are mostly restricted to the rates of 2001. They do more work for the same money as nearly a dozen years ago. This begs the question: If we are paying more as a society for medical care, who is getting the money? Corporations? Suppliers? Hospitals? Insurance companies? If the doctors aren’t getting it, someone sure is. Who then?

Seems to me those who are getting must be the republicans or their supporters.

Do you see how silly all this sounds?

There’s a problem that needs a solution that involves all of us. So let’s get to work and make this a group effort. Not a political one, or a religious one, or an ideological one.

We are Americans and we stand together to solve the big problems facing us. Nothing wrong in that. Let’s use our heads and logic and get the job done. I think we will get farther along in that direction by eliminating political parties from the process.

August 1, 2012