Seperation of church and state is a fine example of this.  How would a supporter of the CE respond if he lived in a small rural county that was chosen by a large group of Afro-Cuban Americans as the place in which they would consolidate their power.  Suppose then that these practisioners of Santeria moved into that county in large numbers, ran for public office and passed a resolution that every school day would begin with a “voluntary” devotional to the Orisha?

My guess it that the CE supporter might be very unhappy with the prospect of his child having to sit through an animal sacrifice every morning.  Yet for some reason these same folks are unwilling to validate the outrage of the Jew or Muslim, or athiest facing a similar Christian dominated situation.

The argument that Christianity deserves special privileges in America because the men who wrote the founding documents were Christian is about as rational as saying that the the theory of special realitivity is more applicable in Israel because Albert Einstein was a Jew.

See, the terrorists say that our Micheal-Jackon-loving-Parada-wearing-pornography-watching-TacoBell-gluttonizng-sodomy-accepting-dept-promoting-Godless-behavior is an example of bad morals for the rest of the world…. Now we seem to agree with them? Let’s get our priorities straight. We do have some problems, there’s no question about it; but religion is not the answer. There was a reason the forefathers wanted church and politics to part ways. As in the case of Iran, once you put religion in power you can no longer have a true democracy. Why? Well, because your vote is useless if it infringes on the word of God, which apparently is eternal and not subject to any form of veto.

1. The nation was not settled for religious freedom of all. The New England area was settled for the Puritans only. The Middle region was originally settled for anyone (The Quakers were willing to share.) The Chesapeake region was settled for monitary purposes. Needless to say, as history will bear out, the Massachuttes closed society didn’t do it a lot of good. Salem witch trials are one account of religion and fear running rampant with nothing to balance it out. Modern day societies that have set themselves up in the same way as New England, have adopted the same radical religion and fear mix and are currently causeing a variety of problems.

2. Christianity is not ment to be a closed society. A true Christian accepts the command to go an make disciples of all nations to mean, be an ambassador for Christ to everyone. We are not supposed to seclude ourselves from the world, shun the world, and lord the Lord over them. We are supposed to be a testimony of Christ’s love. None of us are perfect. We all make mistakes. How can setting up a government based only on God’s word help those who don’t know Him know His love? I’m afraid what may be grounded in good intensions will bring more animosity toward our God, rather than respect, awe, and a desire to know him better. In other words, better to shows God’s love and forgiveness while doing your best to live according to his word, than to become puffed up and arrogant and have the hand of God come down on you!!!

3. Who’s Christian veiws will be honored. The radical right? Will African-Americans or religious groups other than Christians who believe the same way and belong to a particular denomination loose their right to vote? (Check out the religious persecution that occured in the early 1880′s that led to Jefferson and Madison moving for no state sponsered churches.) How far will this go? The consequences need to be looked at all the way down the road, not just up to the bend.

Having said this, I think the Federal Gov. has too much power now and ought to let the States decide who will allow these issues and who won’t. You want to really effect change, quit worring about who the President is and start hammering the Congressmen and Senators. They are the ones making the laws. If the right ones are in office and there is enough of them, it won’t matter what a President will or will not veto, they can over ride them.

Just look at how much clout the Constitution Party has on national politics.

Although ChristianExodus.org does seem to acknowledge the political power of Evangelical Christians, they also seem to believe Christians have failed to effect cultural sway. Consider their homepage:

“Christians have actively tried to return the United States to their moral foundations for more than 30 years. We now have a professing Christian president, a Republican Congress and a Republican Supreme Court. Yet consider this:

— Abortion continues against the wishes of many States

— Sodomite and lesbian “marriageâ€? is now legal (…)

— Children who pray in public schools are subject to persecution …â€?

In response, according to the goals of their “Plan of Action,â€? ChristianExodus.org seeks to use the authority of the 10th amendment (“The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”) to alter this failure, as ChristianExodus.org sees it, at least in South Carolina:

“South Carolina can secure the rights of her citizens by interposing her authority under the 10th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. The federal government operates outside its delegated powers in the areas of education, religion, abortion … and a host of other subjects. … Therefore, we will see to it that South Carolina resumes her governmental authority in these matters …�

This is a political, not a religious, and especially not a Christian, agenda.

At the heart of the Christian message is the belief that all people are by nature flawed. And the possibility that by God’s grace and our faith this nature can be transformed and perfected, so that believers can love God and love their neighbor, is immensely good news. So, as I understand it, the Christian message is a bottom up, other-centered approach: change the person, love your neighbor, and then change the culture by example.

ChristianExodus.org takes a top-down approach: acquire the authority of political institutions in order to create a Christian cultural. Loving God or loving one’s neighbors seems to be, at best, a second thought.

Perhaps the approach is unsettling to us, non-members of ChristianExodus.org, because the use of political authority to make this cultural change seems to imply a use of political authority to promote personal religious change. And this effort does not seem to be in accord with the foundational political principles of America, or with the essential message of Christianity.

“We hold that the power to enact uniform naturalization rules rests with Congress as specified in Article 8 of The Constitution. We also believe that the various States retain the right to restrict and control immigration into the State as had been exercised under the Union until 1875. No person residing in a State contrary to the laws and regulations of that State attains the expectation of rights, privileges or immunities held by citizens.”

This movement feels like it might be an attempt similar to the confederate succession that led to the Civil War. I do not believe it is a coincidence that this movement is taking place in the first southern state to succeed from the Union. Many people assert that the Civil War was about state rights, not slavery. The truth is that the Civil War was fought to maintain the Union, and thereby protect the rights of the African American citizens of confederate states.

I am a Christian, and I believe that abortion and gay marriage are wrong. Nevertheless, I also belief that everyone has the right to chose their own lifestyle. Furthermore, all should be able to exercise their rights no matter what state he/she lives in. I believe that the Constitution of the United States supports this philosophy as well.