Serving Bel Air, Benedict Canyon, Beverly Hills. Brentwood, Laurel Canyon, Los Feliz, Malibu, Pacific Palisades, Melrose, Santa Monica, Sherman Oaks, Studio City, Topanga, Canyon, Westwood & Hollywood Hills.

Name

E-mail

facebook Canyon News twitter Canyon News

Canyon News

Bel Air News

Beverly Hills News

Brentwood News

Hollywood Hills News

Laurel Canyon News

Los Angeles News

Los Feliz News

Malibu News

Melrose News

Pacific Palisades News

Santa Monica News

Sherman Oaks News

Studio City News

Topanga Canyon News

West Hollywood News

Westwood News

Woodland Hills

Celebrity News

State News

National News

World Headlines

Deaf News

Entertainment

Film

Television

Music

On the Industry

Star Gazing

St. John's Confidential File

Theatrical Musings

Life & Style

Event Listings

Tech Talk

Looking Good For Lots Less

Spirit & Creativity

Miller Time

Books

View from the Hill

NY WEST

Chrystal's Recipe Corner

Career and Life Coaching

Gardening With Tony

Life According To Lenson

Real Estate Realities

Food

Sports

Marathon Running

Keeping It Bruin: A Look Into UCLA Athletics

Baseball

Basketball

Football

Hockey

Pets

Vi's Corner

Pet Tips

Point of View

John Armor

Message to America

Critic At Large... Ruta Lee

Labor Week

Ramblings

10 Degrees Cooler

McConnors corner

Edge of the west

The Physics Wizard

Auto

Kyle's Kars

Travel

Susan Michelle's Compass

Advice

Ask Deanna

Dear Lily

Ask Oona

Features

Dancing with Earthquakes

Archives

Sports Schedules

Traveling Beyond the Canyon

Edge of the West

Law Man

Ask Us

Nathan Tabor

The Angry Economist

Truth Probe

As I See It

Columnists

Truth Conquers

The Live Wire

Notes from Exile

Letters to the Editor

Dog Training by Anthony

Canyon Mews

Speak!

Sponsors

America's Most Wanted Dogs

World Recipes

Vegetarian Lifestyle

Humor

News Briefs

Local News

Books

News

Canyon Fodder

Bad Movie Night

Critical Projection

Ed's on the Town

Fitness Quests

Flashback Films

Stories of the Strange

Gourmet Grandma

He Said/She Said

Home Matters with Yvonne

L.A. Etch-a-Sketch

L.A. Ruminations

McConnor's Corner

Mommy Minute

Musically Speaking

My Back Pages

Publisher's Pages

ResourceINK

Scene and Heard in L.A.

Silly...But Wise!

Sunset Diaries

Table Options

The Paws Cause

TV Stuff

Cartoon of the Week



Ramblings

Political Religion
Posted by Henry Meyerding on Jul 7, 2012 - 2:10:49 PM

WASHINGTON D.C.—Edwin O'Brien, the Roman Catholic Cardinal of Maryland, has issued an order requiring the reading of a political position statement he authored, in every Roman Catholic Church in that state. This position statement “strongly encourages” all parishioners to sign a petition to place a referendum on the Maryland ballot. And I thought churches were prohibited from active participation in political campaigns. At least that was always the answer I got back from my church when I asked them to support or participate in anything remotely political. “Oh, we can’t do that, it would be too political.” Turns out, I was wrong.

The IRS has very special rules governing permissible political actions of
nonprofit organizations, especially churches. When an organization flouts
those rules, they endanger their tax exempt status. This is one of the
ways in which our system maintains the separation of church and state by
disallowing churches from bankrolling candidates for office or lobbying
directly for government programs or initiatives.

For a leader of a church to, in essence, tell its members that they must
vote this way, is specifically forbidden by IRS regulations when speaking
of elections to public office. The regulations are more vague, but still
clear, when speaking of other ballot initiatives. Church leaders can
strongly encourage, but not require, their members to cast votes in a
certain way. In general, churches have been given a significant degree of
leeway in interpreting what constitutes lobbying (prohibited) as opposed
to education (permitted). Of course, many churches have evolved all
manner of sneaky ploys to communicate political goals to the faithful
without actually coming out and saying what they are to do.

In this case, it seems clear that this is not an educational activity.
Since it is not an educational activity, and since this is an initiative
that is strongly favored by one party (Republican) and strongly disfavored
by the other party (Democratic), it seems clear that this is an activity
that should threaten the tax exempt status of the Catholic Church in
Maryland.

Or is this all just a sham? Are churches given tax-exempt status because
they have always enjoyed it, and nobody wants to incur their ill-will by
suggesting that they lose it, even if the reason for giving them this tax
exemption is no longer valid? Or are they just tax-exempt lobbying
organizations?

The recent Dan Savage media storm brings up another aspect of this whole
thing: The Christian Right fanatics earnestly believe that Christianity
and homosexuality are completely incompatible - that one cannot really be
a Christian and be a homosexual, nor can any real Christian support or
defend anyone who is a homosexual. For them, homosexuality of any kind is
like child molestation or rape. Of course, when they make this pejorative
value judgment, they are almost entirely ignorant, more than seriously
misinformed, and as a result they are dead wrong on all counts, but that
has never been an obstacle to belief.

The Bible is fairly unequivocal on the subject of (at least) male
homosexuality. But that is also true about the Bible’s stated position on
many things, which we ignore completely and would treat as complete
nonsense if proposed out of context. The traditional attitude of the
Christian religion (as roughly supported by scripture) is against sex of
any kind for anyone in any circumstance excepting sex between a man and a woman who are currently married to one another, if and only if, the sex is
engaged in solely for the purpose of procreation and neither party enjoys
any part of it. That is perfectly obvious nonsense. We ignore it, in the
same way as most folks ignore the blasphemy of eating shellfish or driving
a car on Sunday.

But this gets to the similarity between these two issues, Cardinal
O’Brien’s and Dan Savage’s: both are examples of religion adopting a
doctrinal position and then seeking to influence politics. In both cases,
religious groups are claiming special privilege and not accepting that
they have any commensurate special responsibility. In both circumstances,
the proponents are claiming that anyone who opposes them is bullying them and acting anti-religious: Either you agree with me or you’re against me. People who exercise critical thought and ask difficult questions are cast in the role of anti-religious bigots who hate God. This is both unfair
and untrue.

People who speak from a pulpit already have privilege and authority. We
have the right to question those privileges and challenge that authority.
One of the chief differences between Christianity and many other religions
is the idea that the conscience of the individual is of paramount
importance. I need to find good and evil in my own conscience and then
act according to how I believe; just doing what someone else says,
regardless of who that is or why they are saying it, doesn’t supersede my
own personal conscience.

It disturbs me to see the talking points of a political party, any
political party, emanating from the pulpit. Government, church and the press are the traditional adversaries in free and open societies. The society
works better when they’re at odds with one another and pulling in
different directions. This is part and parcel of separation of church and
state and a free and vigorously independent press. When the aristocracy
and the established church leaders get together, bad things usually
happen. Mostly the bad things happen to working people and poor people
(you know, the majority) and tend to favor the wealthy and comfortable
(the minority), even despite all Jesus’ many strong hints about God
favoring the weak, the meek and the lowly.

We need to understand the ways in which people with power and influence
seek to manipulate political issues to influence us and gain our support,
even when this support works directly against our own best interests.
Historically, when religions have taken up political causes and used their
spiritual authority for temporal purposes, this seldom resulted in
positive changes for the majority of people - there are isolated
exceptions, but they are very rare. We need to stand up and say no to
this kind of dangerous, un-American shenanigans and keep religion and
politics in their respective corners.


 

Cliffside Malibu

-------------------------

-------------------------

 

Serving Bel Air, Benedict Canyon, Beverly Hills. Brentwood, Laurel Canyon, Los Feliz, Malibu, Pacific Palisades, Melrose, Santa Monica, Sherman Oaks, Studio City, Topanga, Canyon, Westwood & Hollywood Hills.