Faith & Politics

[CamTheCat]

Faith & Politics
politicians have values too

As a politician, my political values in keeping with my party are the first priority. As a man with a concept of a Higher Power, I live by the values of my spiritual faith. Now, how does one represent their riding, their party, and their own personal values if they aren't all exactly the same?

I'll always stand by my beliefs and opinions, and I'll always bring my ridings' beliefs and opinions to the table. What I don't want to do is appear as though I have a hidden agenda. I am open about my beliefs, and only wish that more politicians were as clear and unwavering with their values.

I found this bit on the wikipedia site...
Ulysses S. Grant's statement might be interpreted as arguing not only against institutional entanglements, but separation of religion from public life. "Leave the matter of religion to the family altar, the church, and the private school, supported entirely by private contributions. Keep the church and state forever separate."
Thomas Jefferson reflected this same religious basis for belief in the separation of church and state: "Almighty God hath created the mind free; that all attempts to influence it by temporal punishments, or burthens, or by civil incapacitations, tend only to beget habits of hypocrisy and meanness, and are a departure from the plan of the Holy author of our religion who being Lord both of body and mind, yet chose not to propagate it by coercions on either . . . ."
Many Christians interpret Biblical passages such as Christ's admonition to "render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's and to God what is God's" as a warning that the State has a strong tendency toward corruption, and therefore religious involvement in government is more likely to corrupt the religion than to benefit the state.
The above writings bring to my mind the thought that the concept of 'separation of church & state' has been misinterpreted over the years. I think it's a good thing for a politician to express their religion and carry out their duties as both a representative of their voters and as a person of faith (whatever that faith may be). I also agree that the government is just fine without an official religion. That's the opposite of separation of church & state, and that's not what I want to see in Canada.

Are there any other politicians or ppl of faith here who have some thoughts on this subject?

 

[Ocean Breeze]

Are there any other politicians or ppl of faith here who have some thoughts on this subject?

hmm.. well, not a politician and not a person of faith......so that rules me out.. :wink:






(kidding.. )

 

[peapod]

"Religion is anti-human.

george carlin

 

[Ocean Breeze]

"Religion is anti-human.

george carlin

that is DEEP.. :wink:

 

[Andygal]

Read my signatre for my views on religion. Monsieur Pascal pretty much sums them up nicely.

 

[Ocean Breeze]

Faith & Politics
politicians have values too

yes they do. All too often we have seen what their "values" are.......once the BS is removed /shovelled out of the way.

(no offense , honest.........as I do think some politicians are credible .....and live by their standards.or values. And lest we forget , not all values are derived from "faith" or religion.-- so it is rather open )

 

[Reverend Blair]

As a politician, my political values in keeping with my party are the first priority. As a man with a concept of a Higher Power, I live by the values of my spiritual faith. Now, how does one represent their riding, their party, and their own personal values if they aren't all exactly the same?

I'll always stand by my beliefs and opinions, and I'll always bring my ridings' beliefs and opinions to the table. What I don't want to do is appear as though I have a hidden agenda. I am open about my beliefs, and only wish that more politicians were as clear and unwavering with their values.

It depends on what you mean by all of this, Cam. Our last two Prime Ministers have, by most accounts, been fairly devout Catholics. They did not impose their religious beliefs on Canadians though...a woman's right to choose remains in tact and we can still get divorced. Chretien and Martin are not my favourite people, in fact they piss me off a lot, but they kept the church and state separate.

There are several other examples of that in Canadian politics, and it's important that you follow that example.

You don't say what your religious beliefs are, but if want to represent the people of Canada, then your positions have to remain secular because Canada is a secular state.

 

[Nascar_James]

Faith & Politics
politicians have values too

As a politician, my political values in keeping with my party are the first priority. As a man with a concept of a Higher Power, I live by the values of my spiritual faith. Now, how does one represent their riding, their party, and their own personal values if they aren't all exactly the same?

I'll always stand by my beliefs and opinions, and I'll always bring my ridings' beliefs and opinions to the table. What I don't want to do is appear as though I have a hidden agenda. I am open about my beliefs, and only wish that more politicians were as clear and unwavering with their values.

Interesting mix, CamTheCat....faith & politics.

There is nothing wrong with seperating church and state, however if this in turn causes you to take a position which is against your faith, you are doing something wrong. It's best to state your position and platform of your party when you enter politics (example ... pro-life). This would avoid any such problems. I surely would not want to be in a standoff with my church cause I took a position in favor of abortion which is clearly against my personal views. That is why here in the US we still maintain an interface between church and state ... similar to the way Canada maintains it's inteface between the Queen and state.

 

[Ocean Breeze]

Faith & Politics
politicians have values too

As a politician, my political values in keeping with my party are the first priority. As a man with a concept of a Higher Power, I live by the values of my spiritual faith. Now, how does one represent their riding, their party, and their own personal values if they aren't all exactly the same?

I'll always stand by my beliefs and opinions, and I'll always bring my ridings' beliefs and opinions to the table. What I don't want to do is appear as though I have a hidden agenda. I am open about my beliefs, and only wish that more politicians were as clear and unwavering with their values.

Interesting mix, CamTheCat....faith & politics.

There is nothing wrong with seperating church and state, however if this in turn causes you to take a position which is against your faith, you are doing something wrong. It's best to state your position and platform of your party when you enter politics (example ... pro-life). This would avoid any such problems. I surely would not want to be in a standoff with my church cause I took a position in favor of abortion which is clearly against my personal views. That is why here in the US we still maintain an interface between church and state ... similar to the way Canada maintains it's inteface between the Queen and state.

don't think the analogy fits. NJ. The queen does not determine our values for us.......or tell us how to live or what is "right" or "wrong".

 

[Reverend Blair]

There is nothing wrong with seperating church and state, however if this in turn causes you to take a position which is against your faith, you are doing something wrong.

No, actually. It is a sign that you are taking your political obligations seriously.

That is why here in the US we still maintain an interface between church and state ... similar to the way Canada maintains it's inteface between the Queen and state.

The Queen makes no policy for Canada, Nero. That kind of blows your argument out of the water. There is also not supposed to be any interface between church and state in the US. That your president and the witch-doctors that he follows cannot or will not adhere to the separation between church and state is a failing of their moral characters, not an affirmation of your anti-democratic beliefs.

 

[pastafarian]

Nascar_James is dead right with this:
"That is why here in the US we still maintain an interface between church and state ... similar to the way Canada maintains it's inteface between the Queen and state."

Just like the Queen's role in the Dominion, the Christianity of US politicians is purely symbolic.

 

[no1important]

Actually the queen is purely symbolic in Canadian politics but Religion is not symbolic in US politics, just look at "W" he brings religion into his decisions.

 

[peapod]

blunt tool, used to munipulate da people :roll: A guy in the sky, and always broke! Get somebody else for dat job! a women!

 

[Vanni Fucci]

When you use religion as a moral determinant in arriving at policy, you are assuming that your brand of superstition is in the best interest of all your constituents...that notion is the height of arrogance, and is extremely socially regressive...how can Christian values be applied to a family of Hindus, or Buddhists, or Muslims, or atheists even?

Religion has no business in any political process, and should not be seen outside of the church or the individuals homes...

 

[bevvyd]

As Canada is a multicultural nation I would hate to see what would happen if state and religion became one and same.

 

[Karlin]

the State has a strong tendency toward corruption, and therefore religious involvement in government is more likely to corrupt the religion than to benefit the state.

Now THAT is the point... ty.

Religion is one of my favorite targets, I wish it would evaporate and that people would be spiritual "on their own". A relationship with god is never as complete as when you are alone and unhindered by doctrine.

The church is weakened by involvment with politics. So is the state weakened by involvment with religion. I know I am.[eh?]

But I don't even believe in god, I see "that" as something humans created as a way to explain things or scare people into being controlled.

So I get off this train here, but don't miss that point about the church being weakened by political involvment, it is another bit of evidence that the American RadicalRight is using religion to further its evil agenda {their actions are not "for the good of the church"].

 

[pastafarian]

but Religion is not symbolic in US politics, just look at "W" he brings religion into his decisions.

I disagree that "W" brings any religion into his policies. He uses the buzzwords of Christianity to get elected, sure. But W's policies have as much to do with the Gospel as Abu Grahib has to do with the ideals of freedom and democracy.

To use another comparison, W's government is "Christian" in the same way that National Socialists are socialist.

I find that Jim Wallis, author of God's Politics: Why the Right Gets It Wrong and the Left Doesn't Get It provides the most level-headed analysis of why Bush's administration runs contrary to the message of Christ.

 

[damngrumpy]

I know people who are totally anti religion that have the same values as some one who is quite religious. Values do not come from faith they come from the experiences we live. Our values are our own personal belief system.
As someone who has been involved with politics and was a candidate once, I can attest to the fact that one is faced with decisions that may sometimes conflict ones conventional thinking.
I have always taken the position that if I don't agree with my parties position, I said so up front. We must understand as a society that because someone is a Tory, Liberal or a New Democrat, they are not always automatically in favor of everything their party believes, anymore than all people of a church parish believe the same thing.
I always believed, that if elected, I would do what is best for my country, my province, my riding, and if I had to make a choice what was best for me came last.
All too often we have politicians who believe that they will support what is good for the home crowd even if the country suffers as a result. Compromise and working with others is the only way to arrive at the best solution. Unless of course you know everything, then anyone elses thoughts are meaningless.
At present we have too many politicians who believe they know everything, when in fact they know very little, and that is worse than being corrupt.

 

[Durgan]

There is no place for religion in politics, lip service yes, it garners a few votes. Most non-believers consider it harmless, and it is as long as the "believers" remain in their churches.

A simple view expressed by Thoreau.
One world at a time one world at a time.

 

[Semperfi_dani]

I can only speak from me personally.

I am not religious. I do not factor one's religion into voting..unless they use it as part of their campaign or policy. Or more specifically, if they hide behind their religion to advocate policies that i disagree with.

But, lets be honest. For those that are spiritual, you cannot deny that it in someway would affect you as a politician. To state that religion has no foundation in politics is misleading. But the trick is, is your religion the same as those in your ward..and that of the majority of your party? Because if it is, than its easier to take stands on morality issues based on religion.

Nor can you deny that for voters, religion can be an issue.

But no matter what religion a candidate is, nothing pisses off voters than phonies. If you are true to yourself and upfront about your views, noone can ever say you are misleading them.

I personally, would try to keep my spiritual beliefs seperate in so far as trying to determine what is best for the entire nation. But in the absence of any clear direction, your spiritual belief will probably guide you more than you know.