There is a great deal of frustration among the leaders of the Religious Right over the fact that, despite being active for more than 25 years and despite have more power and influence than ever before, they still haven’t’ managed to achieve any real legislative or social gains. What is the cause of these difficulties? Quite simply, religion and government do not mix well.
Taken together, two interesting quotes from Newhouse News Service really stand out:
- With gay rights marching on, abortion an established right, no return to teacher-led school prayer in sight and public vouchers for private schools a messy proposition at best, the Christian Right has learned over time that it's easier to fulminate than to legislate. Even when laws are passed, the courts can and do overturn them.
And:
- There appears to be a growing consensus that the movement must find a way out of its current predicament: being dissatisfied with the status quo, but reluctant to criticize it because allies control the White House and Congress.
The implications of this were probably obvious a long time ago to those who take the separation of church and state seriously, but it is only just now beginning to dawn on the Religious Right. Religion and government do not mix well because, over time, each ends up corrupting the other. Currently, the problem that the Religious Right is facing is due in large part to the fact that they have been used by conservative politicians to get into power - politicians who cannot or will not fully implement the agenda of fundamentalist Christians.
Very often, the correct phrase is "will not" — political victories by sympathetic politicians are not the same as social victories among the populace, much less legal victories in the courts. The fundamentalist Christianity favored by the Religious Right won't be imposed upon America — courts will keep striking down efforts to try. Conservative politicians know this, so they can talk all they want about how they will push the agenda of the Religious Right even while knowing that it simply won't go anywhere.
They can attack abortion without having to take responsibility for actually making it illegal. They can attack sodomy without having to take responsibility for making it illegal. And thus the evangelical voters turn out to elect those politicians without there being much prospect of their getting what they really want: a government that reflects their religious doctrines and then imposes those doctrines on everyone else.
When Paul Weyrich recently received a "Patriot's Award" for his work on behalf of the Religious Right, there was a banner at the event that stated: "Government is not God." This is a sentiment that religious liberals have already taken to heart: they don't try to use the government to impose what they believe God wants of them and other humans. Instead of laws and police, they use language and persuasion to try and get people to agree with them on what is the best way to act.
Now, perhaps, it is time for the Religious Right to start taking this to heart as well. There are no inherent contradictions between being a religious conservative, an evangelical, or a fundamentalist on the one hand and supporting the separation of church and state on the other. Just because one's religious vision is very conservative, orthodox, and traditional doesn't mean that they also have to believe that it is the government's role to encourage, enforce, or impose that vision. Political debates about what are the best laws should not also be theological debates over what God wants.
The Religious Right is not going anywhere — it isn't going to die off and it isn't going to fade away into the recesses of history. As long as there are religious conservatives, there will be a Religious Right. What we need, however, is a transformed Religious Right that doesn't try to use the power of the government to impose particular theological and religious doctrines on everyone else.
We need a Religious Right that respects the separation of church and state — the idea that government is best when it doesn't try to make religion complicit in its actions, while religion is best when it doesn't try to appropriate the government for its agenda. The Religious Right will be more effective in its goals, and more palatable to everyone else, if it retains its independence from the government.
« Has the Christian Revolution Fizzled Out? | Religious Right »
