Kathleen Parker argues the focus of the Saddleback Forum shouldn't be on who won, but was it the right thing to do in the first place. She argues here that events like the Forum are a religious test, and break down the wall separating church and state.  Honestly, after reading the whole thing, sitting back and thinking about it, I think she makes a good point. 

While I oppose the types of people who want really want to use the separation of church and state to bludgeon and destroy faith(Christian faith in particular), the separation is important, and needs to be upheld.  When we mix the two, the results are never good, and the church almost always ends up getting destroyed. That is why I'm opposed to Bush's faith-based initiatives, the second you let the state into the church, the state will try and usurp or destroy the church. 

One of the questions at this Saddleback shindig(of the limited amount I watched) was about imposing standards and regulations on the churches receiving faith-based initiatives.  Sure, McCain said he wouldn't do that, but that the possibility of the ability to impose that kind of regulation on a religious institution even exists is alarming.  That the question even was asked is worrisome. 

I think Parker's argument needs to be given serious consideration, the potential consequences of these types of religious-based events with presidential candidates weighed very carefully. 

Posted by: doubleplusundead at 08:09 AM | Comments (14) | Add Comment
Post contains 240 words, total size 2 kb.