RSS
 

Archive for the ‘Church and State’ Category

WHAT IS THE BROADER AGENDA BEHIND THE NEW “HATE CRIME BILL”?

14 Oct
whitehouse

It is no longer a matter of if, but rather when we will begin to see organized governmental opposition and persecution of the church in the United States. The new Hate Crime Bill in congress will give those who oppose the church a template or mechanism by which serious legal challenges can be brought against Christians, Pastors and ministries that make public declarations against homosexuality.

The freedom of the church in the United States is now on the edge of a knife. The freedom, for the Christian to read and interpret the Bible and to develop a systematic theology about what the Bible is saying, now faces the most severe threat in the history of our nation.

Remember a few articles back I was saying that it has gotten to the point in our society that the rights and freedoms of the various groups and interests within our society would begin clashing with each other. And, that we would eventually see one group denied certain rights and freedoms in order for another group to be able to express theirs. Well, I announce to you as of this posting, that day has arrived and it has come in the form of the Hate Crime Bill.

There is much debate about this bill, its meaning, its intent, its purpose. But, I can tell you, after doing research on this matter, it appears that in some regard, the very formulation of this bill was to set up a device or mechanism within government that would give the homosexual community the tool they needed to go after conservative, evangelical Christians. And, I can tell you plainly, once the Hate Crime Bill becomes law, they will have everything they need. The homosexual community knows this very well. Let’s take a look at some recent events and statements.

In an MSNBC article titled “D.C. gay rights march misses mark” dated October 10, 2009 we read that “March organizers have said they’re no longer willing to quietly wait for Democratic office holders to make good on decades-old promises”. This comment is the “canary in the coal mine” concerning all things about gay rights. We are hearing that some of the leaders of the homosexual community are no longer willing to wait. And, it is what they are waiting for that presents a gravely serious challenge for true Christians.

Upon reading the many news reports covering President Obama’s speech to the Human Rights Campaign one cannot help but be alarmed by the many statements made not just about discrimination against homosexuality but rather, an outright acceptance of such lifestyle. In other words, to hear the thoughts of many of the leaders of the gay community, you get the feeling that even if you think that being gay is wrong, then you are committing a crime. The intensity and ferocity in the tone exhibited toward those who disagree with the gay lifestyle is unfortunately an indicator of things to come. We are headed for a rocky road.

What the Hate Crime Bill will do is give the gay community a template within the government to bring serious legal charges against Christians, the churches they attend and ministries. It will no longer be a question of “can they do it?”. With the Hate Crime Bill, it can and will be done. You will see individual suits and class-action suits brought against Christian ministries.

The sobering reality is that once law, the Hate Crime Bill will allow such lawsuits and then the Christian or Ministry being sued will be at the mercy of the legal interpretation of such law and the charges brought forward. It will no longer be the question of “if” such a thing can happen. It will happen and by and large, most courts are going to rule against Christians and Christian ministries. Christians are getting ready to see how important the U.S. Supreme Court nominations really are.

Some will interject at this point, “but what about the Muslims and their rejection of homosexuality. I doubt we would see such a law because of the conflict and tension this would create with them”. True, Islam does not accept homosexuality and in some Muslim countries, homosexuals are dealt with severely. But, the real truth of the matter is, the Muslims in America aren’t really too worried about all of this. Because, when “push comes to shove” the Muslims are going to do what they want to do, anyway. In a sense, the Muslims have a degree of autonomy from our legal system already and this autonomy will only increase.

Furthermore, most Western governments are fearful of the Muslim culture. The point is, I doubt very seriously if you are going to see a Muslim Imam thrown in jail for speaking out against homosexuality. Never, in the United States will you witness such a thing. On the contrary, you are getting ready to see Christian Ministers thrown in jail for speaking out against homosexuality. This objective, for the larger part, has become a primary motivation for getting the Hate Crime Bill passed. This bill would allow formal charges to be brought against said Christian Minister that he would then be forced to defend against in court, and then after giving his defense, be subject to the interpretation and judgment of such court. This, my friend, is a game changer. Christians in America have never faced such a thing. The gay community and their advocates are simply “looking the other way” when it comes to Islam and the issue of homosexuality. They are thinking that somehow, Muslims in America will assimilate into our culture of freedom and social diversity, which includes gay rights. However, when you consider the overall socio-religious climate of the world, this strategy appears short-sighted.

The Hate Crime Bill could in a sense be described as a device designed to give one group within our society certain “rights” while at the same time, taking away such “rights” from another group. To put it in street, “For me to have the right to openly and publicly do what I want to do, I have to take away the right of another to openly and publicly criticize my behavior”. Never has such a precedent been set in our legal system.

It won’t simply stop with homosexuality. If this can be done once, it can be done twice. I envision that the legal environment could become so hostile against Christianity that if a Pastor were to read John 14:6 and by his interpretation of such scripture make the statement that “Jesus is the only way to get to Heaven”, even this could be construed as “hate speech” in the sense that such a statement creates tension in society and fosters hostility between different groups within our society.

My purpose for writing this post is to exhort Christians to first of all be aware this is going on. Secondly, Christians better start preparing for the challenges we will be facing in the days ahead. Every Christian needs to dig deep into the things of the Holy Spirit. Every Christian needs to have a well developed theology from the Word of God. Every Christian must know what they believe and why they believe it. The hour is late for a Christian to not know where he or she stands on this issue.

Take for example the introduction speech given by Joe Solomonese at the recent Human Rights Campaign dinner at which the President spoke. You can go to You Tube at  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EWraxDFU8Aw or, type in “HRC President Joe Solomonese Speaks Before President Obama” and watch this now on You Tube. In his remarks, Solomonese talks about “hate violence”, “a time of great impatience”, “enemies of change” and at the 3:54 mark of this video he makes a most telling remark as he refers to “hate rhetoric”. OK, let’s try and define “hate rhetoric”. Is it when someone says hateful things in the course of acting out violence against another person? Or, could you interpret “hate rhetoric” as someone saying something against homosexuality that could be considered inflammatory or perhaps as possibly inciting violence if someone hears it.

OK, let’s cut to the chase. Let’s say a Preacher is in his pulpit on a given Sunday morning and decides to preach from Romans 1:27 and I Corinthians 6:9-10. After reading these two portions of scripture, the Preacher states that according to his interpretation of these scriptures and according to his moral conviction he believes homosexuality is a sin. Sounds simple and clear cut, right? Not so. Under the Hate Crime Bill, this Preacher could be sued and brought to court for hate speech which incites violence against homosexuals. This is exactly, by and large, the intent of the Hate Crime Bill. And, I guarantee you; in fact, I prophesy to you that it will be used for this purpose.

It doesn’t stop here. Go back to You Tube at  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8B_uLSHniik or, type in “Andrew Sullivan Blasts HRC’s Joe Solomonese”. Some of you may be familiar with Sullivan. He is often found on news talk shows. He is intelligent, super-articulate, speaks with a very nice British accent, very insightful on the issues, he is a Roman Catholic, a political conservative, and……he is gay. That got your attention. In the video you can see Sullivan saying that the Joe Solomonese and the rest of the gay leadership have failed in their efforts on gay rights. At one point, Sullivan says “We gay people are being betrayed by our leadership”.

So, what are we hearing by this and other comments such as Solomonese’s “this is a time of great impatience”. We are hearing that the hour is upon us when the gay rights agenda is going to move forward in a very big way. It is no longer “if”. It is only weeks away that this bill is going to be introduced in the U.S. Congress.

For the serious Christian, this gets even more complicated. I cannot, for the life of me, understand why certain camps within conservative, evangelical Christianity are so silent on this impending development. For example, I just read in the October 2009 edition of Charisma Magazine, on page 23, where C Peter Wagner has an article entitled “The Case For Dominion”. This article is a response to the question on the Rapture of the Church (which it seems Wagner does not hold the view of orthodox Christianity) and in this article we see Wagner make a striking statement when he says in the last paragraph “We are aggressively retaking dominion and the rate at which this is happening will soon become exponential. The day will come when The Kingdoms of this world have become the kingdoms of our Lord and of His Christ and He shall reign forever and ever”.

First of all let me say that I believe Jesus has all power and authority in Heaven and on the Earth and that He reigns from Heaven above. Having said that, I must also direct the reader’s attention to what Wagner is referring to when he says the kingdoms of this world and dominion eschatology. To capsulate, what Wagner is talking about is Kingdom Now or Kingdom Dominion theology. It is also known as 7-Mountain Doctrine. Basically, this doctrine teaches that there are 7 pillars of control/influence in a given society. These pillars are also referred to as “mountains” thus “7-Mountain”. And, the 7 Mountains are: Government, Media, Arts and Entertainment, Education, Family, Religion and Business.

There is supposed to be a leader or head authority over each of these seven areas of influence. And, the objective is that Christianity will not only gain influence in all of these areas but, eventually out-right control. And, once Christians are in charge of all these areas of influence and control, then, Jesus can return. Note I said “can”. This is the very serious problem with this doctrine. But, that discussion is for another day and I want to keep my focus on this article. Oh, by the way, what was it Jesus said “My Kingdom is not of this world”.

My point is, it looks like someone has been “asleep at the wheel of the Government mountain” or someone has been “asleep in the guard shack at the base of the Government mountain”. What I am saying is, how in the world can Wagner claim that Christians are “aggressively retaking dominion” and this retaking rate will soon become “exponential”? How is this so when you look at what is getting ready to happen in the U.S. Congress with the Hate Crime Bill? How can these guys claim all this power, influence and authority in our society when the most serious threat to our religious freedom since the existence of our nation is just about to come into law? It is double-talk. This group is saying one thing but, the world and its governments are going exactly the opposite.

I can assure you, by taking the above stated position that I will be put into category of the “anti-Christ”. That’s OK. It won’t be the first time. You know what, the truth can withstand examination. So, I challenge the reader who opposes my assessment of this doctrine to systematically and theologically defeat my position. I can tell you now; I won’t be losing any sleep. I am warning my Christian brethren, there is a severe price to be paid if you buy into this particular theology.

So, getting back to my question and bewilderment at the absence of voice of some of these so-called leaders concerning the Hate Crime Bill. I am going to ask a very bold, but not so far-fetched question. Could it be that one of the reasons we are not seeing a ground-swell of specific resistance to the Hate Crime Bill is because there still remains within the leadership of the various prophetic groups some who are sympathetic toward the gay rights movement? Sympathetic either because of their personal desire to gain power and influence by not offending such a large and politically active (and wealthy) segment of our society and/or perhaps there are some within the leadership of these groups who are gay.

Before you get out of shape by this suggestion, you only need to look at the recent history of Christian leadership within the ranks of these particular Dominionist groups to understand the qualification of my question. It is a question, and, I will leave it at that.

Because the Hate Crime Bill so intertwines politics and religion, I could write for a week and still not cover all the issues involved. This is an enormous development in our society and nation. It will affect us all. I am afraid though, that I have only touched on the easy part of the debate in this article. I am fearful for our country in that I believe the Hate Crime Bill, once passed, will turn out to be a “nation-breaker”.

 

 

I JUST FINISHED READING “REPUBLICAN GOMORRAH” BY MAX BLUMENTHAL

04 Oct
repubgomor

Upon reading Republican Gomorrah by Max Blumenthal one cannot help but get the sense that they are reading an attempt to catalogue all the examples of religious hypocrisy to ever occur within the ranks of the Republican Party.  It reads like a grocery store tabloid laundry list of Republican politicians and/or conservative preachers who have committed adultery or have participated in homosexual affairs. 

To be sure, there are many examples of blatant and sordid sexual encounters that have occurred within the ranks of the Republican Party leadership and the conservative evangelical community over the last several years.  Without doubt, some of the criticism offered by Blumenthal is justified. 

Having said that, I will also point out that it is not just the Republicans who are committing such sins, but, the Democrats as well.  One has to only think for a very short moment or two until many examples of Democrat Party leaders who also have committed hypocrisy in the sexual arena also pop up on the list.  Let’s see, one such example I can think of right away would be former U.S. Senator John Edwards of North Carolina.  I mean…you could write a book on just that situation alone.  Anyway, you get my point.  Hypocrisy, religious hypocrisy, marital infidelity are not just specific to Republicans or conservative evangelical leaders.  For every Republican politician you can point to who was/is involved in a sex scandal, you can just as easily name a Democrat.  But, to read Blumenthal’s book, one is left with the impression that only Republicans and Christians commit such sins.  

OK, let’s take a look at the book.  By the title “Republican Gomorrah” it is clear that Blumenthal is making a strong and not so subtle statement about what he perceives as religious hypocrisy within, not only the Republican ranks, but also within the ranks of Christians in general.  Let’s be sure on one thing, this book is not friendly to Christianity.  Perhaps, Blumenthal’s sequel will be “Democrat Sodom”?

Next, the writing style of Blumenthal leaves a lot to be desired.  When reading the book, you sometimes get the feeling that you just happened to have been walking by a newsroom, back in the 1980’s, and someone forgot to turn off the UPI news ticker and you happened to stop by to read the latest news reports streaming in from the various media outlets.  And, these news stories have no rhyme or reason or correlation but, they are none-the-less news stories.  “Republican Gomorrah” has way too much detail and discusses way too many people, way too many incidents without really offering much in-depth analysis.  “Republican Gomorrah” is like an old UPI news ticker that someone forgot to turn off.

So, after having inundated the reader with a plethora of news stories and names, Blumenthal attempts to tie them all together into a vast Republican, Right Wing, Religious Conspiracy.  He fails.  It’s just way too much stuff, way too many names, way too much history, way to much religious history to try and “tie off” in the simplistic way that Blumenthal attempts to do.  Blumenthal makes no attempt to differentiate or separate-out those evangelical Christian, Republican politicians having been involved in sex-scandals from the overall pool of the evangelical Christian population.  Also, Blumenthal eqautes being an evangelical Christian as synonymous to being a Right Wing Christian Radical wanting to “take over the world”.  He makes no attempt to defferentiate within the overall evangelical population.  This is “intellectual dishonesty” as the liberals like to say.      

Next, we see Blumenthal rely heavily on the influence of Erich Fromm.  It seems even, at some places in the book, that Blumenthal appears to be offering his own psychoanalysis of certain people and events. 

Let’s get started by looking at the Introduction.  It is clear that Blumenthal seeks to portray conservative, evangelical Christians as extreme.  And, he makes absolutely no attempt to differentiate between the various groups or camps of Christians.  This is a grievous mistake by any analysis, no matter who you are.  There are many camps within Christianity. There are many denominations within Christianity.  There are many and very differing views held by Christians on a variety of subjects.  So, to simply attempt put all Christians “in a box” is a foolish way to approach one’s analysis.  

Here in the Introduction is where Blumenthal begins his psychoanalysis by quoting President Eisenhower on page 5, paragraph 3, as he states “…the rise of extreme movements could be explained only by the psychological yearnings and social needs of their supporters.”   Then, on page 9, paragraph 4, Blumenthal makes a feeble attempt to be a theologian as he states “The Christian right as a whole is called the pro-Family movement, and movement allies are known as friends of the Family.  In an actual family, blood ties are required, however, joining the Christian right requires little more than becoming born-again, a process of confession, conversion, and submission to a strict father figure.” 

By the above analysis given by Blumenthal, one can see that you will not be getting a very sound or critical theological review by reading his book.  Blumenthal’s casual reference to major doctrines of the Christian faith are simply jaw-dropping.  One cannot take Blumenthal seriously after this point when it comes to his analysis of anything Christian.  It appears that Blumenthal really doesn’t understand what it means to be a Christian.  Therefore, if he doesn’t understand what it means to be a Christian, how then can he possibly give an accurate analysis about anything Christian?

To prove my point further, just go over to page 10, paragraph 1 and see Blumenthal compare the crucifixion and sufferings of the Savior, as depicted in “The Passion of The Christ”, to, in Blumenthal’s words, “two hours of unrelieved pornographic masochism.”  This is an extremely inflammatory statement by Blumenthal.  I believe it represents a lot of personal anger and hatred coming from Blumenthal towards Christians and Christianity.  By making such a statement, Blumenthal shows a reckless disregard for all Christians and Christianity in total.  Such vulgarity is just unbelievable.  In my thinking, this proves that Blumenthal does not understand Christianity.  Blumenthal making such a statement appears to be a feeble attempt to sound esoteric, as he attempts to portray Christians as mentally unstable and weak minded.  I am surprised that we don’t see any quotes from Karl Marx.

Next, let’s look at page 32, paragraph 1, as Blumenthal takes aim at Howard F Ahmanson.  I just can’t help but point out that in this paragraph as Blumenthal states that Ahmanson lives in Newport Beach, he actually feels that he needs to tell the reader where Newport Beach is located.  I mean, come on already!  Perhaps, Blumenthal should have told us where California is located as well?  Anyway, back to Ahmanson.

Notice on page 33, paragraph 4, as Blumenthal portrays Ahmanson as a misguided psychopath who happened upon his wealth by default and didn’t know what to do with it until, in his weak-minded state, he linked up with the Christians.  This is exactly the picture Blumenthal wants the reader to see, not only of Ahmanson, but of all conservative, evangelical Christians.

Indeed, Blumenthal has been reading Fromm so much, too much, that he seems to think that he now is a “psychologist for the world.” 

Next, on page 37, paragraph 2, look at how Blumenthal attempts to downplay the prominence of the character of “Frodo” in the book/movie titled “Lord of The Rings”.  We see Blumenthal state that Frodo was “…the Hobbit protagonist of Tolkien’s novels who must destroy a magical ring in order to save the world”.  Let’s see, the last I heard, the three part movie series titled  “Lord of The Rings” had so far grossed over $4,000,000,000, and this ranks number 2 of all time.  I think it is somewhat of an understatement and somewhat casual to refer to something so significant to the people of the world, as Blumenthal does. 

By this, it seems to me that more than pointing out the failings of Republicans, the real goal of Blumenthal is to strike against anything Christian.  Not convinced, well let’s look at page 45, paragraph 5, as Blumenthal makes an attempt at giving Ahmanson a psychiatric diagnosis and implies that conservative, evangelical Christians are neurotic.  Perhaps, Blumenthal could suggest a medication regime for Ahmanson as well?

Next, we see on pages 224 and 225 as Blumenthal takes on the movie “Braveheart” and he attacks Mel Gibson and attempts to portray the quest of Christian men to be masculine as some sort of latent attempt to cover up homosexual tendencies that “all Christian men have”.  In no uncertain terms, Blumenthal concludes that conservative, evangelical Christians choose to be what they are, because they are trying to escape or hide from some form of inner sexual perversion. 

Next, we see on page 298 where Blumenthal mocks the Biblical manifestation of Speaking in Tongues, and expresses disdain for an African Pastor, and unsuccessfully attempts to describe what certain Christians were praying about.  Then, on page 299 Blumenthal takes a shot a Governor Sarah Palin’s religious beliefs as he suggests that she apparently believes in witchcraft.  Here, it might be pointed out that God has plenty to say about witches and witchcraft in the Bible.

So, in short, Blumenthal has failed in his attempt to psychoanalyze all Christians of the world.  Blumenthal has failed at his attempt to be a theologian.  Blumenthal has failed in his attempt to give a broad and comprehensive political analysis as he portrays Republicans and even more so, Christians as the source of all the ills of the United States of America.  Blumenthal “splashes” all of these stories into one book and then plays the psychologist for us all and tells us how we should interpret the facts.  Blumenthal attempts to compress decades of religious and political history into a few esoteric sound bites.  It just doesn’t work.  The world is more complex than that. 

Finally, Blumenthal attempts to portray Jesus as an anthropomorphic manifestation of misguided, narrow-minded, neurotic, ego-dystonic homosexual Christians.  Blumenthal attempts to get the reader to believe that American Republicans are the only people in the world who are serious about their Christianity.  And, that because of this they are evil and dangerous.  In reality, Blumenthal’s book doesn’t seem to be about Republicans so much as it really appears to be a book written to ridicule and make a mockery of Christianity.             

 

 

 

IS AMERICA FACING A POLITICAL MELTDOWN BECAUSE OF “POLITICAL DISECONOMIES OF SCALE”?

21 Jul

Who is shaping the future of America?  What is the future of America?  Do people even care anymore?  Or, are Americans more interested in who will win the next American Idol competition more than what type of world we are heading towards?

It seems almost as if it has become “uncool” to even think and have an opinion anymore.  Our society has become so lethargic and indifferent to certain realities that one could say that America is suffering from “reality avoidance”.

I remember years ago sitting in Economics class while in undergraduate school.  I distinctly remember learning about what is called “diseconomies of scale”.  It is a very interesting and very real thing that can happen to a large corporation.  And, I believe it can also happen to the Body of Christ.  It could be coined a “spiritual diseconomies of scale”.

First, let’s look at what is known as diseconomies of scale in regards to an industry functioning within our capitalist economy.  Let’s imagine a large corporation that has 100,000 employees here in the U.S.  With an organization of this size it is extremely important to keep track of what everyone is doing in order to prevent duplication and even outright competition between the various and different departments of such organization.  When such a breakdown does occur, that is, duplication of effort and competition among departments, it is called diseconomies of scale.  And, if the diseconomies of scale becomes pervasive enough, it can ruin the organization. 

One of the by-products of diseconomies of scale, that is described in Wikipedia, is called “isolation of decision makers from the results of their decisions”.  I encourage the reader, at this point, to refer to the Wikipedia article as it is very good at explaining all of this. 

To expand upon the term, as found in Wikipedia, I will say that what we are seeing today is “isolation of those who are making bad decisions from the consequences of their bad decisions”.  In street, the people who are making a mess of things are not having to deal with the mess they are creating.  Or, even worse, some decision makers don’t have a clue as to the unintended effect of their decisions.  Let’s take a closer look.

As a nation, the United States is facing what I believe to be an impending and devastating diseconomies of scale.  In particular, this problem is occurring in the area of interpretation of law, and the writing of law.  And, the church in America is setting directly in the crosshairs of the negative and unintended (or, in some cases intended) consequences of bad law.  But, it’s not just the church.  In reality, our society as a whole will have to deal with these consequences.  Let’s look at some current and pending examples.

In Massachusetts we see the debate going on about the rights of transgendered persons to have unrestricted access to either Men’s or Women’s restrooms, depending on which gender they have “chosen” to be.  This is impossible to interpret now, and it will be impossible to interpret in the courts once the lawsuits start coming in.  On a practical note, one of the reasons that cities and towns are even open to such a law is because the idea of building, retrofitting and paying for a “third” class of restroom at all public locations is prohibitive.  So, we see cities and towns falling back on the legal system for a way out, but, it will be even worse in the end.  It would be an “unenforceable” law.  Here’s an example.  Let’s say it’s 10:00 p.m. at a highway rest area stop and a young mother of 25 years of age who weighs maybe 120 lbs and her young daughter who is 4 years old start walking toward the Women’s public restroom.   Then, upon making their way to the restroom, the mother notices a large masculine appearing person who is let’s say 6’3” tall and weighs around 230 lbs.  And, this person is, as they say in bodybuilding, “ripped”.  But, upon noticing the hesitation of the mother to go any further toward the Women’s restroom, the person says to the mother “Oh, it’s OK, I’m transgendered”.  At that point, what is the young mother to do?  Would she say “prove it”? 

One can clearly see by the above scenario that such a “law” will be unenforceable.  Let’s look at another example of an unenforceable and un-interpretable law.  The pending Hate Crime law before congress which is designed to give protection to and special rights to the homosexual community.  Let’s say a Pastor of a large urban Baptist church preaches a sermon that includes a discussion of homosexuality and same-sex marriage in his discourse.  And, in the course of his message, this particular Pastor states that, according to his interpretation of the Bible, he believes that homosexuality and same-sex marriage are sinful and that anyone practicing such behavior will go to Hell.  This is his religious belief.  But, then, a gay person who happens to be sitting in his audience takes a CD of the message to the downtown police station and asks that the Pastor be arrested for “Hate Speech”.  Could such a thing happen?

Here is the complexity and what I see as a “political diseconomies of scale”.   The Hate Crime law, at this point, is un-interpretable and unenforceable.  Because, in order to arrest the Pastor for violating the “rights” of the homosexual, the police will, in turn, have to deny the Pastor his freedoms of speech and religion.  So, which is our society going to choose?  We are getting ready to see a legal environment in which the rights and freedoms of some groups are going to be taken away so that a different group can be free from what they perceive as public expression that they believe violates their rights.

So, we now see that the lawmakers (congress) who are promoting and passing such laws are fitting into the category that we see in the definition of characteristics of “diseconomies of scale”.  In other words, some of the very congressmen and congresswomen that are passing such laws will be “isolated from the consequences of their bad decision making”.  Isolation of decision makers from the consequences of their bad decisions.

It doesn’t stop here.  There is still one developing factor that will dwarf all that we have looked at thus far.  The issue I am referring to is Sharia Law.  This is the body of law that is practiced by Islamic countries.  You may be saying, “Well, what does that have to do with us here in the U.S.?”  Before we get to that point, let’s look at the concept of law and government for a moment.

I remember sitting in an undergraduate class called Federal, State and Local Government.  The professor of this course was a seasoned veteran who had taught for decades.  He was a classic liberal and he and I had an amicable professor/student relationship.  I remember it well, one day in class when a fellow student (the kind of student who thought he was the teacher rather than a student) made the statement “imagine a Presidential election in which the vote count margin came down to just a one vote difference between the two candidates and the winner wins by just one vote!  Imagine what that would do for democracy!”  Then, I’ll never forget the professor’s response (and, this was some 26 or 27 years ago) as the professor said “that really might not be such a good thing”.  And then, the professor went on to explain why he saw it as problematic, as if almost to prophetically describe what we all witnessed in 2000. 

It was this same professor who taught that one of the hallmarks of a government, one of the most legitimizing factors of a government, is to set a body of law and then set a framework to interpret and enforce such law.  So, we now see today, a serious and slowly developing effort on the part of Muslims to set up the practice and enforcement of Sharia Law within our society.  So, what happens when a Muslim and a non-Muslim are involved in a legal dispute over something and both sides are using two different bodies of law to interpret what has transpired and how the matter should be judged?  Which side will carry the most weight? Which carries more legal weight, Constitutional Law or Sharia Law? 

Perhaps, seeing the problem as described above, we could set up yet another 3rd body of law and a 3rd party of law making and law enforcement to weigh out the matter and find the “common ground” between the two other bodies of law? Or, if that doesn’t work, maybe set up a 4th group to try and “work it out”.                       

But, it doesn’t stop here.  Did you see in the news where just recently, the Hizb ut-Tahrir held a “conference” in a Hilton Hotel just outside of Chicago.  The theme of the conference was “The Fall of Capitalism and The Rise of Islam”.  It is reported that several Arab States as well as Russia do not allow this group to operate within their borders.  But, the U.S., in the name of freedom of speech and religion, will allow it.  This represents more political diseconomies of scale.  In other words, this extreme, radical religious group that wants to overthrow the U.S. system of government has every right to express themselves.  It is their “right” to do so.  To put it in street “it is their right to promote and organize as a group and overthrow the very government that “gives them the right to do so”.  Then, the rights and freedoms of expression that used to exist under the old government will no longer exist.  This is exactly the scenario that is developing right before our very eyes.  It is already happening to a serious degree in England, France and Holland. 

So, the Christian church is caught in the crossfire of all this and the rights of the church are slowly slipping away in our society.  The respect that the church once enjoyed in the U.S. is no more.   We, as Christians, must give up our religious freedoms in the name of diversity.  We, as Christians, must give up our freedoms in order that those who want an entirely different body of law and government can have what they want.   Things are getting very interesting.  Perhaps, as a society, we are entering into a period of which the old Chinese proverb could apply.  “May you live in interesting times.”  I think with all the “pushing and shoving” between the different groups within our society, it is naïve to think that things are not going to get interesting.