The move toward theocracy.

Besides, I caught him praising Jehovah here on SE; gonna "out" him when the time is right.
Regards, Doug in New Mexico

I don't see the Democrats as focussed on individual values as much as Republicams. Rather, they seem to want to manufacture new individual rights and violate those of others. Again as seen on various threads here.

and fundamentalist Churches and their use of them as the center of their get-out-the-vote campaign is what, a fiction? (because it's documented) An Accident? (because Karl Rove has been working on it as a campaign strategy for 30 years)

The Religious Right have been working toward political power since Nixon, they endorse candidates and defame other candidates (I've watched the 700 Club). They (the RR) insist that their views are not just right for the country but are the only moral choice, despite a much wider variation of opinions among the religious community generally. They are advocating discrimination against homosexuals with the vigor and fervor that their parents gave to endorsing segregation. Denial of equality before the law for homosexuals is currently as virulent as the discrimination against blacks was 50 years ago. Will separate washrooms and separate lunchrooms be next?

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/architect/

With luck Karl Rove will retire and the anti-gay impetus may die away, but it's worked well for him in his election campaigns for George Bush. It's a great get out the vote issue among evangelicals.

Rob Boyter

You are again becomong hysterical.

"They are advocating discrimination against homosexuals with the vigor and fervor that their parents gave to endorsing segregation.Denial of equality before the law for homosexuals is currently as virulent as the discrimination against blacks was 50 years ago. Will separate washrooms and separate lunchrooms be next?"

You really believe that? How are things different for Gays than they were say, during the Clinton Adminoistration? Not wanting Gay Marriage (about which I couldn't care less) is not exactly equivalent with Jim Crow segregation buy any insane stretch of the imagination. In fact it is an insult to the martyrs of Civil Rights to say so.

Come on, Rob; even you must realize that what you are saying is nonsense.

Are evangelicals second-class citizens? Are they alloewed to vote? Is there something wrong with courting their vote? The Democrats did it for years.

try to clean your neighbor's house.

Baptist churches and other religious organizations on Chicago's West Side were prevalent on the BGA's list. The Christian Love Missionary Baptist Church, Community Christian Alternative Academy and Good Hope Freewill Baptist Church all contributed to Citizens for Action, a West Side group that works to elect Democratic candidates.

Citizens for Action was the biggest recipient of nonprofit donations, collecting $14,250. Ald. Michael Chandler (24th), who has close ties with the group, made no apologies. He said his campaign and Citizens for Action will continue to accept donations until being told otherwise.

How can you separate them?

The IRS declined to comment about specific groups, referring questions about tax-exempt organizations to its Web site.

"Over history, African-American institutions have always been involved with politics, going back to the civil rights era with the Southern Christian Leadership Conference and Martin Luther King," Chandler said. "I don't see how you can separate the two in my neighborhood."

I look forward to seeing your condemnation of these Baptist Churches.

religion has any place in the political process.

I approve of churches trying to address social issues like housing, care for the elderly and the destitute, and for advancing racial equality.

Rob Boyter

and if so since i dont beleave in god i should be president

"I don't think religion has any place in the political process." Always has; always will. This is just a completely silly position. It's like saying people have no place in the political process. Silly and wrong.

Best live in the real world and deal with reality.

these churches lose their nonprofit status? Words without action are ...... just words.

answer is "No". Mainline churches do superb work and should not be impeded, my quarrel is with the evangelicals who confuse God and Washington, but even they too do great community work on a broader front than just their own parishoners. I would like to see Political parties barred from using Church facilities, church mailing lists and any church assistance for political purposes, that's all. It is the partisan political side of the equation that troubles me. I don't think Pat Robertson or any preacher, pastor, or televangelist should be allowed to act continuously as an editorialist and unpaid political advocate for the Republicans via his TV program, a simple one sentence "I prefer George Bush" would do the job. He reiterated and rebroadcast the Swift Boat Vets charges and videos endlessly without any contradiction or contrary opinion. All of the Religious Right have acted vigorously as an arm of the Republican Party since the middle '70's if my exposure to their malign broadcasts is any indicator.

There is no country in the world outside of the Middle East where religion is such a strong influence in the political process as in the United States today. Like the indicators in the health care debate, this is not a good sign.

Rob Boyter

Unlike many people I have spoken to, I appreciate and treasure the church's part in preserving and transmitting knowledge and values. But I see no reason not to decry its errors, morally (Catholic or any other religion's pedophilia), factually (viz. science, evolution), and societally (extreme Islamic fundamentalist opinion).

Jesse Jackson? The "Reverend" Al Sharpton and countless other black activist churches? Evangelicals don't have a monoply on mixing religion and politics; not by a long shot.

I think it is their right whether you like it or not. Trying to tell people what they can say in their pulpits or TV shows is a dangerous mistake. Freedom may be inconvenient at times.

the ones using church facilities for political purposes. The evangelicals are not, but then, not living in the US, you wouldn't know that would you? You are condemning the practices of the Dems and their allies. The Republicans and evangelicals are not 'using Church facilities, church mailing lists and any church assistance for political purposes'. That is what violates the IRS rules.

Pat Robertson? I never see him, but his TV program is not a church and is probably not tax exempt. Thus, he is every bit as free to editorialize as Dan Rather or Peter Jennings.

In the US, unlike Canada, we have religious freedom and freedom of speech. That means that Pat Robertson and others have every right to express their opinion. The 'rest of the world' is a mess! We are not trying to emulate the 'rest of the world'. Americans like to think for themselves.

were once almost entirely addressed through the efforts of the churches which took care of their own members as well as doing "mission" work. Slowly the government has taken this over and replaced tithing with taxation and good, caring workers with faceless government bureaucrats. I, for one, think they have done a poor job. I also believe in the goodness of the human spirit and I think most religious and non-religious carry many of the same morals and values. Where these values come from does not change their importance or validity.