next »

[husqvarna]

I thought I'd start a thread where people can discuss the role of religious reasoning in societal discourse.  This seems to be the current off-shoot of the Election 2008 thread, and perhaps a separate thread here will help to bring things back on track there.

I'd be happy for any sort of conversation to follow this initial post.  I'm doing this because often volatile topics (religion being one of the most volatile) pulls a conversation aside from its original purpose.  This does not mean that I'm making this thread so that religious argument or input can promptly exit other threads about elections, abortion, public schooling, family life, tenure, or anything else.  Religion plays a significant role in most any issue, I think.  Because it is such a massive consideration, however, we could always use an overspill thread.

Feel free to follow up with a discussion or not.  I might add a teaser post in a bit if no one wants to join in.  I may also cut & paste from another live discussion periodically in order to draw some comment over here.

h.v.

[danny_boy]

I don't know if this is the sort of thing that you imagined going here but there was an interesting interview up on CNN with Bishop of Durham, Tom Wright, who argues that Christians are NOT going to heaven, that the whole idea that we'll all go to heaven when we die is a misinterpretation of scripture.

http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1710844,00.html

Now what connection this has with society, I don't know.  But Bishop Wright does suggest towards the end of the interview that people might have different attitudes toward the Earth if they didn't plan on leaving it behind when they die.

[danny_boy]

The thing that struck me though about this interview is that Wright is talking about his idea as if he were talking about his recent discoveries in a lab (or perhaps an archeological site).  It all sounds so concrete.

But to someone on the "outside" of religion this example of "religious reasoning" seems as bizarre anything possibly could be.

[husqvarna]

dannyboy,

Thanks for the link.  I was thinking more in terms of active engagement between religion and society, but as you point out, this has societal impact for sure.  Also, I'm very willing to let this thread go wherever.  I meant for it to be a release valve of sorts, specifically in response to the Election 2008 thread but for any other as needed down the road.

NT Wright has done a lot to develop understanding of salvation on a scholarly level, and the thing about him is that he's also a great communicator on the popular level- as is seen in this TIME piece.  Richard Dawkins or Stephen Hawking may be good comparisons in terms of how Wright relates both to the scholarly and the popular world.

Although Wright has worked with some new ideas in New Testament studies over the last few decades, the idea he's talking about here isn't especially new... it's rather standard doctrine.  The issue is that there's a common misunderstanding of heaven that he's trying to explain.  A similar situation is the idea of the "immortality of the soul"... not standard Christian doctrine but commonly characterized as such in popular discussion.

I think what he's saying here goes a long way to explain Christian environmental concern in recent years, as well as more sophistication in Christian understanding and involvement in psychology.  There's more of a sense of the "embodied" nature of reality, and of the centrality of this world... this creation... to eternal issues.

Perhaps the this-worldly focus is also what has led many Christians to take a more active role in politics- although Wright clarifies that his view is at odds with the "Left Behind" crowd.  So the influence of Wright's view on politics is better related to someone like Andrew White's work in the mid-east than it is to some dispensationalist Israel lobby.

[zharkov]

One thing I'm disappointed about is the anti-Mormon sentiments that plagued Romney's campaign.  Although neither a Mormon, nor Romney fan, I feel that it is really too bad that we, as a society, can't get past that jazz.

Relevant article, BTW, in todays WSJ.

[dr_strangelove]

One thing I'm disappointed about is the anti-Mormon sentiments that plagued Romney's campaign.  Although neither a Mormon, nor Romney fan, I feel that it is really too bad that we, as a society, can't get past that jazz.

Just imagine what it would be like if an out atheist ran for president.

[sunsearching]

Impossible - no atheist would have a chance in hell (ha, ha)...
   There was a thread on atheism about a year ago with some good data on how a high majority of Americans see atheists as completely immoral...back to the standard, you can't be moral without religion/God.
   

[husqvarna]

One thing I'm disappointed about is the anti-Mormon sentiments that plagued Romney's campaign.  Although neither a Mormon, nor Romney fan, I feel that it is really too bad that we, as a society, can't get past that jazz.

Relevant article, BTW, in todays WSJ.

Perhaps I have my head in the sand... I'll put a qualifier on this that I certainly may be wrong... but I've really felt like religion (or race or gender, this year) has happily not been so targeted in the elections.  Not that there hasn't been this sentiment at all, but I really haven't seen it as a big issue.  And I imagine where it does come up, there are that many more people who vote for Romney because he is a Mormon, or Clinton because she is a woman, or Obama because he is an African American.

I know there have been mailings about concern for Mormonism or an imagined Muslim identification for Obama, but I feel like both candidates have, at least, not faired much the worse for it.  Romney certainly got endorsements from evangelical leaders who aren't at all okay with his religious differences.

I'll have to look up the article you mention. 

[hollow_man]

One thing I'm disappointed about is the anti-Mormon sentiments that plagued Romney's campaign.  Although neither a Mormon, nor Romney fan, I feel that it is really too bad that we, as a society, can't get past that jazz.

Relevant article, BTW, in todays WSJ.

Perhaps I have my head in the sand... I'll put a qualifier on this that I certainly may be wrong... but I've really felt like religion (or race or gender, this year) has happily not been so targeted in the elections.  Not that there hasn't been this sentiment at all, but I really haven't seen it as a big issue.  And I imagine where it does come up, there are that many more people who vote for Romney because he is a Mormon, or Clinton because she is a woman, or Obama because he is an African American.

I know there have been mailings about concern for Mormonism or an imagined Muslim identification for Obama, but I feel like both candidates have, at least, not faired much the worse for it.  Romney certainly got endorsements from evangelical leaders who aren't at all okay with his religious differences.

I'll have to look up the article you mention. 

Religion has been a huge factor in Romney's failure and Huckabee's success in the south. Give a southern conservative Christian (esp. a Baptist) a choice between them, and the outcome has been obvious.

[kissa_mau]

Religion has been a huge factor in Romney's failure and Huckabee's success in the south. Give a southern conservative Christian (esp. a Baptist) a choice between them, and the outcome has been obvious.

Being raised as a southern conservative Christian, I was always taught that Mormons were not Christians and that LDS was a cult. I was also taught that dinosaur bones were placed in the ground by Satan to trick true believers. So there's my point of reference. My large family are all huge Huckabee supporters.

However, I really don't think religion is why Romney didn't make it.

[hollow_man]

Being raised as a southern conservative Christian, I was always taught that Mormons were not Christians and that LDS was a cult. I was also taught that dinosaur bones were placed in the ground by Satan to trick true believers. So there's my point of reference. My large family are all huge Huckabee supporters.

However, I really don't think religion is why Romney didn't make it.

Nationally, maybe not. In the South, I bet the numbers are overwhelming.

Actually, Huckabee has seemed to me to be the most genuine and likable of the GOP candidates. Not that it makes any difference; I certainly won't be voting for any of them.

[kissa_mau]

Actually, Huckabee has seemed to me to be the most genuine and likable of the GOP candidates. Not that it makes any difference; I certainly won't be voting for any of them.

I really like Huckabee also. I just can't vote for him.

You're right though, Romney didn't have a chance in the south. Nothing was going to change that.

[deleteplease]

I suspect the worry about Romney is two-part. One is the evangelical opposition to the LDS church. The other is some worries about the beliefs of the LDS church: at every general conference, women are reminded that it is immoral to work outside the home. There are rigid gender role distinctions -- a woman cannot go to heaven on her own, but only if invited by her husband. Only men can be priests.
Blacks were believed to be the "children of Cain" (and not to have souls) until the 1960s when the Civil Rights act threatened to remove the tax exempt status of BYU, which did not admit blacks. At that time the prophet had a revelation that blacks indeed had souls. But there is a strong history of race and gender discrimination, and a willingness to act on it in political matters that is worrisome. The Utah senator Orrin Hatch is, I think, a genuinely devout member of the LDS church, and I think his policies are to the extreme right wing of the Republican party. With Romney, it's hard to tell -- but I'd be worried about voting for anyone who could honestly support the LDS church due to its social policies, and equally worried about someone who claimed to be a member of a given church and did not support the majority of its doctrines and contribute to it financially (hypocrites are not ideal leaders).

Of course, I'm not someone who would have supported Romney even if he belonged to a different church ... but that's another matter.

[kaysixteen]

The Mormon church, like it or not, has gone a long way towards dealing with its racist past.  Today, perhaps its most famous black convert is none other than Gladys Knight, she of Pips fame.

[hollow_man]

The Mormon church, like it or not, has gone a long way towards dealing with its racist past.  Today, perhaps its most famous black convert is none other than Gladys Knight, she of Pips fame.

Oh, well, if Gladys Knight is a convert, then clearly the LDS' racism is just a distant memory.