So, sifting out "what would Jesus do?", how would a decision influenced by faith be distinguishable from a secular decision in any meaningful way?
What with the number of candidates who show up in the pulpits of churches preaching their version of the gospel, I'm assuming the IRS gets regularly ignored when a candidate has some clout.
You just know that apostle83 goes from six to midnight whenever he hears Santorum speak, and I can't help but wonder how he wrestles with it in that embarrassingly homoophobic mind of his.
Personally, I would rather that churches steer clear of that sort of thing. I sure wouldn't want my pastor telling me who I should vote for. (At least, not as pastor. If, in a private conversation between two buddies he mentioned that he thought so-and-so was the best candidate, that's his right the same as anyone else.) But then, my pastor isn't American so he couldn't tell me anyway!
Personally, I probably wouldn't want it either, but that's not to say I think it should be disallowed by the .gov.
I'm on the Board of a political campaign that for tax purposes has become a 501(c)(3). Basically we are an educational charity. We are trying to raise awareness and educate the public on Issue X. Totally legal. As long as we don't say 'VOTE YES ON PROP X' we aren't campaigning.
the ground HAS shifted a good bit but also, the things being said now are considerably more "in your face" than anything bush ever said. Santorum is - purposely or ignorantly - conflating two separate ideas. Kennedy was not saying, nor has anyone else, that a person of faith had to stay out of the arena. Everyone has EVERY right to let their faith animate their worldview and to face their various decisions in office with a worldview that is informed by their religious beliefs and act accordingly. what Kennedy insisted he would not do, and what no one has a right to do, is act in their official capacity in such a way as to enforce that which is ONLY a theological view. The government is a secular actor and must act for secular reasons. Thus, if your faith tells you adultery is wrong, good - but that's different in saying the government has a compelling interest in (and practical ability to) enforce a ban on adultery. Santorum would have us believe that because you argue the government is not in a position to outlaw adultery that you are therefor saying people who believe adultery is wrong are being silenced in the public arena. That's just stupid.
It's not enforced against Democrat supporting - particularly black community - churches pretty much AT ALL. it is on occasion invoked against over-active conservative denominations but not nearly as often as is claimed.
