This is an interesting article about the supposed "threat" of Christian theocracy. Chuck Colson writes:
The real question, as Ross Douthat asks in the latest issue of First Things, is whether they are representative of Christians as a whole.
The answer is a resounding “no!”—maybe one percent. As Douthat points out, genuine Christian theocrats have the same amount of political influence as “the Spartacist Youth League.” I have warned against theonomy for twenty years.
What Phillips, Goldberg, and the rest are doing is “[assuming] that the most extreme manifestation of religious conservatism must, by definition, be its most authentic expression.” They focus on the fringes while ignoring the mainstream.
Why? Partly, it’s to hype the “threat” posed by Christians. But it’s also the way, in some cases, they see us. According to their worldview, any opposition to the culture of death or the redefinition of basic institutions like the family are, by definition, “extremist.”
I don't see how a coalition formed with Catholics and people of various faith communities could be truly "theocratic". The Religious Right is mainly about culture and the family, not economics (although there are some repercussions on that area). There are many differences of opinion on a host of issues, and you simply won't get ONE single answer from the Religious Right: taxation, social programs, the environment, foreign policy, these are among the many areas of agreement.
The notion that I, as a a person who identifies with the religious right, will, when in government, check the Bible to see how to get a policy for Foreign affairs, is ridiculous. Naturally, my values will play a role, but everyone's values play a role. Every situation has its own dynamic.
And contrary to Sharia, which has judgments a wide variety of situations, Christianity does not have such a body of judgments. There's no automatic answer as to whether the healthcare system should be publicly funded, or whether we should cut taxes.
Another aspect about theocracies is that they seek to deny a voice to those who oppose them. I don't think any person on the right is seeking to eliminate anyone's right to make known their views and persuade them of it.
I think there is a need on the left to paint religious conservatives as scarier than they really are. I suspect because they want to scare moderates into thinking that if grant one inch to conservatives, the very existence of democracy is at stake.
Check out the Big Blue Wave Message Board
