Get FREE BuzzFlash News Alerts

Email:  

Mary Shaw: Obama blows it with 'Kingdom on Earth' comment

A BUZZFLASH GUEST CONTRIBUTION
by Mary Shaw

I was really liking Sen. Barack Obama. I was thinking that a Gore-Obama ticket in 2008 would be just what this country needs. (I know, I know, Gore says he has fallen out of love with politics and doesn't want to run. But a girl can dream.)

But on October 7, Obama disappointed me, big time. I know he's a religious man, but he overdid it this time. In my opinion, he crossed the line re: separation of church and state when he told the congregation at an evangelical church in South Carolina: "I am confident we can create a Kingdom right here on Earth."

Clearly he was trying to demonstrate that the Republicans don't have a monopoly on religiosity. But I saw it as pandering to the conservative Christian base that the Republicans have traditionally claimed as their own, and ignoring the Constitution to do so. That may win him some points among that crowd, but it cost him some serious points with me (for what it's worth).

A Kingdom right here on Earth, huh?

Two things:

First, if you want to run this country, sir, you should accept that it was established as a representative republic, not a kingdom.

But of course you were talking about a Kingdom of God. That's almost as bad, sir. You see, as the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution explicitly states, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion." And, by extension, I think it's safe to assume that the founding fathers didn't think a presidential candidate should try to establish a religious Kingdom on Earth either.

The First Amendment goes on to say that there shall be no law "prohibiting the free exercise thereof" -- meaning of religion. In other words, here in the U.S., we must remain free to practice any religion we choose -- or none -- and not be coerced into the kind of state-mandated religion that our founders had fled from in England. In other words, non-Christian Americans shouldn't have to live in a Kingdom on Earth for Obama's selected deity (or anyone else's).

So while I am bothered by the fact that the Republicans (who are not nearly as holy in deed as they might seem in word) have in recent decades cornered the market on religious votes in this country, it bothers me even more to see Democrats recklessly using religion to demonstrate that they can be holy, too.

And it bothers me because religion, per the First Amendment, has no place in U.S. politics. Yet, in real 21st-century life, it has such a huge place in U.S. politics. Religion is supposed to be a private thing.

I suspect Thomas Jefferson is spinning in his grave.

A BUZZFLASH GUEST CONTRIBUTION

Mary Shaw is a Philadelphia-based writer and activist. She is a former Philadelphia Area Coordinator for the Nobel-Prize-winning human rights group Amnesty International, and her views on politics, human rights, and social justice issues have appeared in numerous online forums and in newspapers and magazines worldwide. Note that the views expressed here are the author's own, and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of Amnesty International or any other organization with which she may be associated. E-mail: mary@maryshawonline.com.




Another Point

Mr. Obama is a member of the United Church of Christ (as am I) and it is an article of faith that the UCC supports and works for seperation of church and state.

Re mary

Why Gore-Obama?And not Obama-Gore.Mary stop been an antagonist.U are very naive.Why dont u keep ur mouth shut!!

Why Either One of Them?

Al Gore could have taken the presidency back from Bush/cheney in 2000, but he turned his back on America and walked away. That's why he won't run again.

Obama is in the pocket of big business interests. That's why he voted for the bankruptcy bill and why he supports Free Trade.

Dennis Kucinich is the only candidate who truly represents the people.

www.Dennis4President.com

Antagonist?

I think many oppressed people thank both Mary and Amnesty International for being "antagonists." Further, nobody should keep their mouths shut. A free and open exchange of ideas is a neccesary part of a democratic society. We can disagree (as I obviously do) and still keep a civil tone.

Kingdom Comment

Mary,

The "Kingdom of God" is in progressive Christian terms quite in favor of secular government and separation of church and state. It harkens back to Jesus' statement that His kingdom is not of this world and the kingdom resembling, among other things, yeast in the bread. It is a call for humility and gentleness. Influencing society with love and by non-governmental means, and when said by an individual who is seeking office is a promise that theocracy is the furthest thing from his mind. It is an observation that government will do its job (provide safety nets and regulations that make them less necessary), while encouraging those of good will to do theirs (speaking truth to power, providing healing balm when necessary).

I respect the work of Amnesty international, and thought they were more attuned to the spiritual nature of humanity (in those of one faith or another or none at all). I have been both a progressive and a person of faith for some time and have felt like an outcast in both camps; I thought that was changing; I hope I was right. The unfortunate feuding that arose in the eighties between the more vocal members of some faith organizations and some liberal groups did neither of them any good; and may have resulted, in a large part, to the ascendancy of the religious right, a movement that is finally (I'm gonna say it), praise God, loosing their influence on society. Are those who refuse to learn from history really doomed to repeat it?

In closing I would like to point you to a column (his latest) by Mark Morford. http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/g/a/2007/10/12/notes101207.DTL&nl=fix