There have
been changes in the way American politicians use the bible through 2004-2012.
First off the way the bible is seen in the public sphere differs from how the
bible is understood by scholars. Those in the public sphere look for answers in
the text while those who study the text are more involved in the questions the
study of it raises.
There have been a few mentions of biblical
scripture from the mouths of politicians that leave us giggling at how such a
huge blunder could occur. Example: Rick Santorum’s Chanukah greeting card that
was sent to many Jew’s included John 8:12 “I am the light of the world, He who
follows me will not walk in the darkness, but will have the light of life.”
Even if it was put purposely it was still quite a blunder.
While politician’s
quotes of scripture may make a few laugh, is there a correlation to scripture
use and getting elected or passing policies? Basically no, sometimes scripture
use can even deter moderately religious or non-religious voters. And while some
politicians may use scripture to better articulate their promises, that doesn’t
necessarily mean that they will happen. So why the increase in bold use of
scripture by presidential candidates?
Jaques
Berlinerblau claims it’s been this way since Justice William Rehnquist dissented
with Ishmael Jafree in Wallace v, Jaffree
back in 1985. The case was about prayer happening in a public school in Mobile
County, Alabama. William Rehnquist reduced the separation of church and state
to a “metaphor based on bad history.” Since
he claimed the reasoning was flawed since it was based on writings from Thomas
Jefferson.
No comments:
Post a Comment