The "wall of separation between Church and State" is quite safe in our political system in the U.S., despite any secularists' worry about a rising "dominionism" sponsored by Tea Partiers and the like. Let's recall, for instance, a little bit of 19th century history that was inspired by White Anglo-Saxon Protestantism and flourished under a religious banner of "manifest destiny." (See the influence of Henry Cabot Lodge, Sr., who was advocating a most ambitious brand of imperialism in the GOP at the turn of the 20th century.)
My point is that there is nothing new about radical posturing. It will have no effect on our long-cherished constitutional liberties, even though such liberties do suffer from periodic contractions when worries of sedition sweep the nation. Politicians who are clearly ignorant of our history with regards to civil liberties, such as Michelle Bachmann and others, will generally suffer from that ignorance.
Again, if the past is any measure, the GOP is not in any danger of succumbing to the current wave of radicalism, such as might be termed "dominionism." During our lifetime, the Republicans have been very much aware of the political danger of choosing the most conservative candidate for an election with a possible exception of 1964 when, by the way, the presidential election represented a dismal loss for them. The lesson was cinched by that experience.
No comments:
Post a Comment