Search

A distinguished professor debunks the assertion that America's Founders were deists who desired the strict separation of church and state and instead shows that their political ideas were profoundly influenced by their Christian convictions.In 2010, David Mark Hall gave a lecture at the Heritage Foundation entitled'Did America Have a Christian Founding?'His balanced and thoughtful approach to this controversial question caused a sensation. C-SPAN televised his talk, and an essay based on it has been downloaded more than 300,000 times.In this book, Hall expands upon this essay, making the airtight case that America's Founders were not deists. He explains why and how the Founders'views are absolutely relevant today, showingthat they did not create a'godless'Constitution;that even Jefferson and Madison did not want a high wall separating church and state;that most Founders believed the government should encourage Christianity; andthat they embraced a robust understanding of religious liberty for biblical and theological reasons.This compelling and utterly persuasive book will convince skeptics and equip believers and conservatives to defend the idea that Christian thought was crucial to the nation's founding--and that this benefits all of us, whatever our faith (or lack of faith).

One of the fundamental rights granted in the United States is religious freedom, but does this mean that religion should be entirely removed from politics or that all religious voices should be considered equally? The separation of church and state was established in the Constitution, but the fact that as of 2015, 84 percent of Americans hold some sort of religious belief means that this is easier said than done. Religious morality frequently colors debates surrounding various policy issues, ranging from reproductive rights to education. This volume exposes readers to the ways in which religion inflects policymaking and the varying perspectives about religion's role in politics.

In the course of exempting religious, educational, and charitable organizations from federal income tax, section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code requires them to refrain from campaign speech and much speech to influence legislation. These speech restrictions have seemed merely technical adjustments, which prevent the political use of a tax subsidy. But the cultural and legal realities are more disturbing. Tracing the history of American liberalism, including theological liberalism and its expression in nativism, Hamburger shows the centrality of turbulent popular anxieties about the Catholic Church and other potentially orthodox institutions. He argues persuasively that such theopolitical fears about the political speech of churches and related organizations underlay the adoption, in 1934 and 1954, of section 501(c)(3)'s speech limits. He thereby shows that the speech restrictions have been part of a broad majority assault on minority rights and that they are grossly unconstitutional. Along the way, Hamburger explores the role of the Ku Klux Klan and other nativist organizations, the development of American theology, and the cultural foundations of liberal “democratic” political theory. He also traces important legal developments such as the specialization of speech rights and the use of law to homogenize beliefs. Ultimately, he examines a wide range of contemporary speech restrictions and the growing shallowness of public life in America. His account is an unflinching look at the complex history of American liberalism and at the implications for speech, the diversity of belief, and the nation's future.

La question religieuse en Amérique s'apparente d'emblée à une authentique bizarrerie. Dans cette époque où l'on prêche le rationalisme, les Etats-Unis n'auraient jamais réellement achevé leur processus de sécularisation. À ce stade, la lecture du juriste se heurte à des difficultés : celle d'une lettre constitutionnelle qui opère une nette division entre les Églises et l'État. Or cette division est constamment fragilisée par la présence de pratiques religieuses qui parsèment la vie publique. Cet ouvrage s'efforce de comprendre cette existence d'une république théocratisée et sécularisée.

Throughout human history, religion and politics have entertained the most intimate of connections as systems of authority regulating individuals and society. While the two have come apart through the process of secularization, secularism is challenged today by the return of public religion. This cogent analysis unravels the nature of the connection, disconnection, and attempted reconnection between religion and politics in the West.In a comparison of Western Europe and North America, Christianity and Islam, Joppke advances far-reaching theoretical, historical, and comparative-political arguments. With respect to theory, it is argued that only a “substantive” concept of religion, as pertaining to the existence of supra-human powers, opens up the possibility of a historical-comparative perspective on religion. At the level of history, secularization is shown to be the distinct outcome of Latin Christianity itself. And at the level of comparative politics, the Christian Right in America which has attacked the “wall of separation” between religion and state and Islam in Europe with the controversial insistence on sharia law and other “illiberal” claims from some quarters are taken to be counterpart incarnations of public religion and challenges to the secular state.This clearly argued, sweeping book will provide an invaluable framework for approaching an array of critical issues at the intersection of religion, law and politics for advanced students and researchers across the social sciences and legal studies, as well as for the interested public.

The study of religion and politics is a strongly behavioral sub-discipline, and within the American context, scholars place tremendous emphasis on its influence on political attitudes and behaviors, resultuing in a better understanding of religion's ability to shape voting patterns, party affiliation, and views of public policy.

“The encouraging story of American acceptance of gay marriage and the roles that politicians—gay and straight—have played in that history” (The Philadelphia Tribune). Through speeches, interviews, and commentary, this book chronicles the road toward marriage equality in the United States, edited by former Vermont governor Madeleine Kunin and author and activist Jennifer Baumgardner. “Baumgardner and Kunin have compiled the writings and public pronouncements of public officials and other figures on the issue of marriage equality... This book will serve as a resource for what was said about the struggle.” —New York Journal of Books “Detail[s] the politicians out there who are good-hearted, decent and basically worth knowing about.” —Detroit Metro Times “Compiles speeches, interviews and commentary from 1977 through 2013, in which an array of political leaders... voice their unconditional support for the queer citizens of the US in their quest for same-sex marriage rights.” —Bay Area Reporter “Highlights the path politicians have taken from Harvey Milk of San Francisco in 1977 until now, to advance the cause of marriage equality.” —Sun News Miami “Powerful... As Vermont's governor, Madeleine Kunin was a leader on gay rights years before it was fashionable and years before our state became the first in the country to allow civil unions and, later, gay marriage without a court order. The struggle for gay rights in Vermont was very difficult, divisive, and acrimonious. If you talk to young people today about gay rights or gay marriage, they ask, What was the big deal? Madeleine and Jennifer Baumgardner remind us what a big deal it was and how important it is.” —Bernie Sanders “The gay marriage movement, like all civil rights movements, began with individuals telling the truth about who they are to a world that doesn't accept them. It ends with an entire generation of young people who reject blatant civil rights discrimination... We Do! triumphantly chronicles this recent chapter.” —New Pages Included on the American Library Association's Over the Rainbow Project Book List

Rather than wield religion as a weapon or a ruse in irrational appeals, the book attempts to reimagine a shared American mythos and ethos, by reminding us of our shared stake in creating an America committed to the life of all peoples and species and to the full developments of our capabilities as an exercise of liberty.

This book demonstrates that the United States, whether we like it or not, is a theolegal nation - a democracy that simultaneously guarantees citizens the right to free expression of belief while preventing the establishment of a state religion.

The most significant, public religious issue confronting America today is the relationship between Church and State. Secular opinion holds that the rise of religion in the public square is a threat to our democracy that must be resisted. American Religious Democracy argues that this position, although understandable, is misguided. American political life after the 2004 Presidential election is best understood as a religious democracy, though not of a fundamentalist variety. This book explains the decline of secular democracy, describes some of the legal, political and religious implications of this new religious democracy and, finally, invites secular voters to participate in religious democracy.The 2004 election clearly showed that a substantial number of voters in America now vote the way they do for what they consider to be religious reasons and that, as a result of their voting, government policy is changing to reflect their religious commitments. The result has been the creation of a religious democracy. However,taking part in a religious democracy, for Americans especially, requires a new understanding of what religion means in a public and political sense. Ledewitz takes a reasoned, yet lively approach to the subject, promoting a a new understanding of what religious democracy is and how secularists can and should participate. Looking at the Constitution, the current nature of politics and religion, and public attitudes toward capitalism, the environment, technology, women's rights, and international relations, the author is able to construct a clearer picture of the religious and political landscape in America today.

Title from eBook title screen (viewed Oct. 5, 2006).

Most Americans are religious believers. Among these there is disagreement about many fundamental religious/moral matters. Because the United States is both such a religious country and such a religiously pluralistic country, the issue of the proper role of religion in politics is extremely important to political debate. In Religion in Politics, Michael Perry addresses a fundamental question: what role may religious arguments play, if any, either in public debate about what political choices to make or as a basis of political choice? He is principally concerned with political choices that ban or otherwise disfavor one or another sort of human conduct based on the view that the conduct is immoral. He divides the controversy into two debates: the constitutionally proper role of religious arguments in politics, and a related, but distinct, debate about the morally proper role. Perry concludes that political choices about the morality of human conduct should not be based on religion. The newest work by one of the most important constitutional theorists writing today, Religion in Politics is sure to spark a new debate on the subject.

Prayer in public schools, abortion, gay and lesbian rights—these bitterly divisive issues dominate American politics today, revealing deep disagreements over basic moral values. In a highly readable account that draws on legal arguments, political theory, and philosophy, Ronald F. Thiemann explores the proper role of religious convictions in American public life. He proposes that religion can and should play an active, positive part in our society even as it maintains a fundamental commitment to pluralist, democratic values.Arguing that both increased secularism and growing religious diversity since the 1960s have fragmented commonly held values, Thiemann observes that there has been an historical ambivalence in American attitudes towards religion in public life. He proposes abandoning the idea of an absolute wall between church and state and all the conceptual framework built around that concept in interpreting the first amendment. He returns instead to James Madison's views and the Constitutional principles of liberty, equality, and toleration. Refuting both political liberalism (as too secular) and communitarianism (as failing to meet the challenge of pluralism), Thiemann offers a new definition of liberalism that gives religions a voice in the public sphere as long as they heed the Constitutional principles of liberty, equality, and toleration or mutual respect.The American republic, Thiemann notes, is a constantly evolving experiment in constructing a pluralistic society from its many particular communities. Religion can act as a positive force in its moral renewal, by helping to shape common cultural values. All those interested in finding solutions to today's divisive political discord, in finding ways to disagree civilly in a democracy, and in exploring the extent to which religious convictions should shape the development of public policies will find that this book offers an important new direction for religion and the nation.

This vigorous debate between two distinguished philosophers presents two views on a topic of worldwide importance: the role of religion in politics. Audi argues that citizens in a free democracy should distinguish religious and secular considerations and give them separate though related roles. Wolterstorff argues that religious elements are both appropriate in politics and indispensable to the vitality of a pluralistic democracy. Each philosopher first states his position in detail, then responds to and criticizes the opposing viewpoint. Written with engaging clarity, Religion in the Public Square will spur discussion among scholars, students, and citizens.

How far may Americans properly rely on their religious beliefs when they make and defend political decisions? For example, are ordinary citizens or legislators doing something wrong when they consciously allow their decisions respecting abortion laws to be determined by their religious views? Despite its intense contemporary relevance, the full dimensions of this issue have until now not been thoroughly examined. Religious Convictions and Political Choice represents the first attempt to fill this gap. Beginning with an account of the basic premises of our liberal democracy, Greenawalt moves to a comparison between rational secular grounds of decision and grounds based on religious convictions. He discusses particular issues such as animal rights and abortion, showing how religious convictions can bear on an individual's decisions about them, and inquires whether reliance on such convictions is compatible with liberal democratic premises. In conclusion, he argues that citizens cannot be expected to rely exclusively on rational, secular grounds.

Within democratic societies, a deep division exists over the nature of community and the grounds for political life. Should the political order be neutral between competing conceptions of the good life or should it be based on some such conception? This book addresses one crucial set of problems raised by this division: What bases should officials and citizens employ in reaching political decisions and justifying their positions? Should they feel free to rely on whatever grounds seem otherwise persuasive to them, like religious convictions, or should they restrict themselves to'public reasons,'reasons that are shared within the society or arise from the premises of liberal democracy? Kent Greenawalt argues that fundamental premises of liberal democracy alone do not provides answers to these questions, that much depends on historical and cultural contexts. After examining past and current practices and attitudes in the United States, he offers concrete suggestions for appropriate principles relevant to American society today. This incisive and timely analysis by one of our leading legal philosophers should attract a wide and diverse readership of scholars, practitioners, and concerned citizens.