If you had been born in another country, Yemen or even Turkey, for instance, would you still be as vocal a spokesman for conservatism as you are today?

For American-style conservatism (as opposed to the autocracy, which the media also calls "conservative")? Limited government, constitutional constructionism, rule of law, strong defense, secure borders?

I can't imagine why I, knowing what I know now, would not.

The problem with religion and politics is that both reside in some essential aspect of our being. The more that a person cares about one, the more likely it is that they will also care about the other. Politically liberal folk will generally drift to less rigorous faiths, or deny the faith completely. Politically conservative folk will drift to more conservative faith. And vice versa. A person's religious convictions will generally influence their political thought.

My family was politically liberal (pro-union, pro-Democratic), and religously conservative. Naturally, I tended in that direction as well. In my early life, it was not so difficult to have a conservative faith and more liberal politics. (See the dilemma of devout Catholic voters.) Moral issues of homosexuality, abortion, etc. had not raised their ugly heads in the Democratic party. As the Democratic party adopted platforms that were immoral by the standards of our faith, family members began to make choices. Some of us maintained our conservative faith and we ended up being politically conservative. Others maintained their liberal politics, and ended up being religiously liberal, that is, defining morality by the widest possible brush. One family member now only sees sin in being rich or a Republican.

The political choices for a Christian are pretty well defined along this line. How does a person who accepts biblical morality vote for platforms that want constitutional protection for every perversion known to man (hyperbole intended.)? And how does a biblical oriented person accept a foreign policy that refuses to confront, or at least recognize, that Communism or the current Islamic terrorism is determined to destroy us because we are Christians?

Faith will impact culture. When the faith is biblical and strong, culture will reflect that. When faith is weak, culture will reflect that also. If morality matters in personal and public lives, then Christians will not be able to make those moral political choices. We are both salt and light.

For years I was very uncomfortable with the obvious conservativism of the churches that I attended. It was difficult. And I have great sympathy for those of a different political view who attend the churches that I attend. But I can't see removing all social and political commentary from our spiritual lives.

I don't see a solution. You are experiencing in the Presbyterian faith what other denominations have faced, and ultimately ended up losing. What is the basis of salvation for an Episcopal who accepts the moral and political views of the current Episcopal leadership? To some degree, the Methodists. To a less degree, Presbyterians. Further right, Lutherans. We in the Baptist faith have had these battles, and are content to separate rather than accomodate (but this has consequences as well).

If the political life of the nation matters, it will matter in church.

Scott,

GREAT comment. Sums up my current conundrum perfectly. I may re-use a bit of it tomorrow.

Although in defense of my denomination - grassroots groundswells beat back divestment from Israel and gay marriage in the past couple of years. There's hope.

But there's another aspect to keep in mind here as well, in so far as what parts of faith are culturally determined as opposed to historically determined. If you have an interest in theology and biblical history, you find yourself wondering just what parts of your faith come from Jesus, and what parts are intrusions from Greek, Roman, & Midieval European influences, or come from narrow textual interpretations and misconceptions of the historical and metaphorical context the original texts were composed in. I'm finding the deeper I get into this, the more my faith grows but also the more my faith confirms my progressive convictions of social justice (setting aside for the moment the issue of abortion which is irreconcilable).

Bill-
An interesting comment on biblical accuracy, but I think you're looking at the text of the bible as a divine message that has been misinterpreted by historical forces. The end result of such a way of looking at the bible often leads to gnosticism -- resulting, I think, from the realization that if the divine message can be corrupted, then God is rivaled in His power.

Umm, not really, because (a) God has given man free will, and (b) man is imperfect. It is by the free and imperfect actions of man that God's message becomes corrupt - and hence no Gnostic path to follow. I believe God has found a way around this, however, through redundancy - so that even if only a scrap of his message remains untouched, the most essential parts remain discoverable - i.e., trust in God, and treat others fairly (in so many words). And of course, when I say man above I mean man and woman, but I'm keeping to the style of KJB, Et. Al. for poetic reasons.

I agree with everything in your comment, Bill. I think I must still have a hangover from the DaVinci Code phenomanon.