Originally posted by caltour:One of the great weaknesses of our form of government is that it is a "winner takes all" system. There is virtually no representation for those individual voters who don't vote with the majority. Minority parties are locked out of power. And only a minority of the population votes. Any group that can round up tens of millions of dollars, or (just a few) tens of millions of votes, can control almost everything.
This statement is not accurate. The entire basis of the court systems was put into place to guarantee a voice to minorities to pursue issues that they felt were patently unfair. The filibuster is a great example of how the minority has a huge voice in the federal legislative branch, not to mention the Senate's power to block federal appointments to the judicial appointee's when necessary. Sure when one party has a lock on two of the three branches of the federal system, things may seem to be unfair, but the fact is that the American people voted these particular people into office willingly. The minorities DO have a voice, so long as they are united. Look at how much lobbying power the AIDS advocates have, considering they represent an extremely small segment of the population as a whole, because they are well organized and well connected. I admire their tenacity in pursuing the causes they are dedicated to, as I do for any other organized group of people, Christians included. The political clout of the "Christian right" is a relatively new phenomenon really, that started in the 60's and has grown since then. This is another example of how the pendulum is swinging back in the other direction after the proliferation of the "free love" 60's era and the more liberal lifestyles that came about as a result. Hopefully, we will land somewhere back in the middle, and have more of a healthy balance as a result.
Quote: Faith is a wonderful thing, in sprirtual matters. But not in politics.
Faith can and should be freely exercised in the political arena, and for many people it serves as a healthy basis for their worldviews. Once again, there is a marked different between gov't endorsed religion and the free expression of religion in the public square.
Quote: You acknowledged above that the evangelical megachurches are growing in influence. ("I would agree with you that certain segments of the Evangelical community seem to be increasing in power with each passing year.") You know they have millions of members and are hugely wealthy organizations. They already have more than enough money and membership to steamroll almost any political opposition. And they are avowedly dedicated to doing so.
I would not say the churches themselves are hugely wealthy. Some of the PAC's that represent the same values are well funded, and the conversative movement inside the U.S. is an interesting phenomenon in this respect. I'd highly recommend reading "The Right Nation" if you would like to get an "outside in" view of the conservative movement, it was a great read IMHO. Church giving overall is down more now than ever before, so your statement conflicts with the statistics.
Quote: If you are not alarmed by the political threat posed by the evangelicals and the megachurches, then I suppose it's simply because you share more of their goals than I do. A lot of Germans were not alarmed by the rise of the Nazis, because they shared many of the Nazis militaristic, totalitarian and antisemitic views.
Please, the structure of the German gov't was quite different than ours. No one leader could ever grab such power under our existing constitutional democracy. I am not at all alarmed (read reactionary) about what I'm seeing. On the contrary, I applaud anyone who stands up for what they believe in in the public sector. We should encourage such behavior, not condemn nor seek to snuff it out. We should have more confidence in our system of gov't quite frankly, it has proven itself several times over capable of handling issues much greater than those we are currently struggling with.
