tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3375512083268389933.post8273692142543869238..comments2023-09-30T10:36:23.154-05:00Comments on Accidental Historian: Baptist PolityGedshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15047239425466517786noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3375512083268389933.post-59646399699541783252007-09-14T22:46:00.000-05:002007-09-14T22:46:00.000-05:00Don't worry Brian, I only have one dog and she's a...Don't worry Brian, I only have one dog and she's a wimp without backup! I'm enjoying the discussion actually--I don't get the chance that often--I'm curious to see what other say! <BR/><BR/>And I definitely agree that the battle has to be fought repeatedly. As with most things, the pendulum swings often by generation--the following generation or so responding to the excesses of the previous (whichever direction it comes from).<BR/><BR/>As to the election, sorry, not specific enough: Baptists opposed Madison's election to the Constitutional Convention or Legislature, not as President (I can't remember which at the moment). The rub was that Madison believed the Constitution, during discussion of ratification, already secured freedom of religion in its current form--disagreeing with Jefferson's call for a Bill of Rights. The Baptist community agreed with Jefferson that a Bill of Rights was needed and specifically a positive/proactive statement of Religious Liberty. They then used their influence of numbers to threaten their own candidate to run against Madison (which would have split the vote enough to push the election to another candidate if I remember correctly). This gave them access to Madison and during talks (with Leland, I believe) they convinced him to support/lobby for a positive declaration of religious freedom. <BR/><BR/>How would those tactics be interpreted in today's political climate? Their religious convictions were used to influence a political outcome--which we benefit from so it must be OK. <BR/><BR/>Truly those kinds of things happen all the time as should in the free marketplace of ideas: Based upon true convictions (as opposed to popularity or convenience) proclaim your positions convincingly enough so they become the convictions of others, then together influence the political climate to reflect those convictions. <BR/><BR/>That's generally the system we live in--it's not always "may the best ideas win"--but "may the most widely accepted/believed ideas win". That is the freedom and the danger of the system we live in. It is one that can be manipulated or taken advantage of from numerous directions--including religious. <BR/><BR/>Wow, don't even get me started on the Wiley Drake prayer fiasco. What's funny is that many groups like Baptists opposed gov't registration of congregations, and yet we quickly embraced the concept of Tax Exemption--which accomplished the same thing as registration only using a nice, juicy carrot. Without tax exemption--Wiley could endorse whomever, whenever. And some within AU are opposed to a church getting tax exemption--but that would open up a flood gate of religious endorsements!<BR/><BR/>Wow, that should be all for now!Kelly Reedhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17653555116755206508noreply@blogger.com