The following is a Counterpoint column:
By Tim Allen
Charles Davenport Jr. has offered us a dangerous proposal ("Be thankful that religion still guides the affairs of government," June 5). He asserts that politicians who do not vote their personal religious beliefs are "hollow men, timid souls bereft of conviction."
Then he cites James Madison as an example of a man of religious conviction who stood against the secularism that, Davenport believes, infects our culture today.
When Madison wrote, "The transcendent law of nature and of nature's God," he was not standing tall for the medieval Christian ideals that Davenport applauds in the likes of Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, now Pope Benedict XVI.
Indeed, the word "nature" is a dead giveaway of European secularism. Even evangelical scholars such as George Marsden admit this much. Therefore, Davenport's citation of Madison unwittingly supports the very ideals that he is against.
Davenport is oblivious to this, however, when he employs Madison as an example of real legislators who vote their religious convictions. Citing Gallup polls that reveal the majority of Americans are against abortion, homosexuality and other sins, he argues that our (Christian) legislators should vote their personal beliefs against these issues. If this indeed happens, then we risk the very conditions that led to the Civil War. While many in the North and quite a few in the South were against slavery, most Americans at this time were still anti-black and believed that African Americans were bestial, stupid and therefore in need of the paternal care of the white establishment. As author Fergus Bordewich has shown, legislators and presidents, rather than voting for the freedom of slaves, instead compromised so that slavery remained intact. While they represented the majority, they were wrong.
What is dangerous is that they used Christian theology to justify their position. Such a government may represent the majority of the people based on Christian ideals, but that does not make it right.
To thwart such potential religious injustices (as manifest in medieval times), James Madison wisely and vehemently argued against this type of state church government. Other Founding Fathers were convinced by his argument and adopted his concepts as stated in the Constitution and the First Amendment.
Scholars have long noted that these two writings were the most secularist and nonreligious of all national constitutions of that day.
If Davenport's dream comes true, our legislators will vote only for conservative, Christian values that are often (though not always) misguided (recall the Terry Schiavo fiasco). The history of Christianity, as well as histories of other religions, proves that this exclusive approach leads only to nightmares.
The writer is an instructor of history and religion at Randolph Community College.