Wednesday, July 12, 2006
History of Religion Question
When did fundamentalist pre-millenialist Christians, whose faith tended to make them believe that the secular order was completely corrupt and beyond redemption, go from eschewing participation in that secular order (and in some cases, even rejected evangelization) and waiting instead for an immenant "second coming" to being active participants in the secular political sphere and wanting to get a head start on the millenium by overturning that secular order? I suspect it may have something to do with the mobilization to oppose civil rights legislation, but I am not sure ... anybody know the history/chronology here?
# posted by alberich @ 5:01 PM 
Comments:
<< Home
DAS, I think it is safe to say that Roe v. Wade, among its other sins, created the religious right.
# posted by 
: 5:21 PM
: 5:21 PM 
I'm sure we do. I have problems with Roe as morality, as constitutional interpretation, and as history.
But it was also the kind of judicial fiat (an "exercise of raw judicial power," as the dissenting Democratic Justice White called it) that just begged demagogues to mobilize previously quiescent evangelical voters with the thesis that godless elites would continue to trash their values unless the noble Republicans got to be president long enough to pack the court with good Republicans (forgetting, of course, that the author of Roe was a Republican).
The Republicans have certainly gotten the votes, and now control presidency, court and congress. And what are they still saying to the religious right? "Godless elites...." Roe is the gift that just keeps giving.
But it was also the kind of judicial fiat (an "exercise of raw judicial power," as the dissenting Democratic Justice White called it) that just begged demagogues to mobilize previously quiescent evangelical voters with the thesis that godless elites would continue to trash their values unless the noble Republicans got to be president long enough to pack the court with good Republicans (forgetting, of course, that the author of Roe was a Republican).
The Republicans have certainly gotten the votes, and now control presidency, court and congress. And what are they still saying to the religious right? "Godless elites...." Roe is the gift that just keeps giving.
# posted by : 6:14 PM
: 6:14 PM
But it was also the kind of judicial fiat (an "exercise of raw judicial power," as the dissenting Democratic Justice White called it) that just begged demagogues to mobilize previously quiescent evangelical voters with the thesis that godless elites would continue to trash their values unless the noble Republicans got to be president long enough to pack the court with good Republicans (forgetting, of course, that the author of Roe was a Republican). - Rick Allen
I've seen this point made before. The problem I have with it is that there are many liberties that we have via judicial fiat that would never have gotten past legislatures: most famously the overturning of anti-miscegenation laws (something which hits very close to home for me -- although I reckon that "the Man" wouldn't care about white Jews and black Jews inter-marrying). One could argue that such decisions must be different than Roe v. Wade as they have not managed to produce such a backlash, but some of us tinfoil hattie types wonder if maybe Roe is a more politically correct stand-in for attacking "judicial activism" (read affirming the Constitutional rights of all people of all races and religions and sexes/orientations) in general.
Post a Comment
I've seen this point made before. The problem I have with it is that there are many liberties that we have via judicial fiat that would never have gotten past legislatures: most famously the overturning of anti-miscegenation laws (something which hits very close to home for me -- although I reckon that "the Man" wouldn't care about white Jews and black Jews inter-marrying). One could argue that such decisions must be different than Roe v. Wade as they have not managed to produce such a backlash, but some of us tinfoil hattie types wonder if maybe Roe is a more politically correct stand-in for attacking "judicial activism" (read affirming the Constitutional rights of all people of all races and religions and sexes/orientations) in general.
<< Home
