Whenever it discriminates against (im)migrants because of their origin, race, or ethnicity, or because they seem to bring problems while offering nothing of value, theistic religion as a handmaid of politics is misguided and logically flawed. It may, in fact, be instead a reason for the failure of the U.S. executive branch for not being able to fully carry out and enforce the (im)migration laws to reasonably protect the borders. This is because serious logical inconsistencies arise when believers carefully focused on the larger landscape of the political applications of faith try to exert power over others while still regarding themselves as a good moral people of God. For, it cannot be ignored that such applications of faith are subject to limited, sectarian, and contradictory readings of the Bible—particularly those cherrypicked readings (as a product of selection and/or confirmation bias) illustrating the logical limitations of the biblical depiction of God’s nature and this Supreme Being’s alleged sovereignty in the role of American Democracy. Nevertheless, even if a biblical call for governmental involvement is granted, theistic religion that sees God as active within the governmental process cannot, on pain of logical contradiction, deal consistently with the (im)migration problem, nor claim, aligned with such social or political contexts, that virtue rests in either a Republican/Conservative or Democratic/Liberal approach to solve the problem. The upshot, then, is that it would not matter if governments derived their just Powers from the Consent of the Governed or some Divine Supreme Being.
Philosophy Professor and Lead Faculty, College of Arts and Sciences, Franklin University, Ohio, United States
THEISTIC, RELIGION, HANDMAID, POLITICS, IMMIGRANT, APPLICATIONS, FAITH, BIBLICAL, INCONSISTENCIES
This presenter hasn’t added media.
Request media and follow this presentation.