John McCain's vice-presidential pick, Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, is an evangelical Protestant with a strong record of opposition to abortion and an openness to teaching creationism in the public schools.

Palin is the mother of five children, one of whom was born with Down Syndrome. She learned that her son had Down Syndrome when she was four months pregnant, and she told the Associated Press in May that she never considered ending the pregnancy. "We've both been very vocal about being pro-life," she said in the AP interview. "We understand that every innocent life has wonderful potential." Palin also said of her son, whose name is Trig Paxon Van Palin, "I'm looking at him right now, and I see perfection. Yeah, he has an extra chromosome. I keep thinking, in our world, what is normal and what is perfect?"

In November of 2006, the Anchorage Daily News described Palin's positions on social issues in a story wrapping up the governor's race:

"A significant part of Palin's base of support lies among social and Christian conservatives. Her positions on social issues emerged slowly during the campaign: on abortion (should be banned for anything other than saving the life of the mother), stem cell research (opposed), physician-assisted suicide (opposed), creationism (should be discussed in schools), state health benefits for same-sex partners (opposed, and supports a constitutional amendment to bar them)."

And in October of 2006, the Anchorage Daily News reported that Palin said the following about creationism at a debate:

"Teach both. You know, don't be afraid of information....Healthy debate is so important and it's so valuable in our schools. I am a proponent of teaching both. And you know, I say this too as the daughter of a science teacher. Growing up with being so privileged and blessed to be given a lot of information on, on both sides of the subject -- creationism and evolution. It's been a healthy foundation for me. But don't be afraid of information and let kids debate both sides."

The Democratic National Convention kicked off yesterday, and I couldn’t help but notice the opening invocation. Polly Baca, a former Colorado state senator, led off with a prayer that mentioned Jesus Christ and ended with her crossing herself “in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.”

That’s how Roman Catholics pray. Others do things differently – and, of course, some people don’t pray at all. It surprised me to see such a sectarian invocation before what was surely a very diverse audience.
There’s been a lot of talk about the increased religiosity at the Democratic Convention. Over at the Religion Clause Blog, Howard M. Friedman raises some provocative questions about whether the First Amendment’s Establishment Clause applies to political parties. Are they government entities or private associations?

Don Byrd at the Baptist Joint Committee for Religious Liberty’s blog is also looking at the issue, laying down a series of recommendations for how both parties ought to deal with religion.
But the most interesting reaction came from Focus on the Family’s Tom Minnery. For years, Minnery and other FOF honchos have carped that the Democrats are too secular, that the party lacks an outreach to religious voters and that it is even hostile to faith.
Now that the Democrats are adding a hefty dose of religion to their plate, how does Minnery react? He attacks the party for adopting a “gloss of prayer and God-talk” and criticizes it for including non-Christian faiths!

Article Continues (Off Site)
Courtesy Americans United

Social conservatives are growing more wary of church involvement in politics, joining moderates and liberals in their unease about blurring the lines between pulpit and ballot box, a new study found

Fifty percent of conservatives think churches and other places of worship should stay out of social and political matters, up from 30 percent four years ago, according to a survey released Thursday by the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life and the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press.

That significant shift in conservative thought has brought the country to a tipping point on the question: a slim majority of Americans — 52 percent — now think churches should keep out of politics.

That's an eight percentage point increase over 2004 and the first time a majority of Americans has held that opinion since Pew officials started asking the question 12 years ago.

On this question, the gap between conservatives and liberals is narrowing: just four years ago, liberals were twice as likely as conservatives to say churches should stay out of politics. Now, 50 percent of conservatives and 57 percent of liberals think that. Four years ago, 62 percent of liberals opposed church involvement in politics. Democrats and Republicans are about even on the question, as well.

It's perhaps the most depressing fact of this campaign so far that the first major encounter between McCain and Obama will be presided over by a mega-pastor and in a church. Here's Jeffrey Goldberg's interview with the man who is taking American politics one step further away from the vision of the Founding Fathers. Take this particular piece of blather:

I believe in the separation of church and state, but I do not believe in the separation of politics from religion. Faith is simply a worldview. A person who says he puts his faith on the shelf when he's making decisions is either an idiot or a liar. It's entirely appropriate for me to ask what is their frame of reference.

The entire basis for Western secular government, which rests on the capacity of people to distance absolute truth from political affairs, is based on idiocy or lies? I wonder if Warren has ever read Locke, or Hobbes, or Machiavelli or would even understand the term secularism if it knocked him square off his pedestal. Then here we have full-on Christianism in foreign policy:

WASHINGTON - Former presidential candidate Mitt Romney, once criticized for leaving out atheists and non-believers when he delivered a much-touted speech on faith in America, now says he missed a chance to discuss their role in society.
    Romney, who addressed his Mormon faith on Dec. 6 to allay concerns by hesitant voters, was criticized for asserting in that pre-primary speech that, "freedom requires religion just as religion requires freedom."
    This week, Romney said he is still convinced of that, but that he regrets omitting atheists and agnostics from his initial address.
    "Upon reflection," Romney said at the Metropolitan Club in New York City, "I realized that while I could defend their absence from my address, I had missed an opportunity - an opportunity to clearly assert the following: non-believers have just as great a stake as believers in defending religious liberty."
    If a society decides to outlaw a faith or ordain a state faith, it may be the non-believers who are first likely to be condemned, Romney said. And such an action, in the end, should scare everyone, he added, because an attack on someone because of what they believe - or don't believe - hits at the very idea of religious liberty.

ALBANY

The atheist lobby, in the blond, pregnant person of Jennifer Lange, waited with diminishing patience for the elevator in the Legislative Office Building.

Ms. Lange checked her watch one last time, then rounded a corner into the corridor and skipped down four flights of stairs. The back way to Assemblyman Richard L. Brodsky’s office was just one of those useful things she knew about the inner workings of Albany.

Ms. Lange’s mission on this Monday in early February was to scuttle a bill titled the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, which she and every legislator on her agenda called in their common insiders’ slang Rifra. Of the nearly 10,000 pieces of legislation introduced annually in the New York State Legislature, the act was one of only several dozen brought under the lead sponsorship of the Assembly’s speaker, Sheldon Silver. It was not going to be an easy target.

Senior bishops fear that the Church of England's historic link with the state is under threat following moves to end the prime minister's involvement in key clerical appointments.

They have told The Sunday Telegraph that removing Downing Street's role in the appointment process could lead to disestablishment.

Leading Anglican figures have expressed concern at the long-term significance of a decision taken by the General Synod to give the Church the final say in choosing bishops, a process previously open to the scrutiny of the prime minister.

Gordon Brown has moved to reassure the Church of England that it will not lose its established status as the country's official church, headed by the Queen as supreme governor and "defender of the faith".

But one bishop warned that the change was "pulling at the thread" of a relationship that has stood since the reformation. Another said: "I don't think people have properly considered how this might play out in the future. We should have been given a chance to discuss the issue before being presented with it as a fait accompli."

Story Continues (Off Site)

TALLAHASSEE (FBW) – An evolution compromise approved on Feb. 19 by the State Board of Education was the best that could be achieved in that body but legislative action to protect academic freedom of teachers offering criticisms of Darwinian evolution is possible, House Speaker Marco Rubio told Florida Baptist Witness in a Feb. 20 interview.
Rubio said the Board of Education’s addition of “scientific theory of” before each reference to “evolution” in new science standards for Florida’s public schools was “the best fix available” with “the way those votes were lining up.”

At the Feb. 19 BOE meeting, opponents of the science standards uniformly opposed the theory compromise, arguing instead for an “Academic Freedom Proposal” which would have added a clause to the standards permitting teachers “to engage students in a critical analysis” of Darwinian evolution.

John Sullivan, executive director-treasurer of the Florida Baptist Convention, in a Feb. 17 letter urged the BOE to oppose the theory compromise in light of the standards’ “silence about teaching scientific criticisms of evolution.”

Sullivan said both strengths and weaknesses of Darwinian evolution should be taught and said the standards should “honor and encourage the academic freedom of teachers and students on an issue of fundamental importance and ongoing scientific controversy.”

Asked if the legislature would be open to academic freedom legislation, Rubio told the Witness, “I think so. Sure. Well, I think the Florida House would. I can’t speak for the Senate.”

Although a vote count had not been taken on the issue, “we may have sufficient votes on that in the Florida House,” he added.

Rubio said there also could be activity in the legislature by evolution proponents who wish to remove the theory compromise language.

“I think there’s still going to be folks out there talking about this – on both sides. … I think this will be a battle that will go on for quite some time,” he said.

Story Continues (Off Site)

As much as possible, the presidential candidates should refrain from talking about their religious beliefs. Perhaps even a self-imposed ban on public avowals of religious would be wise. It's all too easy to cross the fine line between expressing faith and aggressively declaring it, and religious tolerance is, I think, inversely proportional to the latter.

Still, it doesn't appear that this is going to happen. Religious beliefs have been a big issue in presidential politics for a while now, and many of the candidates, particularly Govs. Mike Huckabee and Mitt Romney, have opted for different reasons to talk about theirs.

This is a two-way street, however. If religion and religious ideas are going to be more publicly discussed, candidates and their supporters will have to accustom themselves to the free expression of doctrines contrary to their own, in particular to irreligious perspectives.

Their religiosity will eventually invite questions about their beliefs and their provenance more pointed than the usual vague queries about the role of faith in their lives. Here are a few such questions that might be directed explicitly to Huckabee and Romney  and then generally to some of the other candidates.

Questions for Huckabee and Romney

Responding to complaints from the Religious Right, Congress has passed legislation mandating that the phrase "In God We Trust" be moved from the edge to the back or front of the new presidential dollar coins.

President George W. Bush signed the measure into law Dec. 26. It was tucked into a $555 billion domestic spending bill after having been pushed by U.S. Sen. Sam Brownback (R-Kan.). Brownback and other Religious Right conservatives have been complaining about the new coins since the series started last year.