I hold the belief that most of our present day political posturing is simply a desire for governmental authentication of our positions.

We have gone so far down the rabbit hole of the Modern nation-state that it is difficult for us to imagine anything (institution, program, or belief) having any weightiness to it unless it is backed (in some way or another) by the government.

One of the detrimental results of Enlightenment thought was the schism that occurred when the public "officials" deemed that religion has NO voice or say in "public" matters.

Says who? You? Why should I believe you?

Unfortunately these qualificative questions are rarely fielded by such officials.

No no. Religion is allowed to speak to matters of individual piety and salvation but it should not, and indeed cannot, have any say into matters of a broader sphere.

Moderns will call this "The separation of church and state" I call it a monopoly.

The result of this monopoly is that there is only one place to go with our questions that don't have to do with our souls (the church is still allowed to field those questions...for now). Yes, any questions or institutions or programs must flow through this all-encompassing monopoly.

Let's say we've got a people concerned with hungry children in the inner-city. Well this concern obviously can have no merit whatsoever unless it is backed by a political candidate and is pursued through a government-tax-exempt 501c3.

Just needed to vent a little this morning!

Michael