Merging of Church and State

Central to the theme of merging church and state is that Christians will lead the world through political means in order to enforce God’s will. The inspiration for this ideology is based on a passage in the book of Genesis in the Old Testament:

Genesis 1:26: "And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth." (King James Version)

Dominionism then is a belief among predominately Protestant Christian evangelicals and fundamentalists that they should dominate the entire political process as part of a mandate from God. This group takes aims not only at the United States but at countries around the world. Their initial goal is to nurture the seeds of a "faith-based" government that will go far beyond Bush’s presidency and right into the return of Jesus Christ, the Savior.

In more moderate religious circles this view of the world is considered very extreme and some would say, dangerous.

The separation of church and state in the United States is granted by the First Amendment. Sarah Palin’s political and religious affiliations with theocratic groups who do not believe in the First Amendment's separation of church and state are grounds for serious consideration of how her belief system will affect her decision making in government.

Palin never actually says the world should be governed only by those literalists of Genesis 1:26. But she does use evangelical language whenever she speaks publically and her Pentecostal background does seep into her political activities. An example of this is her unwavering position on abortion – not for any reason, says Governor Palin. This puts her at odds with Roe vs Wade that the GOP wants to see reversed. If in a federal executive position, Palin has clearly stated that she would endorse Supreme Court Justices who are also known as anti-choice.

Then there is the example of Palin’s comments about the mission of the troops headed to war Iraq, calling it “a task that is from God.” Clearly Palin leans heavily towards the doctrine of dominionism. To call Sarah Palin a strict dominionist may be a stretch but she does buy into most of the tenets of the rigid dominionist ideology.

According to journalist Frederick Clarkson there are three main pillars of the belief:
"1. Dominionists celebrate Christian nationalism, in that they believe that the United States once was, and should once again be, a Christian nation...2. Dominionists promote religious supremacy, insofar as they generally do not respect the equality of other religions, or even other versions of Christianity. 3. Dominionists endorse theocratic visions, insofar as they believe that...'biblical law' should be the foundation of American law."

Chip Berlet, Senior Analyst, at Political Research Associates says there are in fact two types of dominionists and Sarah Palin appears to fit into the first type:

Soft Dominionists are Christian nationalists. They believe that Biblically-defined immorality and sin breed chaos and anarchy. They fear that America's greatness as God's chosen land has been undermined by liberal secular humanists, feminists, and homosexuals. Purists want litmus tests for issues of abortion, tolerance of gays and lesbians, and prayer in schools. Their vision has elements of theocracy, but they stop short of calling for supplanting the Constitution and Bill of Rights.

Hard Dominionists believe all of this, but they want the United States to be a Christian theocracy. For them the Constitution and Bill of Rights are merely addendums to Old Testament Biblical law. They claim that Christian men with specific theological beliefs are ordained by God to run society. Christians and others who do not accept their theological beliefs would be second-class citizens. This sector includes Christian Reconstructionists, but it has a growing number of adherents in the leadership of the Christian Right.
Leading dominionists are endorsing the McCain-Palin ticket. But consider who these leaders are - members of the secretive Council for National Policy: Reverend James Dobson of Focus on the Family, Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council, and Tim LeHaye, author of the apocalyptic "Left Behind" books which predict the coming rapture. Dobson, who once said he would "never" vote for McCain, issued a statement calling Sarah Palin an "outstanding" choice for VP nominee. It is reported that McCain’s first picks for the post were more moderate men, Tom Ridge and Joe Lieberman. However, the Council’s pressure for a candidate more suitable for their ends forced McCain’s hand in choosing Sarah Palin. There should be no question left as to who would actually run the country if McCain becomes President.

Palin's home church, the Juneau Christian Center, and its pastor Mike Rose advocates dominionism and is an advisor to Rodney Howard-Browne's Revival Ministries, one of the leading Dominionist organizations. The church also has ties with "Joel's Army", the youth group whose mission is to recruit teens to the cause and form God’s army in preparation for the end of times.

D. James Kennedy, often referred to as ‘The godfather of the Dominionists’ helped found the Moral Majority in 1979. At Bush’s request Kennedy blessed him prior to the bid for the Presidency. Kennedy wraps up the whole issue of church and state in this quote:
"Our job is to reclaim America for Christ, whatever the cost. As the vice regents of God, we are to exercise godly dominion and influence over our neighborhoods, our schools, our government, our literature and arts, our sports arenas, our entertainment media, our news media, our scientific endeavors -- in short, over every aspect and institution of human society."

It is hard not to draw parallels between the extreme beliefs expressed by Kennedy and the Taliban of Afghanistan for example. They want the same thing in the name of Allah – to rule “…over every aspect and institution of human society.”

Those of us who staunchly support the First Amendment
and believe in freedom of choice should be wary indeed.