Many argue that a person’s faith should have no bearing upon his politics; hence, a person’s personal faith should not influence his politics or influence whether a citizen votes for that candidate. This position seems, although admittedly quite neo-tolerant, either palpably uninformed or arrogantly dismissive of the Christian faith. First, if a person’s Christian faith does not affect his public life, then the individual is not living an authentic Christian life because we are to be Christ like in public and private (Ephesians 5:1).
Second, would society say that a philosophical secularist should not allow his secularism to influence him? I think not. Third, to say that our religious faith is not appropriate and/or germane to our public life and politics is undeniably contrary to the founding and history of our country, e.g. “All men are created equal and endowed by their creator” is a theological statement based upon Genesis. Fourth, to say that a person’s Christian faith should not influence his public decisions is to fail to appreciate the political implications of the Christian faith. For example, we do not merely believe that a Christian should not steal, but that no one should steal.
Lastly while our faith is intensely personal, it is also very public. In one of Justice Scalia’s dissents he said, “Church and state would not be such a difficult subject if religion were, as the court apparently thinks it to be, some purely personal avocation that can be indulged entirely in secret, like pornography, in the privacy of one’s room.” ((Scalia Dissents p187))
For a liberal democratic culture to argue that the Christian faith, or any faith, is not suitable for the public square seems extraordinarily anti-liberal and anti-democratic. Most importantly, for a Christian to separate his public life from his private life is a dishonor to Christ.
