God's Politics: Why the Right Gets It Wrong and the Left Doesn't Get It
432
God's Politics: Why the Right Gets It Wrong and the Left Doesn't Get It
432Paperback(Reprint)
-
PICK UP IN STORECheck Availability at Nearby Stores
Available within 2 business hours
Related collections and offers
Overview
Product Details
| ISBN-13: | 9780060834470 |
|---|---|
| Publisher: | HarperCollins |
| Publication date: | 08/29/2006 |
| Series: | Plus Series |
| Edition description: | Reprint |
| Pages: | 432 |
| Sales rank: | 169,689 |
| Product dimensions: | 7.98(w) x 10.92(h) x 1.02(d) |
About the Author
Read an Excerpt
God's Politics
Why the Right Gets It Wrong and the Left Doesn't Get ItBy Jim Wallis
HarperSanFrancisco
ISBN: 0-06-055828-8Chapter One
Take Back the FaithCo-opted by the Right, Dismissed by the Left
Many of us feel that our faith has been stolen, and it's time to take it back. In particular, an enormous public misrepresentation of Christianity has taken place. And because of an almost uniform media misperception, many people around the world now think Christian faith stands for political commitments that are almost the opposite of its true meaning. How did the faith of Jesus come to be known as pro-rich, pro-war, and only pro-American? What has happened here? And how do we get back to a historic, biblical, and genuinely evangelical faith rescued from its contemporary distortions? That rescue operation is even more crucial today, in the face of a deepening social crisis that cries out for more prophetic religion.
Of course, nobody can steal your personal faith; that's between you and God. The problem is in the political arena, where strident voices claim to represent Christians when they clearly don't speak for most of us. It's time to take back our faith in the public square, especially in a time when a more authentic social witness is desperately needed.
The religious and political Right gets the public meaning of religion mostly wrong - preferring to focus only on sexual and cultural issues while ignoring the weightier matters ofjustice. And the secular Left doesn't seem to get the meaning and promise of faith for politics at all-mistakenly dismissing spirituality as irrelevant to social change. I actually happen to be conservative on issues of personal responsibility, the sacredness of human life, the reality of evil in our world, and the critical importance of individual character, parenting, and strong "family values." But the popular presentations of religion in our time (especially in the media) almost completely ignore the biblical vision of social justice and, even worse, dismiss such concerns as merely "left wing."
It is indeed time to take back our faith.
Take back our faith from whom? To be honest, the confusion comes from many sources. From religious right-wingers who claim to know God's political views on every issue, then ignore the subjects that God seems to care the most about. From pedophile priests and cover-up bishops who destroy lives and shame the church. From television preachers whose extravagant lifestyles and crass fund-raising tactics embarrass more Christians than they know. From liberal secularists who want to banish faith from public life and deny spiritual values to the soul of politics. And even from liberal theologians whose cultural conformity and creedal modernity serve to erode the foundations of historic biblical faith. From New Age philosophers who want to make Jesus into a non-threatening spiritual guru. And from politicians who love to say how religious they are but utterly fail to apply the values of faith to their public leadership and political policies.
It's time to reassert and reclaim the gospel faith - especially in our public life. When we do, we discover that faith challenges the powers that be to do justice for the poor, instead of preaching a "prosperity gospel" and supporting politicians who further enrich the wealthy We remember that faith hates violence and tries to reduce it and exerts a fundamental presumption against war, instead of justifying it in God's name. We see that faith creates community from racial, class, and gender divisions and prefers international community over nationalist religion, and we see that "God bless America" is found nowhere in the Bible. And we are reminded that faith regards matters such as the sacredness of life and family bonds as so important that they should never be used as ideological symbols or mere political pawns in partisan warfare.
The media like to say, "Oh, then you must be the religious Left?" No, not at all, and the very question is the problem. Just because a religious Right has fashioned itself for political power in one utterly predictable ideological guise does not mean that those who question this political seduction must be their opposite political counterpart. The best public contribution of religion is precisely not to be ideologically predictable or a loyal partisan. To always raise the moral issues of human rights, for example, will challenge both left and right-wing governments that put power above principles. Religious action is rooted in a much deeper place than "rights" - that place being the image of God in every human being.
Similarly, when the poor are defended on moral or religious grounds, it is certainly not "class warfare," as the rich often charge, but rather a direct response to the overwhelming focus on the poor in the Scriptures, which claim they are regularly neglected, exploited, and oppressed by wealthy elites, political rulers, and indifferent affluent populations. Those Scriptures don't simply endorse the social programs of the liberals or the conservatives, but they make it clear that poverty is indeed a religious issue, and the failure of political leaders to help uplift the poor will be judged a moral failing.
It is precisely because religion takes the problem of evil so seriously that it must always be suspicious of too much concentrated power - politically and economically - either in totalitarian regimes or in huge multinational corporations that now have more wealth and power than many governments. It is indeed our theology of evil that makes us strong proponents of both political and economic democracy - not because people are so good, but because they often are not and need clear safeguards and strong systems of checks and balances to avoid the dangerous accumulations of power and wealth.
It's why we doubt the goodness of all superpowers and the righteousness of empires in any era, especially when their claims of inspiration and success invoke theology and the name of God. Given the human tendencies of military and political power for self-delusion and deception, is it any wonder that hardly a religious body in the world regards the ethics of unilateral and preemptive war as "just"?
(Continues...)
Excerpted from God's Politics by Jim Wallis Excerpted by permission.
All rights reserved. No part of this excerpt may be reproduced or reprinted without permission in writing from the publisher.
Excerpts are provided by Dial-A-Book Inc. solely for the personal use of visitors to this web site.
What People are Saying About This
Wallis at his usual passionate and brilliant self: he will move you to examine your conscience and search your soul.
Jim Wallis is an inspiration to mefor his witness of faith and his engagement with politics.
Jim Wallis is compelling, provocative, and inspirational, with faith that can move mountains and can certainly move people and communities.
Jim Wallis is the major prophetic evangelical Christian voice in the country.
How far should we go to understand each other’s points of view? Maybe the distance grace covered on the cross.
Reading Group Guide
Introduction
God's Politics, by Jim Wallis (HarperSanFrancisco, ©2005) contains a thoughtful and inspirational discussion of faith and politics. Wallis urges the Left, the Right, the government, and the religious community to work for real social change in American and the world, through emphasizing a new "prophetic politics." With a focus on spiritual values, Wallis shares valuable insights to the problems confronting us and offers ideas and goals for implementing needed changes. His evangelical Christian voice offers faith, hope, and direction to a nation in need of a renewed spiritual and political vision.
Introduction: Why Can't We Talk About Religion and Politics?
God's Politics challenges everything about our politics. It reminds us of the people who are always neglected -- the poor, vulnerable, and left behind. And it challenges Left and Right by offering a new vision for faith and politics in America.
-- Polling results after the 2004 election emphasized "moral values" as a deciding factor, but differed on what that meant. What is your definition of moral values? Did that influence your choice of who to vote for? What do you think are the most important moral values in politics?
Chapter 1: Take Back the Faith -- Co-opted by the Right, Dismissed by the Left
Many people feel that their faith has been "stolen" by one political side and ignored by the other. We need to return to a genuine evangelical faith rescued from the distortions of both Right and Left.
-- Do you agree that the Right focuses faith narrowly on sexual and cultural issues, while the Left doesn't understand the meaning of faith for politics at all? If so, how was this demonstrated in the 2004 election?
-- How does the "politics of Jesus" offer an alternative to the political and economic agenda of the religious Right?
Chapter 2: A Lack of Vision -- Too Narrow or None at All
America today faces two related vision problems. One is the lack of vision in public life; the other is that political leaders have a clear vision, but the wrong one. The Hebrew prophets and Jesus offer a new vision of our common life and public commitments.
-- What is your vision of politics in America? What are the public implications of your spiritual values?
-- What does it mean to change society by "changing the wind?" How can people of faith become "wind changers?"
Chapter 3: Is There a Politics of God? -- God Is Personal but Never Private
God is personal -- if not, there is little meaning to faith. But that personal God is never private, relevant only to individual morality while oblivious to public issues.
-- What is the difference between "God's politics" and using God to justify our politics? How are God's politics different from ours?
Chapter 4: Protest is Good; Alternatives Are Better
Political protest should not be simply a politics of complaint; it should show the way to personal and social transformation through offering alternatives. Being for an alternative brings more energy and possibilities to the political debate than only being against.
-- In the polarized agenda of today's partisan politics, what solutions could go beyond the debates to show a way forward on the most important challenges facing us? How do we move from complaining about the way things are to creating viable alternatives?
Chapter 5: How Should Your Religious Faith Influence Your Politics?
Religious fundamentalism at its worst seeks political power to impose a theocracy, while secular fundamentalism attempts to restrict religious faith only to houses of worship. The real question is not whether religious faith should influence a society and its politics, but how.
-- What are your observations about the role of religious faith in the 2004 election campaign? Why does it seem as if people who regularly attend worship services vote Republican, while those who don't vote Democratic?
-- Discuss the differences between the religious Right and the Civil Rights movement.
Chapter 6: Prophetic Politics -- A New Option
There are three dominant political options in America. One is conservative on everything -- from cultural and family concerns to economic and foreign policy issues. A second is liberal on everything. The third is libertarian -- liberal on cultural/moral issues and conservative on fiscal/economic and foreign policy. There is a fourth option -- traditional or "conservative" on issues of family values and sexual integrity while progressive or populist on issues of economic justice and peacemaking.
-- How would you react to a candidate who took a traditional moral stance on social and cultural issues -- being decidedly pro-family, pro-life (meaning really waning to lower the abortion rate), strong on personal responsibility and moral values, outspoken against the moral pollution throughout popular culture; AND was also an economic populist, pro-poor in social policy, tough on corporate corruption and power, clear in supporting middle-class families in health-care and education, an environmentalist, and committed to a foreign policy that emphasized international law and multi-lateral cooperation over pre-emptive and unilateral war?
Chapter 7: Be Not Afraid -- A Moral Response to Terrorism September 11, 2001, changed our lives, and since then we have been a nation living in fear.
That fear has led us to accept policies that promised to end our vulnerability, yet we must still go to the roots of terrorism for an effective response.
-- What are the "two paths" that emerged in response to the terrorist attacks? What opportunities were missed to combat terrorism and what opportunities remain for responding to it?
-- What role can the religious community play in developing a moral response to terrorism?
Chapter 8: Not a Just War -- The Mistake of Iraq
While Saddam Hussein was a brutal dictator, and removing him from power a legitimate goal, there were ways other than war to accomplish that end. The war and continuing occupation of Iraq have weakened the system of international law and the cooperation needed to truly combat the threat of terrorism.
-- What are the ways other than war that could have dealt with Saddam Hussein? Do you agree or disagree that they could have succeeded?
-- What has been sacrificed and by whom in the war and ongoing occupation?
Chapter 9: Dangerous Religion -- The Theology of Empire
The word "empire" is increasingly used to describe American power in the world, and is defended by the president with religious language. This nationalist religion is a challenge to people of faith, who must now decide to whom to be loyal.
-- What is the difference between a Christian theology and an American theology? When and how is it appropriate or inappropriate to invoke the name of God in the public life of a nation?
Chapter 10: Blessed are the Peacemakers -- Winning without War
The questions today are how to resolve conflicts in the world, how to reduce violence, and how to heal the causes of war. Real peacemaking can develop initiatives and instutitions that could become alternatives to war.
-- Describe and discuss the strengths and weaknesses of the traditional Christian doctrines of pacifism and just war. Can nonviolence answer the questions that violence purports to answer, but in a better way?
-- Can the role of law and policing in protecting our neighborhoods be effectively applied to the international situation?
Chapter 11: Against Impossible Odds -- Peace in the Middle East
Resolving the ongoing crisis in the Middle East is an essential step toward addressing a major cause of violence in that region.
-- What is the relationship between Palestinian violence against Israel and the Israeli occupation of Palestine? Is a two-state solution with a secure Israel and a viable Palestine likely to resolve the issues involved?
-- How are nongovernmental peacemaking organizations making a difference?
Chapter 12: Micah's Vision for National and Global Security
Micah's vision is of swords being beaten into plowshares, nation not making war against nation, and every person having their own vine and fig tree where no one shall make them afraid.
- What do you think is the relationship between poverty and terrorism? How can we go deeper to deal with the root causes of war?
- Can you think of any modern-day Micahs in your community who are effectively addressing issues of violence and poverty?
Chapter 13: The Poor You Will Always Have With You? —What Does the Bible Say About Poverty?
Several thousand verses in the Bible speak to poverty and God's response to injustice, yet too many affluent Christians have no relationship with people in poverty.
- What is your response to the text from Matthew 25? How can we restore the integrity of the Word of God to our lives, our congregations, and our communities?
Chapter 14: Poor People Are Trapped—In the Debate over Poverty
Republicans look after their wealthy constituencies, and Democrats want to be the champions of the middle class. Neither makes the needs of the poor a priority, and poor people are trapped in the debate.
- What would a solution-based approach to overcoming poverty look like? What can each sector of society contribute?
- What is the relationship between personal and social responsibility?
Chapter 15: Isaiah's Platform—Budgets Are Moral Documents
The budget of a family, church, city, or nation reveals its true priorities—what it cares about and values. Current U.S. federal budgets are sacrificing the poor for war and tax cuts.
- What is your reaction to the story of the 2003 child tax-credit debate in Washington and the exclusion of poor working families from that credit?
- Is it "class warfare" to talk about growing economic disparities and those in poverty who are being left out of America's economy?
Chapter 16: Amos and Enron—What Scandalizes God?
America's corporate scandals are raising new questions about the relationship between the bottom line and the common good.
- Should our behavior in the economic spheres of our lives become the substance of adult Sunday School curricula and Bible study groups?
- Could a religious populism raise hard questions about corporate responsibility, tax policy, campaign financing, and budget priorities that political leaders couldn't afford to ignore?
Chapter 17: The Tipping Point—Faith and Global Poverty
For the first time in history we have the information, knowledge, technology, and resources to bring the worst of global poverty to an end. What we don't have is the moral and political will to do so. And it is becoming clear that it will take a new moral energy to create that political will.
- What is the relationship between debt, aid, and trade? How would debt cancellation, wise aid programs, and trade justice lead to reducing global poverty?
- How are the churches addressing the moral challenge of the AIDS crisis?
Chapter 18: A Consistent Ethic of Life—Abortion and Capital Punishment
Cardinal Joseph Bernardin of Chicago coined the phrase "a seamless garment of life," linking the "life issues" of abortion, euthanasia, capital punishment, nuclear weapons, poverty, and racism all as critical components of a consistent ethic of life.
- What is your view of how both Republicans and Democrats speak to the issue of abortion? What has either done to seriously reduce the number of abortions?
- How could our affirmation of "a culture of life," serve to bring us together across ideological and political battle lines? And even more importantly, how can the precious gift of life be protected and preserved?
Chapter 19: Truth-Telling About Race—America's Original Sin
Wallis names racism as America's "original sin." That original sin has affected most everything about our nation's life ever since. Slavery and subsequent discrimination against black people in America are injustices of such magnitude that one would think national repentance and reparations would be called for. But neither has ever come.
- What do you think of proposals for an apology for slavery? Would it lead to greater healing and racial reconciliation?
- What are the economic roots of racism? Who benefits and who loses because of racism?
Chapter 20: The Ties That Bond—Family and Community Values
The strength and health of the bonds between family and community are essential to the common good. Reestablishing a spiritual sense of community in our churches, neighborhoods, and our national politics is an urgent need.
What are the challenges facing parents and families today? Is there a relationship between "family values" and economic realities? How would strengthening parenting and families help contribute to a healthier society?
-- Do you believe that the long-standing and deeply rooted concept of marriage as being between a man and a woman should not be changed, but that same-sex couples should be granted full legal rights in civil unions, or that only same-sex gay marriage fulfills the requirements of equal protection under the law? Discuss the religious and public policy basis of your answer.
Chapter 21: The Critical Choice—Hope or Cynicism
Prophetic faith does not see the primary battle as the struggle between belief and secularism. It understands that the real struggle of our times is the fundamental choice between cynicism and hope. And the decision for hope is based upon what you believe at the deepest levels—what your most basic convictions are about the world and what the future holds—all based upon your faith.
-- What are some things that give you hope? What does it mean to be a "prisoner of hope?"
Epilogue: We Are the Ones We've Been Waiting For
-- Why are "we" the ones we have been waiting for? Do you have the faith and hope that the world can be changed into a more just and peaceful place?
Interviews
An Interview with Jim Wallis
Barnes & Noble.com: God's Politics is subtitled "Why the Right Gets It Wrong and the Left Doesn't Get It." Were you surprised at how great a role religion played in the 2004 election?
Jim Wallis: No, I said more than a year ago that religion would be one of the big issues in this campaign. Religion was indeed a big factor in this election, with moral values talk in the air the entire campaign. On the Republican side, George W. Bush talked comfortably and frequently about his personal faith and ran on what his conservative religious base called the "moral issues." On the Democratic side, Senator John Kerry invoked the New Testament story of the Good Samaritan, talked about the importance of loving our neighbors, and said that faith without works is dead -- but only began talking that way at the very end of his campaign. Critics of the Kerry campaign say he got religion too little and too late, while critics of the Bush campaign say he used religion in one of the most partisan ways ever seen. But the results of the election point to how incredibly important the cultural and political definitions of religion and moral values really are.
B&N.com: Was the issue of "moral values" really as pivotal as the post-mortems are claiming?
JW: I think "security" and "leadership" were also very important issues in this election. But the "moral values" issue was key for many voters. A flawed exit poll confused "moral values" with "issues," when values are, of course, embedded in issues. But moral values are important to most Americans. The question is, what values, whose values, and how broadly or narrowly values will be defined. The issue of faith and values should not be used as wedges and weapons to divide and destroy us but as potential bridges to bring us together and find common ground. That's one of the reasons I wrote this book.
B&N.com: Simply put, what are "God's politics?"
JW: As I often say, God is not a Republican or a Democrat, and religion doesn't easily fit into political categories. True religion, prophetic religion, should be critical of both Left and Right when needed.
"God's Politics" are therefore never partisan or ideological. But they challenge everything about our politics. God's politics remind us of the people our politics always neglect -- the poor, the vulnerable, the left behind. God's politics challenge narrow national, ethnic, economic, or cultural self-interest; reminding us of a much wider world and the creative human diversity of all those made in the image of the creator. God's politics remind us of the creation itself, a rich environment in which we are to be good stewards; not mere users, consumers, and exploiters. And God's politics plead with us to resolve the inevitable conflicts among us, as much as is possible, without the terrible cost and consequences of war. God's politics always remind us of the ancient prophetic prescription to "Choose life, so that you and your children may live," and challenges all the selective moralities that would choose one set of lives and issues over another.
B&N.com: How have the parties misused religion, in your view?
JW: The differences were very stark. Karl Rove made no secret of his intent to aggressively reach out to conservative religious voters. But in doing so, the Bush team seriously overstepped the proper boundaries of church and state by suggesting religious "duties" that included turning over congregational membership lists to local Republican parties. That offended even members of Bush's own religious base like Richard Land of the Southern Baptists, who said such partisan activities were "inappropriate" and that he was "appalled" -- an honest and honorable criticism. In mailings to churches in some states, the RNC suggested that "liberals" would "ban the Bible" and "accept gay marriage" if they were to win. I have never seen such outrageous behavior by a political party in trying to manipulate religion for its own agenda while so disrespecting the faith of millions of other believers who disagree with the Republican political agenda.
If the Republicans overstepped in their religious outreach, the Democrats under-stepped in their effort to be more "religion friendly" than they have in the recent past. Listening better to religious voices, both inside and outside the Kerry camp, would have provided more strategic help and public capacity in speaking directly to the important issues of religion in politics and seeking to broaden their definition in this election campaign.
B&N.com: What could the Kerry camp have done better?
JW: The Democrats, both at their convention and in their campaign, did try to offer a new open door to the religious community in important ways, and Kerry began to talk about how his own faith influenced his values. But Kerry could have done much more to speak to religious audiences, talk to the religious press, and redefine the "religious issues" at stake in this campaign -- away from just abortion and the Eucharist, to include poverty and war. The Democrats should be much more willing to use moral and religious language in defense of economic fairness and justice. But they shouldn't make the same mistake the Republicans have made in trying to co-opt religious leaders and communities for their political agenda.
B&N.com: Is there a "Religious Left?" How can it best be used to create significant social change in America?
JW: When I critique the Religious Right, the media likes to say, "Oh, then you must be the Religious Left." No, not at all, and the very question is the problem. Just because a Religious Right has fashioned itself for political power in one utterly predictable ideological guise does not mean that those who question this political seduction must be their opposite political counterpart. The best public contribution of religion is precisely not to be ideological predictable nor a loyal partisan. To always raise the moral issues of human rights, for example, will challenge both left- and right-wing governments who put power above principles. Religious action is rooted in a much deeper place than "rights" -- that being the image of God in every human being.
B&N.com: You claim that the Religious Right is declining as a force. How does that opinion square with the election results?
JW: It is a mistake to be always fighting against the Religious Right, as many frightened liberals continue to do. The organizational strength of the Moral Majority/Christian Coalition was always exaggerated by both themselves and the media. But their ability to "deliver" decisive blocs of votes is greatly diminished. The Republican Party is now careful at party conventions to hide its religious fundamentalists, as mainstream voters have soured on both their message and style. The good news for religion and public life in America is that the word "religious" will no longer be always followed by the word "right." This book is a manifesto for progressive religion as a fundamental alternative.
B&N.com: God's Politics makes the argument that Democrats are consistently uncomfortable discussing religion. Why do you think that is?
JW: Just a few decades ago the Democratic Party was vitally linked to a civil rights movement led by black churches. Given that history, how have the Democrats now become effectively portrayed by Republicans as being secularists who are hostile to religion? That perception is not really true, but Democrats too often have lost the ability to connect moral values and the language of faith to their agenda. They need to rediscover a moral vocabulary for their policy commitments by recovering their very heart and soul.
B&N.com: You had a well-documented encounter with the president shortly after 9/11, where you discussed how best to deal with the threat of terrorism. How do you feel Bush has performed in this area?
JW: Despite White House self-confidence, the United States has yet to recognize how the real threats of terrorism are very different from what we have known as "war," to which we simply respond with our habitual military solutions. Instead of seeing the events of September 11th as a new call for international cooperation and collaboration in addressing a host of global problems, the Bush administration quickly retrenched into Pax Americana, "going it alone" as the world's only superpower. Our choices included the rule of law or the habit of war, collective action or unilateral decisions, effective containment or unpredictable escalation. And the Bush administration made the wrong choices.
B&N.com: You and your evangelical organization, Sojourners, made a last-ditch attempt to prevent the Iraq invasion by suggesting a "third way" to deal with Saddam Hussein other than starting a war or doing nothing. What did it entail?
JW: The plan we offered took the threat of Saddam Hussein seriously. It called for his removal from power through an international criminal indictment, the elimination through coercive inspections of any weapons of mass destruction he might have, and the democratic reconstruction of Iraq under international leadership (not U.S. occupation) -- all without war. We said there was a better way than war to solve the problem of Iraq and detailed how it might be accomplished.
B&N.com: How close did you come to having it considered?
JW: In less than two weeks, the plan spread around the country and the world. Those of us offering the plan had just met with Tony Blair in London, and discussions with his cabinet leadership continued. In the final weeks before the war, what they called "the American church plan" was being actively discussed at the highest levels of the British government. Top religious leaders in the U.K., the U.S., and around the world were pushing the plan to their government leaders. People at the UN, including Kofi Annan, were studying it. Officials at the State Department requested a presentation and discussion of the plan, and even some non-administration "hawks" on Iraq said it should be tried. Democrats in the House and Senate were calling us to ask for meetings -- they hoped that an alternative plan to war from the religious community might help them regain their voice. When The Washington Post prominently published the plan on their opinion page under the title "A Third Way Is Possible," a contact at the White House told me that "everybody" over there had seen it. Former British cabinet minister Clare Short has since said she believed the plan would have worked -- but had come too late; and if given a few more weeks could have gained real momentum.
But those making decisions in the Bush Administration were determined to go war with Iraq.
B&N.com: Kerry voters are, of course, feeling very despondent over his narrow loss -- as a progressive Christian, is there any hopeful message you can impart on them at this difficult time?
JW: My vision -- a progressive and prophetic vision of faith and politics -- was not running in this election. George Bush and John Kerry were, and John Kerry lost -- not progressive religion. Neither candidate championed the poor as a "moral value" or made the war in Iraq a clearly religious matter. And neither advocated a "consistent ethic of human life" beyond single issue voting, or a serious "pro-family" agenda without being anti-gay. The ways in which both parties' visions are morally and politically incomplete must now be taken up by people of faith. That can best be done by reaching both into the conservative Christian communities who voted for George Bush and more liberal Christian communities who voted for John Kerry.
We've now begun a real debate in this country over what the most important "religious issues" are in politics, and that discussion will continue well past the 2004 elections. It's time to spark a public conversation in this country over what the "moral values" in politics should be -- and how broadly and deeply they should be defined. Religion doesn't fall neatly into Right and Left categories. If there were ever candidates running with a strong set of personal moral values and a commitment social justice and peace, it could build many bridges to the other side. Personal and social responsibility are both at the heart of religion, and the two together could make a very powerful and compelling political vision for the future of our bitterly divided nation.