From: kilroy@gboro.glassboro.edu (Dr Nancy's Sweetie)
Subject: What's Important And What Do You Do?
Organization: Glassboro State College (The Hour Is Growing Late)
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1992 15:02:39 GMT


[ Politics as a model for just about anything else. ]

Among the issues that I find interesting in religion are questions of what
people consider important, how they put those ideas into action, and what
kinds of action are acceptable for them.

Several disconnected articles on slightly different topics have confused
Robert Weiss, so I will clarify what I was getting at.

I commented that for a pro-life person with only pro-choice candidates, the
least-of-all-evils might be to choose based on other issues.  Suppose all the
candidates are in exact agreement about abortion, and none will do what you
think should be done: you can still influence other bits of public policy, and
perhaps you should do so.  (Note that some pro-life people have said that they
find this unacceptable.)


In another article, I was writing about being pro-life in a pro-choice church.
In particular, I asked how someone who is STRONGLY pro-life feels about going
to a church whose leadership is pro-choice.  The difference between this and
voting is that there are pro-life churches on can join, so one is not left
choosing between pro-choice churches only.  I do not think there are any truly
concerned pro-life candidates running for President this year, so for one who
considers this an important issue there isn't much of an option.  But there
are concerned pro-life churches; one of those could be an option for a
pro-life person.

Of course, one may consider abortion a relatively minor issue compared to some
theological issues, which would be of overriding importance.


I don't mean to say that supporting a pro-choice church is improper for pro-
life people, nor do I mean to say that supporting a pro-choice candidate is
acceptable.  Everybody has their own ideas about how important issues are, and
what methods of accomplishing things are acceptable, and what degree of care
should be used in avoiding support of immorality.  I'm not trying to tell
people what they should think is important -- I'm trying to get THEM to tell
ME what they think.


One person remains Episcopalian at least in part hoping to change the stand of
the Episcopal church.  My (unclear) question was about where the line should
be drawn in such situations; is it okay to be a member of the KKK if you hope
to change the KKK?  Would it be okay to work with the Gestapo while trying to
change it from within?  At what point does remaining a member become improper,
and why?

One person considers voting for pro-choice candidates improper because voting
is an endorsement of a candidate's ideas; does this apply to everything and
everyone who is pro-choice?

Some pro-life people don't bother with boycotts; apparently they feel that the
jump from buying soft drinks to supporting abortions is too far.  But would
you go to a clinic that performs abortions for some routine medical care?  Why
or why not?

Almost everybody disagrees with their church over at least some doctrines/
practices/ideas.  At what point does this disagreement become so big that one
has to leave?  Is there any one topic so important that it's the only thing
you consider important?  What is it?

How do people see issues of converting belief into action?  To what extent
will you join forces with those who disagree?

Those are the issues that come up in elections and in support of churches;
we have some people who think different things, and who take different
approaches to living their faith.  All I want is for them to talk to me.


Darren F Provine / kilroy@gboro.glassboro.edu
"Two roads diverged in a wood, and I -- " (Robert Frost)
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Subject: (no subject given)