All religions have an implicit belief that they are somehow more right, true or valid than other religions. This creates and "us and them" mentality that promotes intolerance of those with different beliefs, that can give license to conflict, violence and even killing in the name of God (which is ludicrous).

I think we all need to understand that any and all religious doctrine only has meaning to those who already accept the religion.

Thus, when we speak and deal with each other, each person must rise above their own particular religious doctrine, and speak in a common language all can relate to. The humanistic values common to all major religions can provide that language.

Religious beliefs are faith based - which are by definition, not rationally based. To a degree, when religious followers subjugate to a power greater than themselves, they exchange a portion of their rationality and morality when they accept the faith based doctrine, and the moral code of a religion.

This makes followers more vulnerable to manipulation by political entities, who solicit the support of religious groups by telling them that a particular political agenda is "God's will". If they can convince a religious group of such, they will gain supporters who will never question their political agenda, because who has the right to question God?

This is potentially very powerful and very dangerous. History is rife with examples of such political manipulation of religion - and its horrendous consequences, and no religion is exempt.

This phenomenon will not end until religious leaders, and religious followers rise above it.

A gread Doc. I am reading the book The Family just now and it makes my hair curl.

J

I have to report a recent dream. God and I were having a discussion about peace on Earth. By the way, She is coloured, not necessarily black, and She said that next year we will abolish all religions on Earth in order to put an end to wars and achieve lasting peace. Hooray, there is hope.

Reverend Hagee sounded very hostile to the Palestinian people. I can almost sense hatred in his voice.

In general, I get the impression that the Evangelical belief of an inevitable battle between good and evil comes down to Judeo Christianity versus the Muslims.

What a bizarre country we live next to. I feel bad that McCain has to compromise his ethics to appease such a large and powerful segment of the Republican base. I'm referring to his current stance on abortion. Clearly he's been forced to pretend he believes that Roe vs Wade should be overturned.

I constantly pose this question to professing Christians who insist on associating Christianity with earthly politics: How do you claim to follow Christ's example, when in fact he scrupulously and specifically avoided political involvement, and cited a kingdom not of this earth?
20 years of asking everyone from man on the street to theologians, no credible or biblical answer yet.

A fascinating program which my wife and I happened on when looking for a newsbite about Sara Palin on SNL. "Jesus Politics" turned out to be far more interesting. Missed a whole section about Jimmy Carter because the TV went on the fritz. But saw the rest of it about the early 2008 Dem and Repub. primaries and how the Christian Right used religious hot-button issues to create and motivate the Republican base.

Weyrich was chilling. Since Reagan, Fundamentalist Christians have been used by the Republican party as dedicated party workers who were key to getting out the vote. Abortion, and Homosexuality were and are being used as powerful motivators.

Fundamentalist Christians are being used by the Republican party for purely political ends. These people - a huge fraction of Americans- are dupes and have been essentially hypnotized through clever manipulation of their own prejudices and dogmatic beliefs.

The documentary made the connection between the US government enforcing school integration and the start of the association between Christian Fundamentalists and the Republican party. I would add to this that Christian Fundamentalism is strongest in the American South which is also where the civil rights campaign was focused and where opposition was strongest. The whole thing about small government,"getting the government off our backs" could be seen as code for an agenda supportive of segregationism.

Both Ayn Rand and Barry Goldwater were against the Civil Rights Act because it violated property rights. You can see how the right could build a coalition between libertarians and fundamentalists where the phrase "small government" could mean different things to different people.

Eventually people like Rand and Goldwater realized that Republican's preference for small government was Orwellian. The War on Terror and "Faith-based initiatives" really meant an explosion of government interference in people's private lives.

There are some people who argue that the Religious Right phenomenon is really about the power of the South as a voting bloc. Which is now on the wane because of the growing influx of Spanish speaking peoples into the South.

Very impressive thought provoking piece. I want to see it again.

For some few years now, I 've watched the growing incursion of religious fundamentalism into politics. A groundswell of religious fervor fixated on the abortion issue has become a focal point which is dominating American politics. The democratic notion of the separation of religion and state is on a fast track to oblivion.

It is alarming to witness the machiavellian spectacle of power grabbing by religious fanatics who demand collusion from their political leaders. United States is moving towards a theocracy that is every bit as dangerous as that of Iran and Israel. American's blindi\ dedication to it's alliance with Israel's insidious practises of genocide of the Palestinians has cost untold suffering in this highly conflicted area and danger to innocent people all over the world.

The documentary left me with the impression that Barak Obama is being hailed as the new messiah who must help to carry out the design of the so-called chosen people rather than as a fine man who is running for the presidency of the United States. Fanaticism is fanaticism no matter the colour of the coat

Dave W., you make some good points: believers tend to believe that their's is the true religion which leads to an "us vs them" mentality. And we need to find a common discourse that rises above particular religious doctrines.

I don't agree with your second-to-last paragraph where you say: "religious doctrine only has meaning to those who already accept the religion."

Christian doctrine has meaning to me because I'm part of the Western World. Whether I agree with it or not, it effects me and influences the way I think and act. You don't have to believe in the literal truth of the Bible to be influenced and seduced (in a good way)by it.

I find lots of meaning in "The Lord of the Rings" but I know it's fiction. And, incidentally, many works of literature like Tolkein's are directly influenced by Christian themes. You don't have to be Christian to appreciate that point of view.

Abraham Lincoln was very religious Christian and he used Biblical themes to paint a picture of America's history and it's dilemma over slavery to good effect. He was open to healing social division but never swerved from condemning slavery.

I think that Barak Obama is a great leader precisely because he seeks what ties us together rather than what separates us and he rises above religious sectarianism. That's where I disagree with the documentary film-maker Ilan Zif.

I hope I'm not being unfair to the film-maker because I missed seeing some parts of it.