Separation of Church and Conscience

For a few weeks now, I have been floowing an email-based discussion of the health care reform by our local medical community. Lately, a participant shared a quote by one Adrian Rogers which reads like this: "You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them, and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for, that my dear friend, is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it."

Another physician remarked that this quote is inconsistent with Adrian Roger's role as the most prominent Baptist minister of his time who supposedly spent his life spreading Christ's message regarding "leaving the worldly goods behind and following him on the path of righteousness."

To which the original participant of the discussion retorted: "That is called separation of church and state."

I should admit that my jaw dropped, and I am still struggling to bring it back up. This may be the reason why I can't just shut up on the issue. But to admit that what is taught at the church stays at the church made even my jaded self shocked. This is more than separation of church and state. This is separation of church and conscience.

OK, but suppose he is right. We go to church, love our neighbor sitting on the same pew, smile and think happy thoughts of righteousness and goodness, and then leave the church, undercut our neighbor in our haste to get out of the parking lot and speed up to worship the green buck. Nothing wrong with that - separation of church and state, you know, democracy, principles of our forefathers, and stuff. But interestingly enough, those same people who would argue for the separation of church and state in this particular instance would not accept the same logic when discussing government funding for abortions. Sorry, guys! You can't have your cake and eat it, too!

I am advocating consistency, please. If it is acceptable for a Baptist minister to make a successful career spreading the word of our Lord and then, in his off-duty pronouncements promote something completely opposite due to the principle of separation of church and state, then please leave your religious beliefs completely outside of the discussion of whether or not government funding for abortions should be allowed. Fair is fair.