It's no secret the thirteenth chapter of Paul's Letter to the Romans has been much abused. Those seeking support for oppressive regimes use it to bludgeon believers into a love affair with the ruling regime. For them, let's be clear the passage says "submit," not "support." The same passage has been read by many as describing the requirement of governments to ensure they are enforcing actual good. Frankly, this is not supported by the grammar. Twisting it around backwards to provide an excuse for active resistance to that same regime won't do. However, while I reject the most common understandings of this passage, I agree it's often taken out of context, at the very least.
Dennis Prager wrote an article on Townhall.com titled “America, Not Keith Ellison, decides what book a congressman takes his oath on.” In brief, the article argues that every congressman should be made to take their oath of office on the Bible, not on any other book. Jason Franklin, a pastor, considers the the validity of this assertion.
A few years ago, I took a biology course in college to fulfill a general requirement for a degree. I never expected that in just a few years I would see a key, seemingly clear, topic we studied in the middle of a major political debate that tried to misinform the public about science. If you think I am referring to the “intelligent design debate,” think again. I am referring to Missouri Amendment 2, the so-called “Life Saving Cures” amendment that focuses on protection of certain forms of embryonic stem cell research. It may be an election issue specific to Missouri, but its repercussions will likely play a role in future promotion of similar amendments elsewhere.