Braunstein 1, 2

Active citizenship involves the belief that members of a community have a duty to be informed about the issues affecting their community and to participate to help solve those issues. Many of these issues are social in nature (for instance, outreach to underprivileged groups and support for members of a community. Active citizenship is often an aspect of religious communities as most religious institutions have community outreach programs. Both the tea party group and Interfaith group rely on "traditional" values that are often fostered by religious communities. And so the type of active citizenship associated with religious communities is likely to be quite similar to the action of groups like the Tea Party and Interfaith.

Becoming an active citizen meant being involved and informed on how political processes and individual policies worked. Members of the community took much more active roles in political life. Thus "In this new system, citizens were expected to become knowledgeable about issues, develop informed opinions and positions, and support or reject political candidates on these bases. They were also expected to advocate the policy changes they sought, often joining with others to form advocacy organizations that would have been viewed as dangerous only a century earlier" (Braunstien, pg14). Active citizenship in the Tea Party group and the Interfaith group was common size both had traditional values.

According to what I understand from the reading, Active citizenship is a process where a person goes out of their way to understand issues around them within their community, as well as in politics, and how those things can be engaged and combined to find solutions because anyone "born here" can be a citizen but to be an active one means proactively engaging with politics about ones interests. When it came to Interfaith and the Tea Party group, they had their different religions and political views, and they had different ways of understanding, interpreting, and enacting active citizenship. But that's a point that is really significant for sociology of religion, trying to understand how these very diverse groups came to the same understanding of them needing to involve themselves in active citizenship to meet the needs of their communities.

One detail of active citizenship that I find important to me is the taking on of an identity that calls back to a tradition of sorts. While its more explicit in the Interfaith organization, as they are openly a faith based group, the trappings of religious dogma and an unifying social ethos is present even in the Patriots. Whats interesting to me is there is a focus in both groups of advocating or actively seeking to recruit or spread their message, which predominates both groups, but the patriots especially. This act of spreading and pushing the viewpoint of the group to the uninitiated reflects the proselytizing found in other religious groups we've studied so far.

Active citizenship is a process where citizens learn how to understand the patterns issues around them within their community, also for political purposes and actively engaging local communities and takes on the role of responsibility and takes initiative in leadership. In active citizenship, it demonstrates examples of solidarity as people within their communities are offering a voice and taking a stand for their society. Both groups the Interfaith and the Tea Party group, they had opposing political views, and they had different perceptions of how active citizenship should be displayed. What makes this a significant concept to sociology of religion is due to the fact we ca see how these two different groups have utilized the same strategy for trying to make useful accommodations toward their community.

Being part of an active citizenship, which varies in ideals from group to group, requires the individual to be involved and informed about the politics and policies of their community. Specifically, in regards to the Tea Party group and the Interfaith group, both groups developed a style of holding government accountable that reflect their ideal visions of the proper relationships among citizens and between citizens and government. Additionally, the religious significance of each groups varying ideals, that are constructed similarly using this sociological concept, results in varying community constructs.

Being an active citizen means participating in and informing the political process and how individual policies work. Community members play a more active role in political life. This means members has to aware of their surrounding and react to what happen to the communities. However, the interfaith and the Tea Party both have their disagreement on political views and thus making their active citizen point of view very different.

Active citizenship essentially meant the same thing for Interfaith and the Tea Party group -- it's a matter of becoming informed citizens and holding the government accountable in order to establish a true representative democracy. That said, each group engaged in being active citizens in different ways. The methods they used are a reflection of their groups goal and mission. One detail in the narratives that I found interesting was how the Patriots used "we the people" as a marker of their identity drawn directly from the Constitution. This mechanism served as a way to empower the Tea Party group and "reclaim their voices as active citizens" (57). This detail, along with many others present in both Interfaith and the Tea Party group, are significant in the sociology of religion because it's an instance of identity formation that will allow the group to mobilize and garner support either directly in relation to faith or in relation to the religiosity present within the Constitution.

Active Citizenship means that each individual who is a citizen in the United States has an obligation to be informed and knowledgeable about issues in their community ,politically,socially,laws that have been passed etc.In order to fight for your rights as a citizen you must be awar of what is happening in your government and community.The Interfaith and the Tea Party group both believe active citizenship can be veiled differently.However both groups rely on traditional values when it comes to most of their teachings.It is important to understand how such diverse groups come together for once goal.

Active citizenship is about becoming an informed and responsible citizen that can allow you to become accountable for the political actions one takes. One detail I think is significant of active citizenship in the sociology of religion is the invoking of social justice. Although this specific detail was embraced by Interfaith only, I think it is important to note how active citizenship is tied to religious beliefs. Interfaith despite being composed of members of different faith traditions, they all used faith as a motive to fight for what is just, while the Tea Party Patriots used patriotism, and individualistic feelings to fight for their common goals. This concluded with a significant difference being that they both fought for different end goals.

Active citizenship calls for participants to be informed and involved in political processes and individual policies. This detail is common to both the Interfaith and Tea Party groups, as they confront political issues, social issues, and other matters that affect their lives and the lives of others in their community. Although they exercise active citizenship for similar reasons, the two groups have a different stance on these political and social concerns.

Active citizenship is risky in that it forces individuals to spend more time in meetings, doing research, reading news, thus putting relationships with family, friends, and neighbors on the line. I believe that both the details of invoking social justice and establishing an identity. Invoking social justice is something that should be done on the collective level. It requires effort and strong belief in a cause. It also requires patience in regards to, as Jennifer C. said, "taking responsibility where the government and public officials have failed and holding those accountable for the lack of solutions." Without these requirements met, no productive, communally beneficial change will occur. Thus, social networking levels with members in a community decline.

Active Citizenship meant for these citizens to be more involved within their community and participate in doing more research and gain knowledge within the political parties. Although both parties felt differently about the social justice and establishing an identity. What they did have in common was their faith and belief in their community and to be active for their community.

Active citizenship is a way of bringing change in a society, it is about staying informed and having a set of ideas about how social justice should be served. One detail that stands out to me is how both groups look at history as a way of constructing the future goals of a group. History plays a major role in groups formation and their view of ideal active citizenship. Both groups emphasize different points and figures from history, which more so comply with their beliefs, values, views as a group. In the end this pick and choosing of history by both groups is what pushes them to act and move forward.