Braunstein 7

What is the biggest obstacle to Interfaith and The Patriots working together to bring religion into politics? What does this tell us about polarization now and in the future?

This forum will be open for credit until M 5/7.

In my perspective, I think the groups that it brings people together in a community. It allows people to share a common goal of the religion. It makes people feel united and gives them something to believe in. However, the negative effects are that it creates conflicts, people disagreed on issues. Therefore, it creates discrimination and prejudice between people and it also means that generally people can not see beyond certain factors in other people.

I agree that religion is a common goal and it can help everyone feel included. I also, I agree that it can create conflicts because not everyone has the same view on certain issues.

I agree that it brings people together, but when religion is brought into politics we see both groups can be very divisive. A major obsectcle that both Interfaith and Patriots face how much of a role religion should play in their groups whether it will be basis of arguments and disagreements or used a support. Both groups use religion and place it in contexts that best fit their ideologies.

In my own understanding, I believe different groups bring people together. It gives them a community for supporting each other, focuses their attention on God. It provides a moral framework. Moreover, different groups of people can be seen to inspire conflict in the world. Some people might think that they focus people too much on religious things rather than on day to day things.

Though both the Interfaith group and The Patriots realize a problem and both come to an understanding of how to deal with the situation, I think, there are a couple of things that prevent them from working with one another. The first is how they organize, the Patriots are very individualistic, so the idea of having someone speak on their behalf or represent their ideas is something they would not tolerate, even if the sentiments expressed are correct. And second, I think how the both groups define and interpret past history shapes how they communicate with others and how the pave their way forward in the future.

I agree exactly with this point. The patriots are very "individualistic" and that was defiantly one of the main downfalls of their compromise and of their working together. Both groups are so different that it was hard for them to compromise on certain matters even if they were in agreement with each other, it was hard for them to communicate the message.

Interfaith and The Patriots differ in a lot of ways and this makes it difficult for them to work together. The Patriots are more independent individuals who like to speak for themselves whereas the Interfaith individuals are not. They also disagree on many issues, so even though they are trying to work together towards a common goal ,their different views and opinions, since they are so strong and prominent, got in the way and made it difficult for them to be cohesive.

The Patriots are the more individualistic group who use their singular power to create change on a political scale. The interfaith groups are more communal and use power in numbers to create change on a societal scale. They are working from two different perspectives of the world and they cannot work together until they reach a viewpoint that's in the middle, or kill two birds with one stone and use both forms of change for a common goal.

If we are to believe that these groups are designed to bring people together in a community and to bring religion into politics, we have to ask if this is beneficial to use "all" in the US. Religious liberty is at the heart of the American Way. In America, one’s standing as a citizen, member of the community, or candidate does not depend on a profession of faith. The First Amendment to the Constitution guarantees the free exercise of religion and prohibits the establishment of religion by the government. These two principles work together to protect religious freedom and a thriving and perse religious landscape. However, the adverse effects are that it creates conflicts, people disagreed on issues. Therefore, it creates discrimination and prejudice between people, and it also means that generally, people can not see beyond specific factors in other people.

I agree, the use of faith as a defining feature of citizenship is definitely a big part of the conception of citizenship for the groups, particularly The Patriots who tie protestantism directly to the conception of American identity. Though I wonder if the discrimination is already an existent part of the larger social structures and that the use of religion is mostly a cover and /or excuse for it?

The biggest obstacle to Interfaith and The Patriots working together to bring religion into politics is that it creates conflict. Religion gives people different ideas on the way a set standard should be, which is what politics revolves around. When you put religion and politics together, it creates disaster, and different views that do not correlate well. Overall, it creates disagreements among people and individials will need to start communicating more to prevent any harm placed in the future.

I agree with you point of view. Not everybody is agree on the same religion and its definitely create conflict. This is the whole reason why some political issues can never resolved. Politics and religion are connected by one another and if one part is changed the second one will sure enough follow.

I agree. Bringing religion into politics creates conflict. It's very seldom that an individual's political beliefs overlap with their religious beliefs. Integrating the two would cause more harm than good.

The Patriots are very independent and voice their own opinions. They try to create political change through their form of identity and what they are known for. On the other hand, the Interfaith groups are more reserved and a smaller group, they use past events to influence their views. This fits in with our understanding of religion and politics in contemporary American society by seeing how the different groups vary in opinions. They use their own beliefs and identity to create their understanding and morals.

The Interfaith's focuses on relationship within their own community. Leaders help individuals express their self-interest identification. White the Patriots sought to authorize citizens to hold government and the principles of the US Constitution. This can cause conflicts between both groups having different views on certain issues. The groups draw a civil discourse to enhance the problems that are faced in a democratic society, to hopefully perform a huge change.

I believe the biggest obstacle between both the Patriots and the Interfaith were political power, and immigration due to the fact that a mass population of people make up both societies. The Patriots not wanting to be flexible with the Interfaith had a lot to do with control and their practices of being firm in their beliefs.

The Interfaiths and the Patriots are two completely different groups, with different intentions. Despite their intentions, I would also say that political power was a major obstacle. A goal for both for these groups was to try and create political change through utilizing religion and religious aspects into politics. The interfaiths made it their objective to incorporate past experiences in order to comprehend their views, whereas the patriots state their opinions on different standards without question. The differences in interpretation between these two groups lets us know that these two groups have different ways of communication which is essentially capable of creating conflict because of their different ideologies and perspectives on the way that they see things in their lens.

I agree and think it's important that you mentioned the "two groups have different ways of communication which is essentially capable of creating conflict", and also think the conflict is created through different styles of interpretation. These interpretative differences are both a blessing and curse because, on one hand, it's important to live in a place in which this discourse exists. But, on the other hand, can also be the cause of slow progress due to continued disagreement. I also think this is part of the reason why people in the US are not more politically engaged.

In my opinion, The biggest obstacle to the unification of the political causes of interfaith and The Patriots are the different way they conceptualize and police the boundaries of their group identity. Interfaith is inclusive and community based and attempts to build consensus, while The Patriots build their identity and organizational principles off the belief in individualism and non-collectivism. The exclusivity and the closed parameters of these identity constructions is also paired with the differing conceptions they have of who gets to be considered American, with the Patriots having particularly tight conceptions of an American identity. From these two groups we can see how polarization is growing between a more inclusive and communal based model that seeks to create a unifying identity based on shared faith versus a model that is based more on a tight conception of what is considered to be stereoptypically American.

The biggest obstacle of Interfaith and the Patriots working together to bring religion into politics is their different approaches and conceptualization of the place that religion has within society and democracy. Their choices were reflections of how they believed ordinary citizens should interact with the government. There is salience in the differences in interpretation because, while often times the groups had a similar shared ideals, the means they used to achieve their ends mattered because of their competing views on democracy. This is what is essentially preventing these groups from working together and proves the importance of interpretation in group activity relating to politics. What this tells us about polarization now and in the future is that it's not going to change any time soon. Polarization exists for a reason and the differences between Interfaith and the Tea Party group are purposeful differences.

The big obstacle i understood with interfaith and patriots working together to bring religion and politics is the different beliefs those two groups have. Create diversity in society and standards and no agreements on the beliefs because of course those two groups believe in different standards. Although i feel that those differences can also be overcome and create a unity within the two groups because they can agree on bringing religion in general into politics.

Bringing religion into politics can either pose as a positive or a negative to the two groups. It positively binds people together with the same political beliefs, yet it can negatively trigger discrimination and prejudice between opposing people.