Matt07924 One can always argue the intricacies of policy — that wasn’t my point so much as to say that it’s not accurate to say that Christianity is apolitical. This was a response to your saying the civil rights movement was good because it dealt with bad actions caused by the state. I said, well, that’s political since politics is the art/science of governing (what the state does.) I think it should be illegal to fire someone because they are black, or left-handed, or gay. The first of these two (skin color, handednesss)are settled law, the latter is not. I think it is humane, let alone Christian, to protect people from being fired from jobs because they are black, left-handed, or gay. The more complicated question of how such laws apply to religious institutions who have beliefs like “being black is bad” or “being left handed is bad” or “being gay is bad” is something that gets worked out over time —often when when the religious institutions change or enough people think a certain kind of discrimination is intolerable that it gets outlawed even in religious institutions. But the details of that is not my fundamental point in response to your argument that Christianity should be “apolitical”. What did you think of my fundamental point saying I think it is, in fact, political (concerned with matters that are enforced by the state) though agreeing that it should not be “partisan” in the sense of Christianity being identified with one political party, and especially not “my party right or wrong”.