tool, i found a great source that could answer this question. it's focused on the uk as example. i actually posted some of it in another thread where someone brought up the idea of christian politics and separation of church and state.
The Truth about Westminster book by Dr Patrick Dixon
Chapter 12: Christians in Politics
" In the nineteenth century . . . Christians saw slavery abolished, the hours and conditions of work for women and children transformed, employment exchanges introduced, orphanages and leper colonies built and staffed. We can and we must do it again!' Clive Calver (1949-)
'Politics is not the art of the possible. It consists of choosing between the disastrous and the unpalatable.' J.K. Galbraith (1908-)...
A Christian view of government
There are many faiths represented in multi-cultural Britain, and I have no doubt that followers of these will have perspectives to bring to help Parliament recover a reputation for integrity. However, the major religion in Britain is still Christianity So what is a Christian view of government?
Jesus himself taught his disciples to respect authority even if, as was generally perceived then, it was corrupt or morally deficient or lacking in spiritual understanding. The disciples were told to pay taxes and to 'render unto Caesar what is due to Caesar and unto God what is due to God'. 246 While he challenged religious hypocrisy and corruption, and was very outspoken, he did nothing to suggest that his disciples should ignore the government of the day.
Jesus was prepared however to commit an act of angry violence against property as part of a wider protest against corruption, when he overturned the tables of the moneylenders in the Temple courts. He was also prepared to act aggressively towards individuals, threatening them with violence, for the same reason. We are told that he made a whip out of some cords and began threatening them with it in such a way that they fled from the area.
Jesus was abrasive and 'rude' in the language he used against religious leaders (Pharisees), and used collective language so strong that in today's culture it would verge on the libellous if printed in reference to prominent national religious leaders.
'You have neglected the more important matters of the law justice, mercy and faithfulness ... Blind guides ... hypocrites ... full of greed and self-indulgence . . . blind ... snakes, brood of vipers ... how will you escape being condemned ... I am sending you prophets and wise men ... some of them you will kill, others crucify ... you make [people] twice as much sons of hell as you are.' This is extremely inflammatory language to say the least, bordering on accusing certain people of being murderous as well as being morally corrupt.
Scarcely a generation later, the apostle Paul wrote to the church in Rome, suffering under a tyrannical dictatorship and severely persecuted, that authority in all its forms was God given and to be respected. 'It is necessary to submit to the authorities,' and later, 'If you owe taxes, pay taxes. 248 However, Peter committed an act of civil disobedience when he refused a court order to stop preaching in public places, and was arrested for it. Even afterwards he again defied a court ban.
The picture then is one of great respect for government as it God-ordained expression of his authority, part of the structure of a healthy society, and of a healthy church, with disobedience as a last resort in extreme circumstances where a 'higher authority' is being violated (abuse of the Temple area, ban on preaching)...
Christian policies - can they be defined?
However, once a Christian is in Parliament, or in office, there are other urgent questions. The complexities of modern life are so great, and change so rapidly, that a policy hammered out today may become irrelevant tomorrow.
At the most basic level governments raise money through taxes or borrowing, and spend money on public services or on reallocation of wealth through benefits and rebates of various kinds. The areas of controversy are therefore:
1. How taxes are raised.
2. How much is borrowed.
3. How the 'cake' is sliced in expenditure between Departments
4. How efficiency and effectiveness are maintained.
The fiercest and most bitter of arguments can be over these four things. However, it can be hard to justify one approach over another in terms of Christian values. In almost every case the debate is not over an absolute, but over subtle differences.
For example, what proportion of the nation's wealth should be taxed and spent by government? What proportion should be income tax or other taxes? What should be the level of 'social taxes' such as a tax on fuel, petrol or alcohol? How much should a government raise through borrowing, risking pressure on exchange rates and interest rate changes, affecting the whole economy?
If more is spent on education and health than can be raised in taxes or borrowing, what government funded jobs in other areas are axed in order to do it? The most vexing questions of all are related to the economy: do we grow a large, low tax economy or a small high tax economy? What will be the effect of - say - a one point cut in interest rates, or of cutting hack on road building to pay more teachers?
Efficiency and effectiveness are values that all would support, but how do we achieve them? There are many ways of running a state health service. There are many ways of managing local schools, or of providing other public services. At the end of the day, while we can define certain principles which are Christian, it is not easy to define detailed policy from the Bible or from the historic teachings of the church. The reality is that in an imperfect world every option can All have problems attached to it, and there may be no 'ideal' solution that is practical in the foreseeable future.
One may argue that such things as extremes of wealth and poverty are incompatible with Christian values. But how do you define poverty? Until recently, poverty was defined as having an income less than a quarter of the national average, but that definition means that exactly the same level of poverty will always be with us, however affluent or poor our society becomes.
Should poverty be defined in cross-national terms? Is my neighbour a peasant farmer in a small tribal community with no running water? To whom is my lot to be compared in the ' need' stakes? The Christian community may be able perhaps to find a greater degree of consensus over issues such as Sunday trading, but even then there is debate and uncertainty.
Christian principles - a guiding factor
Those in politics face these sorts of issues every day. A secondary position to take is that because it is impossible to write a 'Christian Manifesto' for every aspect of government action, one should rely more on underlying Christian principles, about which most if not all Christians are in agreement. These principles might be such things as respect for the individual, respect for human life, basic human rights, personal responsibility, fairness, justice, compassion, mercy, tolerance of others' views, good stewardship of the earth's resources.
We have already seen a set of principles governing personal conduct in politics, in the previous chapter. These are based very largely on Christian values such as integrity, honesty, loving not only our neighbour but also our enemies, judging others as we ourselves would want to be judged, caring about others as we would want to be cared for if we were in a similar situation..."
___________________
I fix ugly logos / inBlogs.org Ad-Free Aggregator
April 18th, 2005 
