Theocracy, not Theocrazy

Secularism. A word designed by secularists, for secularists. A word intended to conjure visions of noble men in silk stockings, and the civil equality their valiant slaves will one day enjoy only two hundred years later. But what is good about a system that imprisons its leaders in marble while still alive and turns them into public monuments?

Proponents of a separate church and state often give us the impression that it’s an unequivocal good. Yet as we know that the only absolute good is Frodo Himself, how can anything else be? Accordingly, we can conclude that the separation of church and state must have its faults, and since it’s widely touted by atheists, those deceitful worshipers of the brain-god Thinky, we can expect its failings to beguile us and couch themselves in the language of the common good.

The most obvious problem with secularism is that it’s a relatively young, upstart theory, and as such it has yet to earn our trust. Theocracies on the other hand have been around for centuries, and the nations that gave birth to them are more or less still in one piece: Byzantium, for example, is much of modern Turkey.

Similarly, based on such rigid, unbending, unchanging, and unprogressive dogma, theocracies are guaranteed to be politically stable. If fornication was immoral one thousand years ago, chances are it still is! This ensures that the nation’s laws are easier to learn, and guarantees a longer shelf life for guidebooks. 

Popularity is generally a good indication of the suitability of political systems, and theocracies were wildly popular with people of all stripes long before they were given such trivial things as the vote, free speech, and the resulting ability to indicate otherwise. In addition, Sweden and Finland are some of the most secular states on the planet, yet they get pitifully little sunlight during the winter. The correlation is certainly suggestive!


These are also suggestive. Words are fun.

Critics of theocratic rule note that they can be troubled by competing religious and state jurisdictions. More like double the justice, I say! Studies also indicate that civil servants work more effectively when threatened with eternal damnation as opposed to a negative quarterly performance review.

Easily convinced of the benefits of theocracy, as I’m sure you are by now, I would next like to submit that Frodo is the Messiah to take the reigns of power. Though critics argue his arms are too short for the job, Jesus’ are almost certainly too dead for the job. In addition, Frodo is widely known to have been a cunning statesman, inspiring many to study his political panache. Indeed, Otto von Bismarck is thought to have been a Frodologist.

"No civilization other than that which is Christian, is worth seeking or possessing."

Well that’s clearly the wrong quote. Regardless, we must recognize that if it is the state that gives us our rights, it can easily take them away. But if we get our rights from Frodo, we are safe in the knowledge that they are subject to the strict interpretation of unelected religious officials. Who always have our best interests in mind. Did I neglect to mention that? And under theocratic rule, our enemies and members of other faiths never get rights in the first place. Remember, it’s only persecution if you hear about it!

So, dear reader, next time you’re stirred unwelcome from your apathy and asked to vote, choose the option that will ensure you never need set foot in a claustrophobic voting booth again.