I actually can't believe that this just came to me:
As a fundamental Christian, I always believed that we were right and everyone else was wrong (us vs. them)...so it was all right for us to condemn/judge others' wrongs. Therefore, it would be good ("right") if we gained power (supremacy) and "helped" the government to become in-line with our "right-God-fearing-beliefs". Because we were "right", there'd be no concern, once we were in power, of forcing 'our ways' upon others because 'our ways' were God's ways and that would assure that there would NOT be abuses. We'd love the sinner; while condemning the sin...which would cause us to have to act on God's behalf in how He has dictated we are to address sin.
Now that I have gone through the above (step-by-step), I realize that this way of thinking IS NO DIFFERENT than those of other religious extremists. I truly wonder if the religious "right" would like to assume such power/ supremacy over the populace when they see the abuses of history and those handed out daily in the name of religion -- yes, even theirs. The abuses of leaders who are fallen men. Who could be trusted to lead?* WE ARE THE US; what would happen to the "thems"?
What limits would be set on those responsible for enforcing God's laws?
Who exactly would be responsible for the final interpretation of God's laws?
Who would, without any question, know that their interpretation was exactly the interpretation God would have?
Sadly, I'm afraid there are a number of Christians who believe that they know (the Word/God's Will) exactly as God intends it to be known, that they would gladly accept such responsibility (dictatorship - as many others have throughout history and history has proven that they DID NOT know His exact intentions). Not at all unlike the leaders of existing extremists.
Doesn't this concern a good number of Fundamentalists?
*He is not here - yet.