Subject:
|
Re: One nation, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Tue, 2 Jul 2002 17:10:10 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
6263 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, John Neal writes:
> Interesting that the same Amendment that you cite condemning his "endorsment"
> of religion protects his right to do so. But I think you are applying it
> incorrectly in this case. The First Amendment prohibits *congress* from
> establishing religion (ie through law). Since the excutive branch is not
> empowered to create law, it by definition couldn't "establish" religion.
Hmm. Good point. Still, it's risky for the leader of the nation to take
a stance on religion when there's a very real chance of being exclusionary
on that basis.
> I'm not sure a President of the United States *has* a private life while he is
> in office-- just ask Willy Clinton;-)
Oh, he had a private life--the problem is that everyone knew about it!
> Yes, I think at this point it becomes opinion, and the highest opinion in the
> land gets to decide.
(Well, that's MINE, of course...)
> I still think Jefferson's mentioning of a Creator in the DoI is a salient
> argument that such language *doesn't* constitute establishment.
My view regarding the DOI remains that it is a statement of secession from
England but isn't any kind of document of internal, national law for the US,
and certainly does nothing to establish policy beyond national sovereignty.
The fact The Constitution refers to it doesn't seem like a real endorsement,
so I don't see that the DOI could be any kind of State establishment of
religion, even if it attempted to be so. For that reason I just don't know
that it's a relevant document when discussing the literal or figurative
meaning of the language.
> Personally, I think that children *need* some sort of assurances of a God in
> those type of situations. Atheism is a pretty brave and mature attitude to
> hold and I would say above kids' intellects (as if theism and atheism weren't
> far beyond our own;-) Teach them about a God when they are young; let them
> eschew those beliefs when they are old enough to think for themselves if they
> wish (that's just my feelings about the subject-- please spare the tar and
> feathering)
Heh. That sounds rather like a justification for telling kids about Santa
Claus or the Easter Bunny! 8^)
> I still don't have an adequate reason why an atheist should act "good"...
Umberto Eco gives a *FANTASTIC* discussion in the last essay of the book
"Belief or Non-Belief," but I don't want to butcher his articulation of it
by trying to quote from memory. Another good piece is by Alan Dershowitz
and can be found here:
http://www.beliefnet.com/frameset.asp?pageLoc=/story/92/story_9263_1.html&boardID=27945
(sorry if the link got wrapped). Dershowitz is kind of tough on martyrs in
his essay, but his point is valid, and I've often mused upon the same point.
Dave!
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
395 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
