To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.off-topic.debateOpen lugnet.off-topic.debate in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Off-Topic / Debate / 27847
27846  |  27848
Subject: 
Re: Newdow in the News (again)
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.off-topic.debate
Date: 
Mon, 19 Jun 2006 16:44:19 GMT
Viewed: 
2105 times
  
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, John Neal wrote:

  
   Forgive me, but that’s coming from the position of one who believes. If every coin were stamped with the slogan “There Is No God,” would you be as receptive to the argument that the message is secular in nature and in use? Every piece of currency that I encounter is a reminder that the government has formally declared me to be an outsider, based upon my lack of belief.

But that would be to deny the history of this country, which was founded by religious people, Dave!

And slave-owners, and people who unleashed biological warfare upon the indigenous population and ignored every treaty with them besides. Why don’t we commemorate these cornerstones of our history as well?

   There are many historical religious references that are completely benign, until some jerk like Newdow trumps up bogus persecution charges.

Newdow may or may not be a jerk, but you seem to be allowing that possibility to taint the validity of his claims. Remember--the Supremes rejected his Pledge case on a technicality, rather than on a lack of merit. And now that Dubya has secured his far-right majority on the Court (in exact accordance with decades-old far-right fundamentalist agenda), we can expect that they won’t give Newdow a neutral treatment any time soon.

   Honestly, do we really need to go and find every single religious reference and wipe it out??? Change city names? “Los Angeles”, “St. Paul”, “San Francisco”??? It’s just crazy.

That’s the fallacy of the slippery slope, of course. City names, and idioms like “good-bye,” are part of the vernacular and are not a deliberate endorsement of religion by Congress. These do commemorate our history. The emblazoning of “in God we trust” on all currency is an explicit endorsement of religion by the Federal government.

   The effect, however, comes off as a direct attack on Christians. And they are fighting back.

Oh, come on. Christians (not you personally, but as a group-in-the-media) portray themselves and are portrayed as a persecuted minority, when in fact they are the overwhelming supermajority and have held a stranglehold on the culture and government for well over two centuries.

   Simply because one is not forced by the government to ever say (the Pledge), I would think.

That’s not correct. If I wish to say the official, state-endorsed Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of my (secular by charter) nation, then I am forced to swear fealty to God.

   But it comes from the people with the understanding that ultimately it came from the Creator-- that our rights are inalienable, even if a government of the people, for the people, and by the people try and take them away.

That’s an assumption, and it’s irrelevant in any case. Because the Constitution makes no reference to the Creator, and because it explicitly attributes its authority to the will of the people, you have no basis for arguing otherwise. Extraneous explanatory documents (such as personal correspondence) are likewise irrelevant, because they carry no legal weight and because we both know that there are many documents in which Jefferson et al argued for an inviolable wall between church and state.

  
   Well, I’m sure you’d recognize that to be a statement of faith. Many factors have contributed to the success of our system, such as naturally protected borders, abundant resources, cultural and ethnic diversity, blind luck, etc. etc. etc. If we want to throw a personal (though not national) belief in God onto that same pile, sure, why not? But it’s a mistake to identify it as the sole or primary cause for our success (such as it is)...

Many countries have naturally protected borders, resources, etc, and have not achieved what we have. Blind luck is hardly the reason.

Not the reason, perhaps, but surely one of the reasons. And could you name a few of those other countries? I can think of two: Russia and China, both of which have histories far older than ours and both of which have enjoyed legendary prosperity in that time. Check back on the US in a thousand years or so, and we’ll talk about how freedom and belief in God have made all the difference.

   Freedom is the reason. We have excelled because we have embraced freedom. Period. My only point is that it was religious people, for the most part, who figured that one out.

You’ve got to be kidding! Our nation’s founding documents were products of The Enlightenment. In fact, I would say that we’ve prospered in spite of religion, rather than because of it.

Dave!



Message is in Reply To:
  Re: Newdow in the News (again)
 
(...) I would question your characterization of two of our governmental branches being under control of fundamentalists. They may be under conservative control, but that doesn't mean that they will kowtow to the fundamental right. I am not in favor (...) (18 years ago, 16-Jun-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

14 Messages in This Thread:




Entire Thread on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact
    

Custom Search

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR