Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,906 Year: 4,163/9,624 Month: 1,034/974 Week: 361/286 Day: 4/13 Hour: 1/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   A Test for Intelligent Design Proponents
randman 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4928 days)
Posts: 6367
Joined: 05-26-2005


Message 40 of 115 (263886)
11-28-2005 6:49 PM
Reply to: Message 38 by crashfrog
11-28-2005 6:35 PM


Re: False idea of Separation of Church from State
Isn't it the effects that go along with that that the framers tried to prevent? Isn't it the effects, not the statement, that do the harm? And if you have the effects, what does it matter if the government avoids the appearance of a state religion?
The protections of the first amendment go way beyond a declaration of state religion; they protect the citizenry against government implementing a state religion under any name.
I think the new separation concept really is the opposite of what you think it is here. What we are seeing now is the enshrinement and codification of secularism as the official state religion in all but name only, and that's the opposite of the intent of the first amendment to ban prohibition of religious expression.
The idea is not that religion per se is dangerous or bad, but that no one should have to adopt certain beliefs; that there should not be a national religious establishment should include banning any national ideology, as ideology and religion in this regard as essentially the same thing. The State should not be imposing beleif systems on the population.
But the way secularists have banned public religious expressions, they are essentially making secularism and hostility towards religion the de facto State religion/ideology, and that's what is wrong.
Religious people, Christians and otherwise, don't want the State to force beliefs on people, except the secularists, and they want secularism rigourously maintained and all religious expression except secularism banned from public events.
This message has been edited by randman, 11-28-2005 06:49 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 38 by crashfrog, posted 11-28-2005 6:35 PM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 42 by crashfrog, posted 11-28-2005 6:57 PM randman has replied

  
randman 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4928 days)
Posts: 6367
Joined: 05-26-2005


Message 47 of 115 (263905)
11-28-2005 7:19 PM
Reply to: Message 42 by crashfrog
11-28-2005 6:57 PM


Re: False idea of Separation of Church from State
Is Confucianism a religion? Religion can entail more than worship of a Creator.
But more to the point, the aspect of religion that is a concern of the first amendment entails beliefs, and since you are arguing "purpose", it's pretty darn clear that ideology fits the same concerns.
Prohibiting public officials from religious participation in a public capacity is prohibiting religious expression. YOu said so yourself. You feel only secularism can be expressed with your tax dollars, and presumable mine too. So the Christian should have to pay to promote secularism, and that's OK, but any entaglement the other way around is wrong.
Gotcha.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 42 by crashfrog, posted 11-28-2005 6:57 PM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 48 by crashfrog, posted 11-28-2005 7:31 PM randman has replied

  
randman 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4928 days)
Posts: 6367
Joined: 05-26-2005


Message 49 of 115 (263913)
11-28-2005 7:41 PM
Reply to: Message 48 by crashfrog
11-28-2005 7:31 PM


Re: False idea of Separation of Church from State
Fortunately, there are people in the world that are beginning to understand secularism is it's own religion. In Scotland, for instance, non-Christian clerics are calling for more Christian beliefs in education to combat the influence of secularism. They are aware that the real threat to pluralism stems from secularism, not Christianity.
HINDU and Muslim leaders are urging the Kirk to boost religious teaching in schools in order to counter the "secular society".
David Lacy, the Moderator of the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland, said senior clerics from other faiths were now telling him to offer a more "strident" view of Christian beliefs, in order to provide young people with more moral teaching.
The non-Christian leaders added that the Kirk had been "too concerned" with being inclusive at the expense of laying down its own beliefs in schools.
The surprising calls come with religious communities preparing to mark Scottish Inter Faith Week from today, in which the links between the country's main faiths will be celebrated.
...
But he said pressure to assert more Christianity in Scotland was now coming from other faiths, following a meeting of religious leaders from all faiths earlier this month.
He said: "This point was being made about the need to counter secular culture. We were being told that we should be calling for religious observance and religious education far more stridently in schools.
"This is a Christian country, they told us, and others are happy to live within a Christian country."
He added: "They wanted us to be demanding more Christian education in schools and that we were far too quick to make room for other religions.
"Their point was that youngsters often came away from school with nothing at all and that we should be pushing our own beliefs more. That surprised me. I am not sure that they are right.
"We want to be inclusive but I hadn't previously considered that we might want to be far more stridently Christian for their sakes.
"I am not sure about it. Multiculturalism is at least encouraging people to come out of their shells and I wouldn't want that momentum to stop."
Leaders from the Hindu and Muslim faiths said last night that they backed the teaching of Christian values, because of what they saw as the need to promote all religions.
Home | The Scotsman
This message has been edited by randman, 11-28-2005 07:42 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 48 by crashfrog, posted 11-28-2005 7:31 PM crashfrog has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024