Important Announcement

See here for an important message regarding the community which has become a read-only site as of October 31.

Post Reply
Page 8 of 8  •  Prev 1 ... 3 4 5 6 7 8
Switch to Forum Live View Obama: U.S. Not A Christian Nation
9 years ago  ::  Sep 29, 2009 - 12:46PM #71
Posts: 19,669

Sep 29, 2009 -- 9:14AM, Heretic_for_Christ wrote:

This is a key tactic of the religious right--whining that their rights as Americans are being taken away. What rights? Freedom of religion? How does the government refraining from taking any position on religion infringe on anyone's rights? Quite the contrary, every time the government does take a position on religion, it is infringing on some people's sensibilities if not their rights.

For example, fundamentalists like to claim that atheism is a religion. That is bizarre and self-contradictory, but if we accept that as true, then any governmental recognition of God, no matter how non-denominational, is an act of disestablishment of the religion of atheism. Let me repeat: It is an act by which the government officially disestablishes a religion. Do any of those true believers want government to have the power to disestablish a religion? Or are they such hypocrites that they are okay with disestablishing "wrong" religions, as long as "right" religions are supported? Or, just maybe, is that claim, that atheism is a religion, utterly meaningless?

Some hard-core atheists want all of the common mentions of God eliminated from any governmental place or product, including inscriptions on coins and on governmental buildings. For better or worse, that is not going to happen, but it is interesting to note the basis of the courts' rulings on such cases to date: such routine mentions of God do not violate the First Amendment's establishment clause because they are not really religious messages, but cultural traditions. And the fundamentalists cheered their victory--yet their "victory" hinged on a ruling that rendered such mentions of God violations of the Bibilical commandment that we shall not take God's name in a vain and worthless manner.

Did they get that? Did they realize--or care--that their victory meant that the only way God's name could be mentioned was if it had no religious significance, if such mention was vain and worthless, if such mention is a violation of the commandment? No, they didn't care--they won the legal right to keep God's name worthless. And why should they care? They don't really believe in God except insofar as God is mentioned in the true object of their faith, the Bible. What they want is to turn America into a Christian nation, and claiming it always has been a Christian nation is the huge lie they tell over and over, to cover up the fact that they do not want to "restore" America but change it radically from what it has always been--a secular nation, most of whose citizens happen to be religious, and mostly Christian.


your use of the word fundamentalist here is way over broad; there are a few minority Re-constructionists that fit the general description-I '' quote you from above-

Some hard-core atheists want all of the common mentions of God eliminated from any governmental place or product, including inscriptions on coins and on governmental buildings. For better or worse, that is not going to happen

just substitute atheist with Re-constructionist and follow the the thought through by enforcing Biblical doctrine as law of the land-and end it with but that is not going to happen

there are hard-core radicals on both sides-they are both minorities-nether one is getting their way


the majority of those who state that "atheism is a religion" are using as a short-hand to describe the fervor of the aforementioned hard-core atheists

you are much more likely to have heard (especialliy in the 80's) that Secular humanism is a religion

and you kind of missed the main thrust of the 9th Circuit decision and followed down a valid by minor rabbit trail-its not so much that certain phrases are empty and meaningless as they are reflective of the State Civil Religion and are therefore exempt

Non Quis, Sed Quid
Quick Reply
9 years ago  ::  Sep 29, 2009 - 9:30PM #72
Posts: 325

Sep 28, 2009 -- 10:29PM, Vistronic wrote:

Sep 27, 2009 -- 9:07PM, MysticWanderer wrote:

Vis, don't get your knickers n a bunch over C.E & B.V.E.  think of it as simple courtesy to those who do not share your religious background and belief.  While B.C and A.D. were fine in an academic world pretty much limited to Christendom that is no longer the case.  The entire world needs a single dating system for ease of communication.  Consider yourself fortunate that because of the Eurocentricity still in effect year 1 was chosen from the Christian calendar rather then the Jewish or Islamic calendar.  I do not knowingly wish my Jewish or Muslim friends a Merry Christmas but rather a Happy Hanukkah or Blessed Eid or other appropriate holiday.  Anything less than that is frankly rude and certainly not the consideration that Jesus showed others when He walked among us.

How do you reconcile this with your faith?

I know you didn't ask me, but I have to ask you, what is there to reconcile? MW is wishing, to a person who celebrates Hannukkah or Eid, that they will enjoy their holiday. It's along the same lines as wishing someone a Happy Mother's Day even if you are not a mother, and no longer have a mother, and therefore do not celebrate Mother's Day. Or someone who is Canadian wishing you a Happy Fourth of July, even though they themselves do not celebrate it as a holiday. Or wishing someone a Happy Birthday even if their birthday is not the same as yours.


Shared pain is lessened, shared joy increased. Thus do we refute entropy. - Mike Callahan, Callahan's Crosstime Saloon
Quick Reply
Page 8 of 8  •  Prev 1 ... 3 4 5 6 7 8
    Viewing this thread :: 0 registered and 1 guest
    No registered users viewing

    Beliefnet On Facebook