Defending the Truth

I think that we shouldn't be inflaming people's differences in order to insert religious values into government. Our founding fathers had the right idea as deists. I totally understand the meaning of the word theocracy, and that is indeed what our religious right would have us become. Have you ever heard of Chuck Colson? There are many things that I could tell you about that Washington originated Christian charitable organization, from my own personal experience. This country was founded on liberty and freedom, not politics based on religious beliefs, or the religious beliefs of one religion.

Quote:

You will learn that freedom is a highly subjective concept. Americans may be brainwashed into thinking they have the most freedoms of any nation but this is highly debateable.

We Americans aren't brainwashed about our freedoms. We know how our country was formed and how it is maintained. But we did try to ensure that the people would not be tyrannised by one group of people. Be it a monarch or a religion. Religion is just like any other special interest group because that is what it is, a special interest. You know very well how this country was started, and that it was about protecting people from oppression from religion and government. We certainly aren't willing to change everything that this country was based on, and turn it into another dictatorship, albeit a religious dictatorship.

It certainly isn't subordinated to other special interests. And those other special interests you mention are regularly brought into the public's attention by the religious special interests themselves.

And I can't speak for other Americans, but I know what the Constitution says, and I know how we maintain our form of government. It seems the religious special interests, don't. They wish to alter the Constitution and insert their own ideas about government into it. And the President does as well, being that he is a self confessed born again Christian, and has called the Constitution "just a goddamned piece of paper." And he took an oath to uphold and defend it.

Are you familiar with US politics gary?? "Advancing Christian rights/values" is primarily what the (formerly small-gov't Goldwater conservative) Republican Party has essentially been reduced to. And since the political empowerment of Christian conservatives, and since Jimmy Carter, even Democrats shake in their boots if they don't pledge they will subscribe to such values in office.

You're right that the influence of religious doctrine and politics are inseparable. However, the separation of church and state refers to an institutional separation following two primary principles, that (a) there be no official 'religious test' for offices of government and that (b) the tax payer should not be forced to furnish their contributions to the propagation of any one religion or denomination.

Can't speak for waitingtables, but of course I would. But I'm pretty sure you could already deduce that.

I understand very well. And I wouldn't have a problem with an atheist as the president, or a Wicca, or a baptist, or a Jew, or a Buddhist, or a catholic, etc. etc. The problem only occurs when one cannot separate between their own personal religious philosophy, and the need to indoctrinate every one around them into their religious beliefs. That is the problem. Many of the founders were deists and believed in their religion on a personal basis, they would never have sanctioned faith based government funded charities.

And Gary, I do believe that if the born agains were allowed enough power in government, they would bring forth a theocracy, and that would be the end of religious freedom in this country. And a great many other freedoms as well.