>Okay, one more time...The principle is that there shall not be government establishment of religion. I object to the "entanglement" standard as being an overly broad ramification from the original, but I agree that " proselytizing " would be impermissible.<
Listen. Government establishes religion dang left and right in this country. Despite your standards “proselytizing” continues all the dang time. And by what set of mores? Certainly not often a Christian one.
>…Then, Achilles made a good point about how someone might readily draw out the implication that being a good citizen meant that one had to adhere to a monotheistic religion…<
Surely, and as I have said over and again, folk can draw religious conclusions from very many other things sanctioned by the state-- from the lack of God anywhere in the school system to the forced teaching of neo-Darwinism. There is no pat solution here, as our sensibilities and belief structures are quite different. Someone will be disappointed whatever solution is chosen, this, on the basis of the belief that the system is sanctioning religious doctrine. You may disagree with others' position here, thinking them unreasonable, but this certainly will not make you right. Your forced polytheistic solution causes nothing but the same problem the Ten or “safe-sex” or neo-Darwinism causes.
So then, if folk cannot live as they choose, and should a person sincerely think himself ill used, he is left with but one option: to try and force the system to his way, even if it means the destruction of others, this, to protect his moral/religious legacy. I personally think there is a better way. Get the feds the heck outta the schools.
>…, at which point, upon consideration, I amended my policy suggestion and said that I thought that it ought to be mandatory…(snip)<
And here is where you force all people to accept your polytheistic ethic. I may not be offended by it, because I know your thrust, but a remarkable number of other people simply will not care for this solution regardless of its purpose.
>Saying that it is a local issue is insufficient, since the principle has by now been applied at all levels of government, and for good reason, I think...<
Then there is no need for you to support sending abortion back to the states, since the constitutional right to abortion (a legal position that has about the same constitutional support as does the constitutional support of Atheism) has also by now been applied at all levels of government. The truth is, there is no Constitutional principle by which the federal government can control education, and neither is there a valid principle allowing federal control of abortion.
My saying this is a local issue is quite sufficient, as it allows the people freedom to live their lives as they choose. Under your system, everyone is potentially forced to your brand of polytheism, and for many this will be no better than our current system.
>....No one is forced to be an Atheist. I do not even understand how you can make so categorical an assertion...<
Dear me, Neocon, I have all this time been saying to you that folk are being forced to act like Atheists contrary to what they truly are, and you claim I have here been arguing that they are being forced to be Atheists? Mercy. There are some folk in this country who are seriously defined by religion. Indeed for some of them it is, for example, important to their religious life and identity to pray five times a day. For other groups it may be important to pray several times a day corporately. As it stands currently in the school system, they must simply act as if their gods do not even exist. This is Atheism.
>....Why is there hostility to Civic Religion, which may be characterized as the AA version of religion: belief in a higher power, one that calls one to reformation and will help one to accomplish it? All else is sectarian, and properly beyond the pale of government sponsorship...<
Because there are folk for whom the “AA version of religion” is utter hogwash and unacceptable. To allow this religion to teach our children will not solve the problem. It will simply replace the religion of Atheism with a bland religious stew. The very moment your religion says anything to children, it will offend some people and the message implicit in its pronouncements will be that “these gods are state sanctioned, and here is what they have to say about morality.” Even if you have no such religious stew in the schools and yet teach children, especially morality, then there is a religious message implicit in the teaching – “God has no place here. In fact, He is capable of being ignored. Nevertheless the state has some moral guidelines you must follow…” No matter how you slice it, this is pure Atheism my friend. The dang federal government, the powers of which are specified in the U.S. Constitution, should not be in the business of preaching any dang religion at all. The only way to keep the government from preaching religion in public school is to get it out of the friggin schools. It has no authority to be there in the first place.
>....No one agrees with every use to which public funds are put…<
If the feds were to engage in Constitutionally valid undertakings, far more people would agree than they do currently. It is very difficult to argue against roads and national infrastructure. Religion makes the thing a whole heck of a lot trickier.
>, and we rarely allow them to opt out. Vietnam protesters who withheld their taxes went to jail; no one gets a rebate because they dislike "In God We Trust" being on the coins; one cannot ask for a dime back because one disapproves of Ken Starr, or disapproves of Madeleine Albright...<
Very well then. You wanna throw religion in the mix and force people to your brand of it, then folks who disagree with you will have no other choice but to fight to wrest control of government religion from you, just as they would fight for their positions on all these other matters you have listed. Since you somehow feel you must force some kind of religion on folks, then their only recourse is to make dang sure you will be forcing their religion on the country. This is why religious wars must be fought in the public schools. There is but one way to avoid them. Get the dang feds outta deah. They don't belong in the first dang place.
>....No one is forced to atheism.<
They are too.
>People of distinct cultures and religions inhabit a common public area. What is so wrong with that?...<
Nothing at all, but instead of the federal government telling them how they should live their religious lives, they should be allowed to determine it for themselves.
>....We do not fund National Atheism, and should not fund National Christianity...<
We do indeed fund National Atheism. The very moment you pay for a system that definitely answers the question of our origins and does not allow even the consideration of God's potential input in the alleged process, you have funded National Atheism. The very moment you pay for a system that teaches morality and does not allow even the consideration that God is the origin of morality, then you have funded National Atheism. The very moment you pay for a system that issues grants to folk so that they may later produce anti-religious works of “art,” but which system does not allow the funding of pro-religious works, you fund National Atheism. You fund National Atheism all the dang time, and those for whom it is repugnant are forced to pay for it by threat of law. You call it what you want. It is nothing but National Atheism.
>....I still think that everyone can be adequately accommodated, but if not, I do not think the solution is "community control", but privatization... <
I do not think everyone can be adequately accommodated, despite the use of privatisation. You see, many folks are happy with the system as it is, and would be unhappy with any change. My system would, after some initial difficulty, satisfy the greatest number of people, and the quality of education would increase remarkably.
I think I will have to let you have the last word on this issue. I do not think you will be changed here, and neither will I. (and this is just fine - grin. Gotta scoot.) |
