Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Let's Talk About Our Feelings!!! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: epicure who wrote (40832)	6/19/1999 2:35:00 AM
From: greenspirit	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 108807

The question really is, why not simply be pro-religion, or no religion without emphasizing the Christian roots of America? First, it would not be historically accurate. The founding fathers were not an amalgam of Shintoists, Jews, Muslims, Christians, and pagans. Our founding fathers were Christians just as no one disputes that the founders of Saudi Arabia were Muslims. Second, it is important to understand that different religions are incompatible. When the British ruled in India, they had to choose between imposing their beliefs (Christian) and allowing widows to be burned on their husbands pyres in the name of the religious ritual of suttee. There was no middle ground possible. Sometimes in life we just have to choose who we really are. This is as true for groups as it is for individuals. Nobody would contend that a tennis club should also provide equal facilities for mud wrestlers. Its members may dispute whether to play tennis on indoor or outdoor courts, but debating the fundamental of the club would spell doom. Using an anarchistic view, any law would be found in violation of some religion. I'll bet some obtuse religions believe having sex with their children and sacrificing them to their Gods is acceptable. And even killing their third daughter or something. The same holds true for health-care to children. Should we allow parents to prevent their children from receiving inoculations because it's against their religion? And should we allow widows to be burned on their husbands pyres in the name of the religious ritual of suttee?? These kinds of moralistic decision based on the foundation of Judeo-Christian principles lie at the root of this country. There is also a fallacy in thinking that religion can be removed from all events and that the results will be a benign neutrality. Since nature abhors a vacuum, the religions of moral relativism and secular humanism will simply replace the religions that were expelled. From the very beginning of our country it was perfectly evident to all, that Christmas was to be a national holiday. Nobody argued that the post office or other government offices should be open on Christmas for fear of inconveniencing or offending non-Christians. We were founded as a Christan nation, and took Judeo-Christian principles so much for granted that the founding fathers saw little reason to state the obvious. And dispite the fact that Judaism and Christianity have totally differing theologies, there is still one Judeo-Christian ethic. Which is to say, how people order their lives and societies, how they organize their families and behave toward one another turns out to be more similar than different. The origins, legal system, and moral sense of America are entirely Judeo-Christian. Philosophically speaking, an atheistic American is a contradiction in terms. We call them secular, they do not believe in God, not because they are wicked or evil, but because they're honest, and would rather walk with the unbelievers than sit hypocritically with people of faith. Many of these people have excellent character, and make great neighbors. But they are living upon the accumulated spiritual capital of Judeo-Christian civilization, and at the same time they deny the principles upon which the ethics of this country were founded and grew. In Jefferson's view "if we deny the existence of God who gave us the life, how can we live by the liberty He gave us at the same time"? Our coins are imprinted with "In God we Trust". And it is upon the Holy Bible that the President takes his oath of office. To redefine our cultural heritage, would require fundamentally destroying that which represents the foundation of this country. We obviously wouldn't be able to accept our two greatest documents. Namely, the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence. So what do we cling to? A new "Secular Humanistic Constitution"? That's the truly scary road "secular humanists" have been pushing us down for the last 35 years. Michael