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.

Politics : Bill Clinton Scandal - SANITY CHECK -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Johannes Pilch who wrote (55761)	7/12/1999 9:36:00 AM
From: Neocon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 67261

I do not think that the finer points of local vs. federal will matter in a controversy like this... ...Attempting a degree of neutrality is not the same as forcing atheism. Since I think that too strict a separation is both unrealistic and undesirable, since it creates too much ill- feeling and fractures the cultural milieu, I would only try for the kind of neutrality implied in the concept "civic religion"... ...I agree that if there were too much offense, the minority ought to be at liberty to "catch a smoke", but I think that few would bother under the regimen that prevailed until recently, where there was a rotation of ministers, and non-sectarian prayers were employed... ...I agree that there ought to be more parental control, and that the schools should avoid teaching certain things which are offensive to the religious background of the family. However, since my standard was "when does it come too close to being establishment or proselytizing, and thus violate a constitutional principle?", I confess that anything promulgated by the government with a strong and readily drawn out implication that an American is expected to believe in monotheistic religion offends the standard. If there is an issue in a particular school, therefore, I suggested that the various constituencies have the opportunity to have brief texts from their scriptures, with the same general purpose (admonition to decency), posted alongside the commandments. I think that this is a reasonable solution... ...On the issue of moving: no one should be forced to sell property because of such things. I think that if some want to retreat, like the Amish or Hasidim, and establish communities where the exclusive character is explicit from the beginning, that is fine, but no one should be able to gain political strength in an ordinary municipality and do anything he wants on a "like it or leave" basis....