Semi, Re: "the point that I Was Trying to make, that Religion and Greatness aren't necessarily bonded"
You forget what my original point was, which is that a Fundamental Moral set of Ideals and Greatness *are* necessarily bonded. I said from the beginning that this is not a religious debate, but you continue to hold on to that notion, and argue that religion should not be bonded to government. That's fine, but do you have a set of morals to take its place?
When I responded to your earlier comments to Jim (and thanks for gathering everything in one place, since it makes my response so much easier), I was trying to suggest that one good way to create a successful civilization is to start with a religious basis. It's not the only way, but our country did it that way. Given enough generations, the basis for thought becomes more "modern" and people's opinions change. Many Americans no longer consider themselves as "Under God", but what has stayed the same? Something has.
That something is the notion that we are still Free individuals who were Created Equal, and who are capable of making our own choices - unbound to any single monarch or ruler. "Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness", right? Throw "Justice" in there, too, for good measure. These are still the fundamental morals on which we base our society, and those are common whether you are a Christian American, a Moslem American, a Hindu American, or even an Atheist American.
Now, this isn't exactly the same thing that you are saying. You'd like to believe that religion inhibits community to interact along with morality, and you would like to abolish it from public record. You're not exactly calling religion "evil", like others who have responded on this forum, but you do believe it to be "unfit" and otherwise against our constitution. I believe differently.
Religion is more of a means. If you don't believe in it, fine. No one is forcing you to. Instead, I believe it's in the best interests of our nations for people of different creeds and faiths (or lack thereof) to explore the set of moral rules behind the Christian ideals of our country, and in doing so, apply those ideals to each person's own beliefs. Otherwise, if you refuse to acknowledge those ideals because you are offended by the religious foundation, then I don't think you can really build a solid structure to house our government and keep it stable.
Like others have pointed out, this is really a debate about Political Correctness, and the desire to make everyone equally happy. If you've ever paid attention to politics, you should already know that you can never make everybody completely happy. Every decision is based on pros and cons, and every conclusion has its consequences. Here in Oregon, farmers want more water from the rivers to grow their crops, but others want that water for the endangered salmon. You can't divide the water equally if there is a shortage, so one person has to go without. One person will be happy, and another will lobby for new legislation. There is a lot of similarities with the issue of the Pledge of Allegiance, too.
Some people are angered at the prospect of changing a 50 year tradition, while others are outraged at the prospect of introducing religion, no matter how small (two words), into the school system. For one group of people, they will get what they want, and for the other, tough luck. But fundamentally, has the government done what the ideals have set out to do? Has the government failed because "Liberty and Justice for ALL" wasn't served? That's the topic, it seems, that we are trying to debate, and I don't at all pretend that the answer is a simple one.
Instead, I am trying to get the proponents to consider the basis for the birth of our country, and to see things from a different perspective. Instead of complaining that the government has failed you, try to understand that which you are trying to condemn. Go through the proper legislation to make your own voice heard, and realize that you and the next guy can never perfectly agree on everything. It isn't the Government for You, it's the Government for the People, and as such, compromises need to be made. People want "Under God" to remain in the Pledge of Allegiance, so it's your choice to find a way for your child to either recite the Pledge and understand that it isn't promoting a Christian faith, but a Christian set of ideals, or simply find a way to excuse your child from saying the Pledge at the beginning of class. *That's* your choice, and *that's* how people get things done in our society. No amount of rhetoric from me is going to get you to accept the way the Pledge is; however, instead of accepting the Pledge, you should accept our nations desire to maintain the Pledge in its current form, and exercise your own Rights concerning it.
wbmw |
