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 : Should God be replaced? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Sun Tzu who wrote (21589)	7/22/2005 2:59:12 AM
From: Greg or e	Respond to of 28931

"do you believe 'Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.'?" LOL! I'm like, a Canadian eh? Unlike some of my fellow countrymen, I have a great deal of respect and fondness toward the United States and the principals it was founded on. On one hand; I don't think the State should necessarily mandate particularly Christian Laws but I also don't favor the establishment of materialistic Atheism as a default philosophical/religious position. But OTOH: The U.S. was established as a result of certain Theistic philosophical principals that were commonly agreed to at the time. (primarily by Christians and Deists) Certain of these principals are the basis for inalienable Human rights and if they are undercut by an Atheistic default then the foundation of the things (freedom and Human dignity) that make America a great nation are also at risk. In essence the non establishment clause has been used to disestablish the entire American experiment. So my answer hinges on how the clause is interpreted and applied. If it is the practical outcome that the philosophical foundations of freedom and Human dignity are undermined then I'm against it. If it can be applied so as not to destroy those philosophical foundations then I am generally in favor of it.