mlah The “culture” that has evolved here isn’t conducive to sissies

February 3, 2008

Religion in Politics

Filed under: Politics,Religion — mlah @ 2:20 am

Women are God's greatest creation

ok. so i’m going to write a series of posts for the upcoming election.

separation of church and state.

that is a saying. not law. it was uttered by tj i believe when describing the intent of the anti establishment clause of the constitution.

so we have a conflict in the land over religion in politics.

the anti establishment clause:

that the government will not create or ‘establish’ a religion. this constitutional clause was designed to stop the government from instituting a single religion, and OPPRESSING other religions.

keep in mind the religious persecution most immigrants to the ‘new world’ got to enjoy in old europe just prior to their immigration. sometimes their immigration was for life expediency.

this same persecution, which pushed members of many different strains of Christianity into the new world is what got us the feedom of practice.

so we have a small amount of a dilemna. we are free to practice, but the government won’t let religion be instituted in the US.

may not seem like much at first. but it is.

the freedom to practice religion is not absolute. the supreme court limited the practice of the mormon religion in 1879. specifically, they forbade members of the mormon faith from indulging in polygamy.

essentially, if your religion demands human sacrifice. the religious guarantees of the constitution would protect your right to believe in your faith, but not to practice ritual human sacrifice.

this is the dilemna we face in today’s society. where does the gov draw the line at limiting practice?

in our upcoming election. we have two fairly religious guys running on the right. huckabee, and romney. now at first glance, a lot of people are against them both as they are ‘too religious’.

the extent of the religious intents of these two candidates are. at least to the best of my knowledge. that huckabee has some ambitions. ropmney really doesn’t

huckabbe wants to allow prayer in public schools, and even allow the teaching of creationism in public schools.

should it be allowed? should that be a valid reason to vote against him? let’s think about the ramifications first.

if prayer is allowed in school.

what is the worst that can happen? if we allow elementary schools to take a minute every morning for prayer. like, saying the pledge of allegiance, is it the establishment of religion?

are young atheist children having religion forced on them? or are young religious children having religion denied to them? but what would the result be if we allowed prayer in school?

would kids learn at a young age a greater appreciation for each other. learn respect? let us keep in mind, that the religion being eradicated from public life is the same religion that gave birth to the notion of separation of church and state. it is the same religion which believes in equality.

we are not talking about islam. a religion which believes women are subservient, lesser creatures than men. that muslims are more than non muslims.

IF a theocracy was setup in the US, which is soooooo far from the designs of any religiousiosos in the current presidential race, what would be the worst to happen?

boys would be forced to wear slacks and button downs? they would be forced to get heair cuts and groom themselves? girls? forced to wear skirts. and below the knee skirts? lay off of the makeup until high school?

is the prospect of allowing, NOT the insertion of christianity into public schools but, the practice of chrisianity in school a bad thing?

i make an accusation.

it has been said before that the new left values are a dogma. even that evolution, which is a theory and not a fact, is a central tenet to the new religion of the left. central to this new religion is faith in evolution. it is not proven. yet it is unquestionable, unassailable by the proponents of the left. faith.

the left. the anti religious left, is a system of beliefs. it is a religion. and the exclusion of other religions from school is tantamount to the establishment of religion by the state.

creationism? should be taught in school. in science class? nah. it is anti science. but it should be taught. intelligent design? sure. teach it in school. in science class even. after all, a central tenet of intelligent design is evolution.

so. at the worst, if we allow kids in school to pray. maybe even memorize the 10 commandments, is a bunch of clean cut kids who are more respectful?

what is the worst?

that kids will stop respecting their parents? that they will stop respecting each other, or even life itself?

why do you think we get all of these shootings in schools now? don’t believe me? you get religious nut jobs who go on shooting sprees sometimes. but usually against some perceived target. not a nutjob who is intent on killing as many as they can, then commiting suicide.

i blame the breakdown of our society on a breakdown in morals. and why the breakdown in morals?

the eradication of religion from as many aspects of life by the a-religious left.

they even decry the re-introduction of prayer in school as the beginning of theocracy in the US.

what a laugh.

14 Comments »

  1. Everyone knows that creationism in the schools is illegal after the Supreme Court ruling, and so-called “intelligent design” is just a repackaged version of creationism. You right-wing extremist nutjob! You are a Neocon! People like you are destroying our country! How dare you try to force your views on the rest of society! You are worse than the Taleban! You you you you evil Nazi republican thug!

    (You’re welcome, Gus.)

    /moonbattery

    Comment by yup — February 3, 2008 @ 5:38 am

  2. Really, there’s no point debating religion. Religion is based on faith, not logic, so asking someone to debate one side or another is like asking someone to drive a car with no gas. Some people are religious, some people aren’t, but you aren’t going to change anyone’s mind either way just by arguing.

    Comment by medium john — February 4, 2008 @ 5:29 pm

  3. well the intent was to talk about religion IN politics, not religion itself. but mj, you are wrong, people are convinced about religion all the time. each way. it’s called conversion.

    but the real intent is just to try and bring back some of my readers.

    Comment by mlah — February 5, 2008 @ 3:30 am

  4. mmmm… smells like controversy. good plan!

    Comment by medium john — February 5, 2008 @ 11:41 am

  5. Mlah: “if we allow elementary schools to take a minute every morning for prayer. like, saying the pledge of allegiance, is it the establishment of religion?”
    Of course it is.

    “are young atheist children having religion forced on them?”
    In that case, yes.

    “what is the worst that can happen?”
    The breeching our our Constitution. Isn’t that enough?
    You’d also have every sect under the sun seeking equal time in our schools, right? It just isn’t practical or appropriate. No matter how beneficial you believe the effect of your favorite sect to be, somebody else would prefer to have their sect’s viewpoint highlighted. Rastafarians don’t cut their hair (the Bible says so!), so there go your clean-cut young men. What makes a skirt holier than pants? You can still see a girl’s shape, not to mention the flesh of their lower leg, in a skirt. The 10 Commandments don’t mention make-up. Did Jesus wear button-down shirts? Go to hell!

    “even that evolution, which is a theory and not a fact”
    How many times do you morons have to be pointed to the scientific definition of the word “theory”?
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution_as_theory_and_fact

    “the left. the anti religious left, is a system of beliefs. it is a religion. and the exclusion of other religions from school is tantamount to the establishment of religion by the state.”
    If they’re supported by facts– unlike religion– then they are more than “beliefs” supported only by “faith”. What else, in your view, besides evolution, makes up the “Religion of the Left”?

    “would kids learn at a young age a greater appreciation for each other. learn respect?”
    Like they do on (godless) “Sesame Street”?

    “let us keep in mind, that the religion being eradicated from public life is the same religion that gave birth to the notion of separation of church and state. it is the same religion which believes in equality.”
    Tell me how Christianity “gave birth to the notion of separation of church and state”! Historically, religious authorities have never willingly released their hold on state power if they had it. If you are referring to our Founders, well, they didn’t all believe the same thing themselves. As it is now, with all religions EQUALLY EXCLUDED from State power, is the only and best solution.

    “creationism? should be taught in school. in science class? nah. it is anti science. but it should be taught. intelligent design? sure. teach it in school. in science class even.”
    What class should creationism be taught in, then? The only thing ID would be good for in science class is to show “How Science Weeds Out Bullshit”.

    “you get religious nut jobs who go on shooting sprees sometimes. but usually against some perceived target. not a nutjob who is intent on killing as many as they can, then commiting suicide.”
    So it’s more acceptable to kill people in school as long as they were your premeditated targets? Do you honestly believe that any school shooter doesn’t know that killing is wrong? The 10 Commandments aren’t gonna keep some f-ed up kid from going off the deep end.

    “i blame the breakdown of our society on a breakdown in morals. and why the breakdown in morals? the eradication of religion from as many aspects of life by the a-religious left.”
    Gee, whillikers, Mr. Cleaver. If people got real answers and sustenance from religion (and their parents)– and not hypocrisy, kiddie-diddling and counter-factual fables– maybe they would have stayed in the houses of worship of their parents. If you had to choose between your X-Box and your church, what would you do?

    Yup: “Everyone knows that creationism in the schools is illegal after the Supreme Court ruling, and so-called “intelligent design” is just a repackaged version of creationism. You right-wing extremist nutjob! You are a Neocon! People like you are destroying our country! How dare you try to force your views on the rest of society! You are worse than the Taleban! You you you you evil Nazi republican thug!”
    I know that was supposed to be satirical, but it seems to have doubled over on itself to be a fairly rational analysis that most people would agree with. I would only delete “extremist”, “worse than the Taleban” and “evil Nazi”.

    Comment by Gus — February 5, 2008 @ 9:22 pm

  6. Well, c’mon Gus. You were sleeping on this one. I had to jump in for you. Glad to see I got it right, although I am curious to see that you are laying off the name-calling.

    Comment by yup — February 6, 2008 @ 1:16 pm

  7. Yup: “You were sleeping on this one.”
    It’s Mlah fault. He hasn’t been posted on interesting political/social topics for a long time, so I don’t visit as often as I used to.

    How do you all feel about McCain, Romney and Huckabee? Hillary and Obama? C’mon, get with it!

    Comment by Gus — February 6, 2008 @ 10:00 pm

  8. nice gus. i have news for you. evidently, i’ll you’ll have to keep informing us about theory and fact as often as we’ll have to remind you that the wiki is not viable. i write in the wiki gus. is anything on my blog evidence it is fact? why are my writings on the wiki any more substantial?

    if you believe i am full of shit here. then you should also believe i am full of shit there. and just like me. so is everyone else at wiki.

    wiki is bogus.

    evolution is fact. show me one piece of evidence? show one thing which has evolved.

    Comment by mlah — February 6, 2008 @ 10:53 pm

  9. There is some body of evidence that creatures adapt to their surroundings, which is also known as evolution. However, there is no proof to support the theory built upon this quasi-observed evolutionary adaptation to environment — you know, the evolution that is popular with the anti-creationistas, wherein the protozoa evolved into pollywogs which evolved into alligators which evolved into monkeys and thence into human beings, and it’s all just cosmic chance which made it happen.

    There is a widespread acceptance of a creator at some level within scientific circles. Or do you think that Einstein and other people more brilliant than you or I got it completely wrong, too?

    Gus, do you dispute the Declaration of Independence? You know, the one signed by the Founders which refers to “Nature’s God” and states that “all men are endowed by their creator”? No specific “creator” other than a hat-tip to the entity many know as “God” — but certainly not a specific declaration that it is Allah, YHWH, Zeus or Jesus H. Christ Himself. One of the drafters of this document, who himself signed it, was Thomas Jefferson. The one to whom all the secularists point as the man who separated Church and State. (Ever hear of the “Church of England” by the way?)

    So a moment of silence — which anyone who has small kids craves first thing in the morning — is tantamount to establishing a religion (ala that nasty old Church of England)? Tell me, which religion would that be? Is it the Church of the United States, attendance to which is mandatory, with compulsory tithing and societal organization regimented within bishoprics? Or is it a silent moment of thought, the use of which is regulated by the grey matter between each student’s ears (each student being indoctrinated from a young age by his parents to determine how that grey matter organizes his thoughts)? Because certainly organized prayers lead by the school staff would be problematic in a public school.

    Comment by yup — February 7, 2008 @ 1:52 pm

  10. Whatever, douchebags.

    Comment by Gus — February 7, 2008 @ 9:28 pm

  11. Rather than answer questions, Gus pulls out his namecalling tricks (standard fare for him and the Left at large) then walks away without engaging in an actual debate. That’s typical: take the Leftist version of life and ask no questions!

    Comment by yup — February 8, 2008 @ 10:20 am

  12. Sorry, but we’ve been thru these stupid old arguments before. Cases closed.

    Comment by Gus — February 8, 2008 @ 8:30 pm

  13. Tell me what you think of McCain.

    Comment by Gus — February 8, 2008 @ 8:33 pm

  14. Gus: Tell me how Christianity “gave birth to the notion of separation of church and state”!

    Well actually, without the Protestant Reformation (you know, Martin Luther and his comrades) the power of the Catholic Church would not have been challenged, the 100-years’ war would not have been fought, and the Treaty of Westphalia would not have established the clear right of state sovereignty free of Church interference. “Divine right” of kings to rule over the state fell by the wayside just over a century later, with the “divine right” of the people to rule themselves enshrined in the U.S. Constitution.

    Can you point to a major state or country at the time which had a ruler whose power did not flow from the ‘mandate of heaven’ or some other religious basis? Certainly Islam does not separate the government from the religion.

    Comment by yup — February 9, 2008 @ 12:02 pm

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL

Leave a comment

Powered by WordPress