Posted on 10/17/2003 4:04:27 PM PDT by TXLibertarian
Excerpted from a longer op-ed. Author discusses the danger of legal proselytizing by a few firebrand secularists. Worth a read, IMHO.
What Atheists Want
By Chris Mooney
....
Unfortunately, in my experience, the U.S. atheist and secularist communities contain a number of activists who are inclined to be combative and in some cases feel positively zestful about offending the religious. Madalyn Murray O'Hair, easily America's most famous atheist firebrand, wasn't dubbed "the most hated woman in America" for nothing. Despite her landmark 1963 Supreme Court victory in a case concerning the constitutionality of school prayer, O'Hair's pugilistic and insulting public persona hurt atheists a great deal in the long run. A head-on attack on the pledge seems to epitomize the confrontational O'Hair strategy.
....
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
That is actually not the case. The Bible is very clear that conscience comes from God (Romans 1:20-21, 2:14-15) so without God there would be no such thing. Only instinct, and with instinct there isno "ought to" as I believe C.S. Lewis put it, so that really can't account for conscience.
Was man free to murder prior to receiving God's expressed disapproval in the Bible?
Of course not. The Bible is very clear, as stated above, that man has a conscience, which is the "law written on our hearts." I believe you'll see that in Romans 2:15-16.
I think anyone who answers this question "No" is simply being dishonest.
I didn't say that I would murder someone if there was no God. I said there would be no real moral reason not to, because there is no eternal standards without God.
That's one of the ideas of the universe itself. Also, as research into the nature of time continues, this entire subject of beginnings may become moot.
Rights come from a society that recognizes the value of the freedom of the individual. If rights came from God, and his followers were to enforce those rights, then why have most Christian states never recognized the value of an individual's rights, much less that individual's life?
To get these rights we have, it took some enlightened people who, while retaining belief in a creator in general, rejected the idea of an overbearing god that passes judgement and of any state with a Christian power structure.
As far as I'm concerned, go for it. I'll only get offended if the reference is in an official government form and appears designed to tell me I must be Christian to be an equal citizen.
As far as personal interaction, I only know on a case by case basis. I have a Bible that was a gift from a very religious major I had. I still have it and appreciate it. And while I can easily drag out major dirt on the Mormon religion, a good friend of mine was Mormon, and we used to have quite nice and very civil talks on the subject. I miss those. Basically, you show me and my nonbelief respect, and I'll show you and your religion respect.
However, if someone starts talking down to me or treating me like some uninformed sunday school reject, I'm likely to go off. I've put more than one persons' faith in question in instances like that. Preaching to me was the beginning of the end for one Jehovah's Witness.
Actually, given infinite time, the probability is 1. It's also the same probability they would have recreated this entire thread with all the HTML used to display it. Infinity is a concept that most people don't understand correctly, and it's actually a bit beyond my grasp especially when you start doing mathematical operations with it.
We have a completely different view of history. Western Europe and the United States were strongly influenced, indeed were shaped by, reformed Chritianity. Consequently they retain a huge amount political freedom.
Christianity recognizes an inherent right to life for every individual, Christian or no. Not to say that every Christian has been a perfect example, but clearly the right to live is fundamental to the Bible, so I am confused by your statement.
Rights come from a society that recognizes the value of the freedom of the individual.
Rights do NOT come from society! I cannot stress this enough. If they do then society can take them away. Where do they come from? So I am afraid this proves nothing. You'll have to tell me how a society "recognizes" human rights. That is what this whole discussion is about.
To get these rights we have, it took some enlightened people who, while retaining belief in a creator in general, rejected the idea of an overbearing god that passes judgement and of any state with a Christian power structure.
Again, I understand our history radically differently. Our founders were mostly (but not all) Christian, and borrowed heavily from the Christian ethic in fashioning a governmental system.
And God does pass judgment, whether we reject it or not. Rejecting it does not alter reality. It is not an optional thing, I'm afraid.
Isn't your god supposed to be infinite in all apsects? That's no less strange.
I think that was Washington because Franklin was not a Christian.
“My parents had given me betimes religious impressions, and I received from my infancy a pious education in the principles of Calvinism. But scarcely was I arrived at fifteen years of age, when, after having doubted in turn of different tenets, according as I found them combated in the different books that I read, I began to doubt of Revelation itself.”James Madison wasn't too hot on Christianity either:
“Religious bondage shackles and debilitates the mind and unfits it for every noble enterprise....During almost fifteen centuries has the legal establishment of Christianity been on trial. What have been its fruits? More or less, in all places, pride and indolence in the clergy; ignorance and servility in laity; in both, superstition, bigotry, and persecution.”In short, a lot of our Founding Fathers were scared of Christianity as a force gaining power over government. Why else would they have explicitly rejected mention of Jesus in the Constitution? Why else would they explicitly eliminate any religious test for office?
Many of them may have been religious themselves, but they were smart enough to know that religion and state do not mix except to the detriment of the people.
A common answer is that God is infinite and transcendent and therefore needs no creator.That's one of the ideas of the universe itself.
That's exactly my point, from my very first post on this thread. May atheist cosmologists are unable to accept that our finite universe could spring from "nothing". So they posit theories that "attach" some infinite "source" for the universe, like a multiverse---with no supporting evidence for it whatsoever. In effect they demonstrate a measure of irrational faith not unlike what theists have.
And, lo and behold, that's exactly the position many of us here (including yours truly) take.
You referred to the infinite monkeys tale. In a case of infinite, all probabilities reach one no matter how great the calculated odds in the beginning.
Atheists and homosexuals demand that the traditions and foundations of the USofA be torn down lest they be offended and then expect the whole of society to bend to their will out of "compassion" and "tolerance" for their plight, while displaying no such compassion for society themselves. In effect they ask our compassion and tolerance of their need to burn our house down, and stike an astonished and offended pose that we might object.
Failing that they turn to distortions of the historical record and/or an activist, radical, judiciary to force their destructive agendas. Many of our founding fathers held organized religion in suspecion, as do I. That suspecion of the ability of clergy to abuse power, and seeking to limit the power of clergy in government by forbiding government to use favoritism of one religion in regards to the civil rights of the individual in the Constitution, did not extend to their trust of God, or Chrisitian principles. On the contrary, rather than deny that our government is founded on them, our founding fathers, believers and deists alike, hearalded the fact from the rooftops that our government is based on Christian principles, again, diest themselves or not.
For deists to avere and acknowledge this nations founding on Christian principles should impress atheists, should impress anyone really. One of you is an atheist, the other an educated Christian, so induldge me while I add to your education by quoting our founding fathers and presidents.
--on October 9, 1789, President George Washington said: "True religion affords to government its surest support," and
--on September 17, 1796, President George Washington stated: "...let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion. Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds...reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail, in exclusion of religious principle"; and
--on October 11, 1798, President John Adams said: "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other"; and
--on June 20, 1785, President James Madison stated: "Religion [is] the basis and Foundation of Government"; and
--on July 4, 1837, President John Quincy Adams rhetorically asked: "Is it not that the Declaration of Independence first organized the social compact on the Foundation of the Redeemer's mission upon earth? That it laid the cornerstone of human government upon the first precepts of Christianity?";
--on June 21, 1776, John Adams wrote: "Statesmen...may plan and speculate for liberty, but it is Religion and Morality alone which can establish the Principles upon which Freedom can securely stand..."; and
--in 1820, Thomas Jefferson, author of the Declaration of Independence, in which God is acknowledged as the Creator of men and women and the Giver of freedoms and equality, wrote: "I hold the precepts of Jesus as delivered by Himself, to be the most pure, benevolent and sublime which have ever been preached to man...."; and
--on March 9, 1790, Founding Father and signer of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution Benjamin Franklin, stated: "As to Jesus of Nazareth...I think His system of morals...as He left them to us, the best the world ever saw or is likely to see," and
--Patrick Henry, who was largely responsible for the adoption of the first ten amendments to the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, and was a driving force behind the First Amendment regarding church and state, declared: "It cannot be emphasized too strongly or too often that this great nation was founded, not by religionists, but by Christians; not on religions, but on the gospel of Jesus Christ!", and
--President Abraham Lincoln said, "I believe the Bible is the best gift that God has ever given to man. All the good from the Savior of the world is communicated to us through this Book," and
--President Woodrow Wilson said, "Let us seek forgiveness for any errors of act or purpose and pray for God's help and guidance on the way that lies ahead," and
--President Calvin Coolidge said, "The foundations of our society and our government rest so much on the teachings of the Bible that it would be difficult to support them if faith in these teachings would cease to be practically universal in our country," and
--President Harry S Truman said, "The basis of our Bill of Rights comes from the teachings we get from Exodus and St. Matthew, from Isaiah and St. Paul. I don't think we emphasize that enough these days. If we don't have a proper fundamental moral background, we will finally end up with a...government which does not believe in rights for anybody but the State!", and
--President John F. Kennedy said, "Let us go forth to lead the land we love, asking His blessing and His help, but knowing that here on earth, God's work must truly be our own," and
--President Ronald Reagan said, "Without God there is not virtue because there is no prompting of the conscience...without God there is a coarsening of society; without God democracy will not and cannot long endure...If we ever forget that we are One Nation Under God, then we will be a Nation gone under," and
--President George Bush said, "...seeing before us the promise of a safer, more peaceful world - one marked by respect for the rule of law - let us offer all these entreaties in a spirit of faith, humility, and gratitude, seeking reconciliation with all people. In so doing, we recall the timeless prayer found in Scripture: Thine, O Lord, is the greatness, and the power, and the glory...for all that is in the heaven and in the earth is Thine...and Thou reignest over all...in Thine hand is power and might; and in Thine hand it is to make great, and to give strength unto all. Now therefore, our God, we thank Thee and praise Thy glorious Name
Read it and weep boys. Not one of these men determined that all trace of the historical foundations of Christianity be erased from government, it's money, it's pledge, it's Declaration of Independence, it's national anthem, it's buildings, nor insitutions, it's oaths of office, to the contrary, they declared the end of freedom should it not be acknowledged.
Government is NOT FREE to erase them, there is no problem with government acknowleding it's own Christian foundation as the basis for respecting the rights of all individuals to worship in their own religions. In the minds and writings of the founding fathers, both believer and unbeliever saw the danger in government casting aside, erasing, it's own Christian principles and history.
So in closing let me attest to the historical fact that even though some founding fathers may have been deist, they were not so stupid and vain as to be unable to acknowledge the worth and value of Christian principles and base our government on them.
Well, thank you, I guess, for that long soliloquy, but that's pretty much exactly what I said in post #305, so I'm not sure why you're so fervently trying to persuade me to a point of view I already agree with.
Granted we do have some disagreement on the balance between church and state, but in your haste to berate me you seem to have missed which points it is we disagree on.
Atheists can be acting as morally, or more morally, as Christians. The only place the two meet is in the activism end which enrages many of us. But Christians also have their annoying activists.
To the point, some of these quotes are questionable.
I hold the precepts of Jesus as delivered by Himself, to be the most pure, benevolent and sublime which have ever been preached to man
I've never heard that one, although it could be possible withouth the capital on "Himself." The closest I can find is
To the corruptions of Christianity I am indeed opposed; but not to the genuine precepts of Jesus himself. I am a Christian, in the only sense he wished any one to be; sincerely attached to his doctrines, in preference to all others; ascribing to himself every human excellence; & believing he never claimed any other.He believed in the teachings of Jesus as a human, nothing more. Of course, anyone with half a brain and a good heart would find his teachings most wise. As to the mystical part of Jesus that your religion is founded on, Jefferson says about his teachings:
They have been still more disfigured by the corruptions of schismatising followers, who have found an interest in sophisticating & perverting the simple doctrines he taught by engrafting on them the mysticisms of a Grecian sophist [my emphasis], frittering them into subtleties, & obscuring them with jargon, until they have caused good men to reject the whole in disgust, & to view Jesus himself as an impostor.According to Jefferson, Christianity as practiced as a religion is a corruption of Jesus' works.
Many of the other Founding Father quotes can also be countered with others. But this more modern one leads me to a point:
President Ronald Reagan said, "Without God there is not virtue because there is no prompting of the conscience..."
This is a simple difference of worldview, nothing more. Christians see humans as highly fallible, needing the guidance of God to keep them in line. Your doctrine of original sin guarantees that we start out in a corrupted state, needing to be saved. Athiests, and especially Humanists, see humans in much better light, capable of being moral without daddy in the sky to threaten them if they get out of line.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.