Posted on 05/04/2005 9:30:26 PM PDT by Unam Sanctam
I am not a Christian, or even a religious believer, and my opinions on social issues are decidedly middle-of-the-road. So why do I find myself rooting for the "religious right"? I suppose it is because I am put off by self-righteousness, closed-mindedness, and contempt for democracy and pluralism--all of which characterize the opposition to the religious right.
One can disagree with religious conservatives on abortion, gay rights, school prayer, creationism and any number of other issues, and still recognize that they have good reason to feel disfranchised. This isn't the same as the oft-heard complaint of "anti-Christian bigotry," which is at best imprecise, since American Christians are all over the map politically. But those who hold traditionalist views have been shut out of the democratic process by a series of court decisions that, based on constitutional reasoning ranging from plausible to ludicrous, declared the preferred policies of the secular left the law of the land.
(Excerpt) Read more at opinionjournal.com ...
A fundamental folly about libertarianism is their failure to understand that in order to have a 1900 state, you have to have a 1900 culture. You can only have a small government in a society with strict cultural rules about right and wrong and where disgrace and ostracism are feared punishments. The stricter the society and culture the less government you need. Libertarianism can only work in a Victorian society.
A depraved society with no moral laws needs lots and lots of government to protect people from themselves. Things like deferred gratification and impulse control are not innate to human beings. They have to be taught by the surrounding culture. And they cannot be taught by parents in the context of a decadent culture that glorifies promiscutity and hedonism. But they must be learned if you are going to become a civilized human being.
You commit a blunder common to libertarianism. You fail to comprehend that only a very, very civilized people can dispense with a big government.
"A depraved society with no moral laws needs lots and lots of government to protect people from themselves. Things like deferred gratification and impulse control are not innate to human beings. They have to be taught by the surrounding culture. And they cannot be taught by parents in the context of a decadent culture that glorifies promiscutity and hedonism. But they must be learned if you are going to become a civilized human being."
Wow....just, wow. In one paragraph you advocate not only for bigger government, but for governmental control over parenting. That's just about one of the creepiest things I've ever read on FR.
"A depraved society with no moral laws needs lots and lots of government to protect people from themselves. Things like deferred gratification and impulse control are not innate to human beings. They have to be taught by the surrounding culture. And they cannot be taught by parents in the context of a decadent culture that glorifies promiscutity and hedonism. But they must be learned if you are going to become a civilized human being."
Wow....just, wow. In one paragraph you advocate not only for bigger government, but for governmental control over parenting. That's just about one of the creepiest things I've ever read on FR.
Fool, the size of the government is proportional to the public's expressed need for it. An uncivilized people will demand lots and lots of government to protect them from themselves. Who said anything about "government control over parenting" ? As families break down in a pagan society, as the sexual revolution creates more and more throwaway children won't the government inevitably become the parent of last resort to more and more children ? Either that or Victorian street urchins. As a society becomes more and more pagan, more and more secular, less and less able to convey values like deferred gratification and impulse control to its children, less and less able to domesticate adolescent male drives so you don't have a generation of yobs and gang bangers, people will inevitably demand that the government protect them from the growing barbarism of their world.
Yeah, ok, sure. Have fun in your totalitarian paradise. I'll stick with the United States.
Excellent points! Great Britian is fully expressing your observations, as we write. Thanks
Makes Christopher Hitchens' missive ('Why I'm Against The Religious Right') a bit hollow don'tchaknow.
Apparently you have never run a sheep herd, or heard a lamb cry. "BAA" is a goat sound, not a sheep sound. Bah & Baa are totally different. I will admit both are a flocking cry. Never heard the differance have ya? Oh by the by, ever heard a lamb bark? Ever heard a goat bark? You know the right from wrong, eh? Go swimmin'...
Thanks for your reply, my FRiend. Let us all keep the Faith, no matter what becomes...
Hoover & the South Park Republicans...lol. Yeah, ya got it! You are correct, now I am fully defined as "incoherent"...thanks for the memories, daa daa daa da!
ping
Where is the separation of Church & State in Our Nation's Founding Documents? Show just one example. Did I once mention the Christian Church or any Church-NO- yet you keep blathering about a diplomatic letter, don't ya lucysmom? So, you are a self proclaimed Christian, yet you keep diverting from truth and thus lying- long, hard and continuously. Please admit your anti-federalist biased opinion, whatever it may be. Clean it up.
Pass off if you will a treaty ratified by the Senate, signed by the president, and given the weight of "supreme law of the land" by the very Constitution you claim to respect, as merely a "diplomatic letter". It is obvious that the truth in this matter is inconvenient for you.
So, you are a self proclaimed Christian, yet you keep diverting from truth and thus lying- long, hard and continuously. Please admit your anti-federalist biased opinion, whatever it may be. Clean it up.
If you are going to accuse me of lying (did I make up the treaty, invent the words?) then back it up. Otherwise you are bearing "false witness". My Christianity is not the issue here, historical truth is the issue. I was taught, and believe, that Christian faith is a matter of accepting Jesus as savior, not on the belief that no wall of separation exists between church and state.
I agree with James Madison who wrote, “Religion and government will both exist in greater purity, the less they are mixed together.”
You have great reason to argue, even without substance of fact. Your reasoning is appreciated, though not within the Founding Documents of the United States of America. By the simple minded fact- that I referred to these aforementioned Founding Documents- such as- The Bill of Rights, The Declaration of Independence and The Constitution of the United States. So, lucysmom, are ya a libertarian or a just plain ol' contrarian? Perhaps, another different stroke of bereavement against G-d inspired law,is your meddle by menhaden. If so, please cast again...
The original term you used was "Documents of Federation" which I hadn't heard before and so did a google search. That phrase does not seem to be in common usage, if indeed it is used at all, to refer to our founding documents.
As to the Constitution, Bill of Rights, and the Declaration of Independence, the language used is not specific enough to make a clear case for either your contention or mine. We must then try to determine intent by looking at other contemporaneous documents. The phrase "wall of separation", to my knowledge was first used by Thomas Jefferson, author of the Declaration of Independence and a founding father. Further we find a very clear, unequivocal statement in the treaty with Tripoli. The treaty was unanimously ratified by the Senate and signed by the President, giving weight to the notion that the United States was not founded on the Christian religion (does it make sense that if the US was founded as a Christian nation these men would ratify and sign a treaty specifically stating it wasn't?). The Constitution gives the treaty the force of law meaning that if the intent were not clear before, it is clear now.
Non of that diminishes the role religion played in the lives of the men who founded our country or the role they hoped religion would continue to play in the lives of citizens.
I applaud your stalwart application of constitutional theory. Perhaps you are correct- there is a separation of church and state. I won't bother to mention details, since my general reference was clearly not broad enough. Please feel secure in the fact- that several residing Supreme Court Justice agree with you; in that a broader living interpetation of those now untimely silly Founding Documents are indeed neccessary and perpetual. They even now apply 300 year old foreign law and everthing in between. You should & will be quite happy.
...Supreme Court Justice agree with you; in that a broader living interpetation of those now untimely silly Founding Documents are indeed neccessary and perpetual.
The Constitution wasn't even hot off the press before it was amended 10 times (Bill of Rights). The first amendment containing that pesky antiestablishment clause.
Perhaps you think Blacks should still count as 3/5 of a human being and be denied the vote along with women. Why stop there, just reestablish slavery as was originally allowed by the Constitution.
Those founding fathers were indeed silly to provide a process to amend a document they intended to remain forever untouched.
Yep, ya got me! This Greatest of Human Endeavors was founded on slave trade and keepin' church folk mindin' they own busyness. I submit to your newfangled ways o' thinkin'- by the by, wha'cha gonna call it? Hows 'bout socialist-fascism? Kinda catchy- ain't it? You go ahead a sleep with the aclu, commies need their rest from instructin' morons like me. Yah ya dooo...
Home Run
As opposed to the freedom to have sexual relations with any person, animal, or object they can lust after
I thought you were a Christian man. Sorry, my mistake.
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.