Posted on 08/20/2005 12:11:11 AM PDT by Lexinom
A federal court of appeals ruled yesterday Wisconsin prison officials violated an inmate's rights because they did not treat atheism as a religion.
"Atheism is [the inmate's] religion, and the group that he wanted to start was religious in nature even though it expressly rejects a belief in a supreme being," the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals said.
(Excerpt) Read more at worldnetdaily.com ...
secular humanism was judged a religion 40 years ago. so?
We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these United Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States; that they are absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do.
And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.
The court may as well rule that black is white or that 2+2=5. Idiots.
that's an interesting point.
It's more likely that we'll have to endure huge "There is no God" signs in that famous public square, if we keep going the way we are.
That will be impossible for a raitonal court, because the word means w/o religion. The fed courts might go for it though.
Nope, try again. You need to get more.
It is the left that denies religious rights, because traditional religion stands in profound opposition to the goals of the left.
Granted - it is sometimes not easy to distinguish the left from the atheists.
I have not lost my certainty that there is no God, as that word is understood by people of faith. I have no expectations of losing it either. My last breath will be my last breath. No more, nothing to follow, except what lives on in the hearts and lives of others whom I have influenced.
Wonderful. Does this mean that the next time Michael Newdow or one of his kind attempt to get a cross removed from some public place, we can tell him to quit imposing his religious views on the rest of us?
Payback sucks, don't it?
From the wikipedia article on Secularism:
From my beloved Webster's Third New International Dictionary:
Secularism opposes traditional religion with an alternative belief system, that is of this world.
Perhaps I should have written instead:
The courts are not yet likely, in my view, ready to recognize government establishment of secularism as the state belief system is just as wrong and unconstitutional as the establishment of any traditional religion, or even of the "there is no God" variant held by atheists.
I don't think that a lack of a public religious display would qualify as an endorsement of atheism. If so, we sure have a lot of space in the world dedicated to atheism. For instance, every single spot that doesn't contain a cross, menorah, etc.
Pray for W and Our Freedom Fighters
When the courts recognize secularism as a religion, then that will be huge, in my opinion.
Atheism, as an actively practiced belief system that is as certain that there is no God as the Pope is certain that there is a God, is a belief system held by a rather small set of people (fair notice - I am one of those Atheists, though a rather odd one.)
Secularism, as the lack of an actively practiced belief system, that is twisted by the left and the ACLU into the right not to be offended by any overt expression of someone else's belief system, is widely held by those on the left. Secularism puts too much 'faith' in them, the government and other large institutions, to achieve that false hope of a Heaven on Earth.
The ACLU and its leftist friends has turned the "no establishment of religion" clause in the Constitution into the claim that "secularism - the absence of any overt belief system" must be the established State Religion.
Very interesting post, and after some thought, I agree with you. (My own personal disclaimer, I'm an odd sort of deist.)
People on this thread, I assume primarily Christian, are getting very excited about this decision, as if it actually means that recognition of Christianity will return to government controlled arenas. It doesn't mean that at all. By defining atheism as a religion, it actually makes it much easier to show that atheism is in fact not a part of our public schools, government, etc.
For instance, as a religion, for the government to "impose" atheism upon someone in violation of the First Amendment, a state actor would have to actively do something to promote atheism, like (as you have noted in some of your posts) create a display prominantly announcing "there is no god." Or...in the school, requiring children to acknowledge the absence of a deity.
It is my opinion that this court decision actually enforces the idea that the absence of such requirements, displays, etc., is not atheism.
That's an argument by tradition if I ever saw one.
So if we're going to elect somebody because they're "Christian", what would constitute the term "Christian"? To an LDS, you're not a Christian unless you're a believer in the Book of Mormon. To a Catholic, you're not Christian if you accept the pope, if you're part of the Christian Scientists, you're not Christian if you take Ny Quil for a cold.
This is a new low, even for the courts. What are they going to recognize next? How about Nihilism? I know, Egocentrism -- the worship of self. Adherents will be allowed to masterbate at ritualistic intervals since they have yet to figure out a way to **** themselves.
I can hear "them" now screaming like little scared puppies.
"Oh the injustice of it all!"
"Those evil RELIGIOUS b@stards sitting up there in their old rightwinged boy clubs manipulating it all through Karl Rove and run by Chaney through Rumsfields agents as part of the neocon religious right's plot to turn America into a theology......blah...blah....blah....."
SSSSSWWWWEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEETTTTTTTTTTTTT!!!!!!!!!
It means w/o religion.
Secularism is not unique. It is not a belief system, nor is it a religion. It's a open set of different "beliefs" that ranges in scope from strict authoritarian to the libertarian, and strict communitarian to libertarian. It includes any moral principle from any religion whatsoever.
"When the courts recognize secularism as a belief system, subject to the Constitutional prohibition of a state established religion, then that will be huge, in my opinion."
The courts have to do no more than to admit that the law of the 1st Amend contains no such idea as separation of church and state and that it prohibits govm't from interfering with the Free exercise of religion. It's truth and reason that need to prevail, not building on the buffoonery these jailhouse clowns and black robes are engaged in.
I think these moron judges did this so the ACLU can go after the Boy Scouts again for religious discrimination.
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.