Posted on 12/01/2001 10:28:24 AM PST by Brian Kopp DPM
By Gary L. Morella
I have a question for those who believe that the atheistic worship of the state is to be recommended over an appreciation of a "higher" or "natural" law as the foundation for the rights that government ought to secure for the common good.
Natural law can be readily appreciated in the American experience, given the preamble to the Declaration of Independence: "When, in the course of human events, it becomes necessary ... to assume among the powers of the earth the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them ..."
Natural law is something above power or force that gives content to the notion of justice. This notion suggests that there is a higher law by which the positive law of the state is to be measured and judged. Slavery was ultimately abolished in America because of the recognition of this "higher law."
Thomas Aquinas sets the most famous variation of this approach in his Summa Theologica. His natural law is a participation in the wisdom and goodness of God by the human person, formed in the image of the Creator. It expresses the dignity of the person and forms the basis of human rights and fundamental duties. This was the approach later used by Martin Luther King, Jr. in his "Letter from a Birmingham Jail," which contains references to Aquinas.
Simply put, what has state worship done for us lately? We only have to look at recent history for an answer. We saw the deaths of six million Jews and 20 million Ukrainians in the concentration camps and gulags of Hitler and Stalin, respectively. Today, we see the killing of 40 million innocents in what should be their safest place of refuge, their mothers' wombs.
If the state is the final arbiter of the law, the sole dispenser of rights, we're in big trouble, given the lessons of history. The state can easily take these rights away with catastrophic consequences. This is inevitable when each man is a universe unto himself, courtesy of Planned Parenthood v. Casey, which ignored a very important question: What happens when each citizen's "personal universe of rights" collides with another's? In the absence of some absolute, immutable, higher law, knowable through reason and not just faith, we're left with anarchy.
But more to the point, the traditionally recognized goal of a respected political regime is the common good. Does killing our children when they're most vulnerable and promoting aberrant behavior that leads to physical ruin meet that goal?
The fact is that ignorance of the necessity for human law to be rooted in the natural law has led to the major ills plaguing society today. This has nothing to do with theocracy. It has everything to do with common sense and the rule of right reason. This is obvious to any Christian who knows that God's supreme gift to us was the opportunity to choose him freely.
Interestingly, those decrying theocracies have no problem accepting a "state religion of amorality," which is promoted by demagogues who won't stand for any opposition. This is the current state of affairs in a "politically correct" but "morally bankrupt" America for which we can thank the example of the former "adolescent-in-chief," whose main claim to fame was making the country more comfortable with its vices.
Can you elaborate on that link between coerced prayer and Freedom?
Home schools rule.
Wrong, thanks for playing. Don Pardo will now tell the studio audience about your nice parting gifts.
Not in my experience...
But since you made a claim, why don't you take a stab at trying to prove it? This ought to be amusing.
I see this claim touted a lot by atheists, but I've never seen them even attempt to prove it.
Shall we take a look at JUST the catholics, kind Sir?
The Roman branch of Christianity has a terrible record of instigating wars in its own interest. Setting aside the promptness of the clergy of every country to support the national authorities without any regard to justice (the Buddhist priests in Japan, the Italian priests in the rape of Abyssinia, the attack on France, etc.), the Papacy has in the course of eleven centuries initiated wars in its own interest, and to the grave injury of the peoples involved, which have helped to retard the progress of civilization and cost tens of millions of lives. The wars it set afoot for the recovery or protection of its temporal possessions from the eighth century, when such wars had millions of victims, to the nineteenth have drained Italy, France, and Germany of blood century after century. The Crusades , summoned by the Popes in whatever spirit they were conducted, led to appalling losses and ended in futility. Scores of times they flung nation against nation because some monarch refused to submit to them and was declared deposed; and they blessed aggressive wars - of the Normans in England, the English in Ireland, etc. - because kings offered to do them feudal service. The Thirty Years War, which according to all historians put back for a century the civilization of half Europe, lost an unknown number - certainly millions - of lives and led to epidemics of vice, was incited by the Papacy and the Jesuits as - their agents. The most amazing feature is that in our own day the Pope can pose as a serene advocate of peace while he incites to war in the interest of his Church as explicitly as Gregory VII or Innocent III did. From the date of his accession (and for some years earlier as Secretary of State) the present Pope repeatedly demanded "the extinction of Bolshevism in Spain, Mexico, and Russia"; that is to say, revolt (aided by Italy and Germany in a savage war) in Spain, the annexation of Mexico by the United States, and war upon Russia by Germany. The entire Catholic Press of the world supported his demand, and it was frequently reproduced (sympathetically) in the Times and other organs. He remained also in close alliance with Japan during its series of vile aggressions, and he attempted to paralyse America's assistance to Britain, when Germany treacherously attacked Russia, by inciting the great body of American Catholics to cause trouble and facilitate that destruction of Russia for which he hoped. Throughout 1946 the Church has made frantic efforts to drive America into war with Russia.
Care to try again? I have proof of hundreds of millions of deaths tied to religion to support my earlier assertion.
Here's something a little bit more up-to-date for ya. Oh, and ridicule til your heart's content.
| Country | Main religious groups involved | Type of conflict |
| Afghanistan | Extreme, radical Fundamentalist Muslim terrorist groups & non-Muslims | Osama bin Laden heads a terrorist group called Al Quada (The Source) whose headquarters are in Afghanistan. They are protected by the Taliban dictatorship in the country. Al Quada is generally regarded as having committed many terrorist attacks on U.S. ships, embassies, and buildings. Their goal is to promote a worldwide war between Muslims and non-Muslims. Britain and the U.S. are attacking the Taliban and Al Quada. |
| Bosnia | Serbian Orthodox Christians, Roman Catholic), Muslims | Fragile peace is holding, due to the presence of peacekeepers. 2 |
| Côte d'Ivoire | Muslims, Indigenous, Christian | Following the elections in late 2000, government security forces "began targeting civilians solely and explicitly on the basis of their religion, ethnic group, or national origin. The overwhelming majority of victims come from the largely Muslim north of the country, or are immigrants or the descendants of immigrants..." 5 |
| Cyprus | Christians & Muslims | The island is partitioned, creating enclaves for ethnic Greeks (Christians) and Turks (Muslims). A UN peace keeping force is maintaining stability. |
| India | Animists, Hindus, Muslims & Sikhs | Various conflicts that heat up periodically. Situation exacerbated recently by the election of a Hindu nationalist party as the federal government. |
| Indonesia, province of Ambon | Christians, Muslims | After centuries of relative peace, conflicts between Christians and Muslims started during 1999-JUL in this province of Indonesia. The situation appears to be stable. |
| Indonesia, currently a province of East Timor | Christians & Muslims | A Roman Catholic country that was forcibly annexed by Indonesia (mainly Muslim). 20% of the population died by murder, starvation or disease. After voting for independence, many Christians were exterminated or exiled by the Indonesian army and army-funded militias in a carefully planned program of genocide and religious cleansing. Situation now stable. |
| Indonesia, province of Halmahera | Christians & Muslims | 30 people killed. 2,000 Christians driven out; homes and churches destroyed. |
| Kashmir | Hindus & Muslims | A chronically unstable region of the world, claimed by both Pakistan and India. The availability of nuclear weapons and the eagerness to use them are destabilizing the region further. More details |
| Kosovo | Serbian Orthodox Christians & Muslims | Peace enforced by NATO peacekeepers. There is convincing evidence of mass murder by Yugoslavian government (mainly Serbian Orthodox Christians) against ethnic Albanians (mostly Muslim) Full story |
| Kurdistan | Christians, Muslims | Assaults on Christians (Protestant, Chaldean Catholic & Assyrian Orthodox). Bombing campaign underway. |
| Macedonia | Macedonian Orthodox Christians & Muslims | Muslims (often referred to as ethnic Albanians) engaged in a civil war with the rest of the country who are primarily Macedonian Orthodox Christians. A peace treaty has been signed. Disarmament by NATO is complete. |
| Middle East | Jews, Muslims, & Christians | The peace process between Israel and Palestine suffered a complete breakdown. This has resulted in the deaths of over 400 Palestinians, and about 80 Jews. Major strife broke out in 2000-SEP and is continuing. |
| Nigeria | Christians, Animists, & Muslims | Yourubas and Christians in the south of the country are battling Muslims in the north. Country is struggling towards democracy after decades of Muslim military dictatorships. More details |
| Northern Ireland | Protestants, Catholics | After 3,600 killings and assassinations over 30 years, some progress has been made in the form of a ceasefire and a independent status for the country. |
| Pakistan | Suni & Shi'ite Muslims | Low level mutual attacks. |
| Philippines | Christians & Muslims | Low level, centuries old conflict between the mainly Christian central government and Muslims in the south of the country. More details |
| Russia, Chechnya |
Russian Orthodox Christians, Muslims | The Russian army attacked the breakaway region. Muslims had allegedly blown up buildings in Moscow. Many atrocities have been alleged. |
| Serbia, province of Vojvodina | Serbian Orthodox & Roman Catholics | Serb Ethnic cleansing programs have "encouraged" 50,000 ethnic Hungarians (almost all Roman Catholics) to leave this northernmost province of Yugoslavia. Full story. |
| South Africa | Animists & "Witches" | Hundreds of persons, suspected and accused of black magic, are murdered each year. |
| Sri Lanka | Buddhists & Hindus | Tamils (a mainly Hindu 18% minority) are involved in a long-standing war for independence with the rest of the country (70% Buddhist) |
| Sudan | Animists, Christians & Muslims | Complex ethnic, racial, religious conflict. Slavery and near slavery practiced. Alleged instances of crucifixion. 3 |
| Tibet | Buddhists & Communists | Country was annexed by Chinese Communists in late 1950's. Brutal suppression of religion continues. * |
Actually I mean the definition of "personhood", as opposed to, say, an organ that's being kept alive, or a body being kept alive minus the head, etc. I don't know if I can come up with a deductive argument for why a working brain (a mind) is the definitive test for whether there's a person there - it seems almost axiomatic.
I can visualize a headless body being kept alive by machines, and I can visualize a bodyless head being kept alive by machines, but I'll never consider the headless body to be a person. Only the working brain can support memories, personality, thoughts - that which I could have a relationship with. What other criteria could there be that makes sense?
As a physician, I have a hard time with that definition, for, as you seemed to be aware, there are many adults who have little or no brain activity (as well as some on FR :-), and thus may be candidates for "adult abortion."
I don't think it's subjective per se, but nature does give us an extraordinarily fuzzy line between personhood & non-personhood, or life & death. As for an adult who's near brain death, i.e. where there's only some brainstem activity but no discernable higher functions, it seems really tempting to call them dead & move on. I'm sure for the relatives in that situation, the emotional & financial pressures would be there for a lot of people.
The problem with that is, where do you draw the line? There is no bright line there except for complete cessation of activity at the brainstem. Any other criteria seems too prone to the slippery slope, IMO. (Not an expert on neurology, by any means!) Also, how many almost-braindead people have spontaneously come back to life, vs. "really" braindead people? In that case there's an existing mind that has the chance of being recovered. (In the case of embryo abortion of course, there hasn't been a mind there yet to begin with, so that problem doesn't apply at that end of life.)
I'm sure if I was confronted with having to make decisions in that area, I'd have to think & learn a lot more about it. But again, what other criteria for declaring a person dead are there that make sense to you?
The post above that I made only scratches the surface. The history is there for your understanding. Try something other than a whimful, and outright rejection of the fact that governments have killed many but not as many as religion.
Try a search on askjeeves.com with the keywords "religious wars", or "religious massacres", or "religious conflict". The proof is easy to find.
For those of you who bring up communism: remember that the communists were "atheists" because they didn't want anything in their way (in the minds and hearts of the masses) of total domination. They sought almost to replace all other religions with their own brand. For example, observe the language and tone that communists utilize in referring to, or describing their leaders. You would think that the Red leaders were near god-like. They saw any other god as a threat to their own rule.
I thought that we covered this very thouroughly in #49, #66, and #74. There's noting new in you #113 post. Actually, the title is part of the article. If fact, it's the most important part of the article. It's what's most remembered, and it's fraudulent. Do you have any evidence that that wasn't the author's original title.
Whether your claim of it being an editor produced title is true or not, you should have noticed the absurdity of it and done something to mitigate it. (Deleted it, changed it, Disclaimed it or whatever.)
Would you have just let the horrendous title that I suggested in #44 upset Christians and then just dryly coming to the defense of the sound but incomplete reasoning within the body of the article?
No, you wouldn't . You either intended to tweak some people with this garbage or you screwed up.
That's not only is that wrong, it's self-serving. It looks like an attempt to set up a condition where one is forced to disprove another's wild assertion for it to be discounted. One only has to not be convinced to not believe in a religion.
See, all that's not really unique to religion. But in its defense I can say that it may be somewhat true if applied to non-objectivist atheism, which probably accounts for most atheists.
Well said. And there will be differences of opinion on the truth derived from those facts, just like there are differences of opinion on the interpretation of scriptures. And just like the claim that there is only one version of God's truth, there is only one objective truth for us to discover.
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.