Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: skr; Destro
Yeah, rule #3 is written as badly as the 14th amendment. plenty chance for judicial abuse. :-)

Overall, it was an excellent article.

The author betrayed his secular tendencies and perhaps ignorance of Greek mythology with his 'honor the gods' comments. Greece was polytheistic - so of course, their own narrow cultural version of Moses #1 would be plural 'honor the gods'. yet the author bone-headedly takes it to be an opening for honoring different religions, some kind of writ of tolerance. Um, no, he confuses Joseph Campbell with the ancient Greeks. Do any serious non-primitive polytheists even exist today? Christianity and Buddhism killed that in the west and east repsectively... (And dont count Wiccans, they are a pseudo- new age 'religion' that constructed in recent decades with no real relation to primitive animists).

So I conclude, with the author, that Solon gives good advice overall, but his guidance on religion and the basis of any community laws both come up short.

Then much of it can be simplified to one rule as Jesus taught:

Love your neighbor as yourself.




7 posted on 08/23/2003 12:13:12 AM PDT by WOSG
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]


To: WOSG
Actually, the Greeks were fairly open to foreign cults, tending to take a syncrenistic view of foreign gods. For example, Amon, the great sun god of Egypt, became identified with Zeus. Amon had a great temple and oracle that the Greeks started going to, calling it the Oracle of Zeus-Hammon. Stories like that abound.

The Greeks themselves believed that some of their gods, notably Dionysus, were foreign gods that they had adopted rather recently.
11 posted on 08/23/2003 12:34:20 AM PDT by TheAngryClam (TOM McCLINTOCK is my choice for governor. He should be yours too.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies ]

To: WOSG
The author makes some good points, even though he does go a bit overboard. We owe a lot to the ancient Athenians, although their society was far from perfect (they practiced slavery and their government at worst was more mob rule than a constitutional republic).

I think it is false to say we have to choose between Solon and Moses. Modern Western civilization is (to greatly simplify things) mostly a mixture of Hebrew, Greek, and Roman ideas. All three cultures introduced something vital -- also something that the modern hedonists, subjectivists, and collectivists hate.

The Law of Moses introduced conscience. Concience is an inner-directed, thus individualist thing. When one goes against the dictates of conscience, one feels guilt. Most other cultures enforce morality through an other-directed sense of shame (one has broken a taboo, one has discraced one's family) rather than guilt. Both a guilt-based and a shame-based morality can be subjective, of course. I think a guilt-based morality is more sophisticated, and it is a foundation of individualism. It is not for nothing that the guilt-inducing Jewish mother is famous!

The Greeks brought us philosophy and the scientific method. They also introduced a crude idea of democarcy and a sense that no person should be above the law. One problem with the Greeks was that their concept of law was vague, and Athens was periodically subject to demagogues and tyrants.

The Romans introduced the rule of law and the first modern government.

I think some people are being too harsh on the author from infidels.org. He at least recognizes some of the pillars of our civilization. He at least respects Athens. The ideal of the left today is not ancient Athens -- no, the left's ideal is totalitarian, war-like Sparta. The left is all about opposition to guilt-inducing (thus conscience-forming) religion. The radical left hates Greek logic and reason. They hate the rule of law, although some admire the bureaucratic system of government the Romans invented (the far-far-left -- the anarcho-enviro-communists reject even this).

I think there is more to the attack on the Ten Commandments than mere secularism. The Law of Moses is an easy target because it is based in religion and the establishment clause can be abused to ban from public discourse all religiously-inspired ideas that the left opposes. If you look around at our education system and popular culture, you can see that the left is also waging war against Greek rationalsim and the Roman ideal of the rule of law rather than the rule by men.

I think some of the supporters of the Ten Commandments being posted in the Alabama courthouse go too far, also. I have heard some of them say that the First Amendment only means that the Federal government cannot establish a state church, but that any state can establish an official church. This places us in the same mess that the Founding Fathers were trying to avoid.

Most of the Colonies had an official church, and people who were not members of the official church were persecuted and had to flee to another state. People thought that William Penn was an atheist because he envisioned a colony that did not have a state-sponsored church. The Founders built on Penn's idea of no state-sponsored religion. Why would there be an Establishment Clause if the Founders wanted each state to have its own official religion?

We are being given false alternatives if the only choice is between an amoral, Spartan-like totalitarianism the far left wants and a New England-style theocracy that some religious conservatives want. I support the placing of the Ten Commandments in the courthouse because the left is against it, it is part of our civilization, and because the left wants to censor all conscience-inducing ideas. However, the theocrats' idea that no religion is valid unless it is state-sanctioned is frightening, and in a way, idolatrous and irreligious. It is ironic that some atheists and some (I said some) religious conservatives have this in common -- they have made the state their god.

41 posted on 08/23/2003 8:53:00 AM PDT by Wilhelm Tell (Lurking since 1997!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies ]

To: WOSG
For a pretty serious neo-pagan site, see NovaRoma.org.

I find polytheism logically satisfying. Mathmatically the only logical numbers for G-ds are 0, 1 and infinity. With 0 or 1 you must, to honor your G-d, always argue with anyone that disagrees with you. With an Infinite number of G-ds, you need not argue, and in fact may maintain civility when discussing religious matters. Buddha said "The things of G-d are unknown, and unknowable. So why argue?"
54 posted on 08/23/2003 9:58:43 AM PDT by donmeaker (Bigamy is one wife too many. So is monogamy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies ]

To: WOSG
Do any serious non-primitive polytheists even exist today?

Yes - Shinto and some currents of Hinduism.

125 posted on 08/24/2003 10:38:12 AM PDT by A. Pole
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson