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

To: gcruse
I completely understand your point. Mine wording may be weak, but the intent is more aimed at preventing the imposition of militant atheism as a defacto state religion than anything else.

Our founding fathers did not hide the fact that they were religious, and did not hesitate to reflect that in their public roles. To my eyes, this is how it should be. Representatives from religious areas should be allowed to reflect that in their lives and vocations, just as representatives from areas that are more secular should be allowed to not. Nothing more, nothing less. Not the imposition of a religous state, nor the imposition of an atheist state. Jesus' realm is not Caesers'.

But more importantly, the fact that we differ in that regard should never turn me from people like you as allies, nor people like you from me. If either happens, then this is the exact problem that that particular wording (poorly constructed as it is) was aimed at trying to prevent.

Regards

28 posted on 07/31/2002 6:28:22 PM PDT by Dales
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies ]


Mine=My. The beer at Billy's Roadhouse is the culprit, I swear. :-)
29 posted on 07/31/2002 6:29:38 PM PDT by Dales
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies ]

To: Dales
From your take on the WOD,
abortion, and religion in government,
I'd say you are a libertarian-leaning
conservative, making me a
conservative-leaning libertarian.
I can live with that. :)
31 posted on 07/31/2002 6:32:41 PM PDT by gcruse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | 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