I try! Believe me, I really really try.
But I just can't get myself to swallow all the spoon-fed pablum that seems to be the primary diet of right wing religious fanatics and far right conservatives.
I mean, talk about an unhealthy diet. I get a stomach ache reading the stuff, and the labels I'd put on it would not pass muster at the department of food and drugs.
Now... I confess; I also have some major bones to pick with those who play way out in left field. I'm a nice guy and I'm in favor of a helping hand. But, at some point folks need to demonstrate the willingness to stand on their own two feet.
I'm a registered independent. My pragmatic nature requires empirical thinking. The theoretical is based on guesswork and conjecture. It works well in science fiction but falls short of being factual or even applicable in most instances. I tend to give more attention to planning than conducting. If I stray from practical thought it's in deciding if demonstrable conclusions are worth pursuing.
It's clear to me that separation of church and state was intended by our founders. It's also a wise idea. Religion belongs in the home. It's an individual and family matter. It's a choice; no more or less deserving than any other personal choice. Crying about where God can or cannot be displayed rings hollow. Both sides have overstepped reasonable boundries. While I don't subscribe to the concept of an omnipotent creator, I married a devote christian and we blended well. It's a simple matter of allowing individuality as opposed to foisting beliefs on others. My spirituality belongs to me.
It's also clear... to me, that government is too big. It's also clear, to me, that won't change without a major revolution, at least not soon; and it's not a practical solution. That kinda puts us in deep do-do. I hope Mr. Obama has a big shovel. He is, at least, a ray of sunshine peeking through the gunmetal gray clouds that have lingered for the past eight years. He was't my first choice. But he was and is a better alternative than the other choices provided.
I don't need my government to be my big brother. I already have one and he's a pretty cool guy, thank you very much. Nor do I need my government inventing excuses and/or lies to play world cops as a way of filling the coffers of corporations and cronies. Forcing a redistribution of wealth is not the answer. But neither is widening the divide. In a free enterprise society one must wonder why failing companies are thrown a life raft by government. Would a mom and pop business receive the same consideration?
Yes .... 911 was a tragedy. And yes we need to be alert to attacks at home. But I've seen more illusions, at Disney's Fantasyland, that are far more believable than Bush and company's theatrics and scare tactics cloaked in pretence.
My country, and the world, is in an economic slide. We have an outgoing president to thank for much, but not all of it. I have not seen such incompetence in Washington since the mid 60's. I have no doubt Mr. GW Bush will go down in history as our most incompetent president. He was no Ronald Reagan and certainly no JFK.
I try to stay away from political and religious skirmishes. I don't always succeed. I've had my say and I'm hoping for better days ahead.
Many of your arguments are good, but you are not on solid ground when you rely on "separation of church and state" as a foundation for one of your points. Jefferson is the person who brought that metaphor into our common usage, although we misuse it terribly compared to what he intended. The University of Virginia has Jefferson's writing collected on their website. Many are organized by category. On the page of statements he made about the need for the Bill of Rights, you will find six references to "freedom of religion" but not even one to "separation of church and state."
ReplyDelete(churchvstate.blogspot.com/2008/11/thomas-jefferson-meaning-of-bill-of.html)
Charles Carroll was one of the signers of the Declaration of Independence. He was the longest lived signer of the Declaration of Independence and the Continental Congress. Consider his words:
"Without morals a republic cannot subsist any length of time; they therefore who are decrying the Christian religion, whose morality is so sublime and pure...are undermining the solid foundation of morals, the best security for the duration of free governments."
Several of our Founding Fathers said religion is important to the survival of our government. For example, James Madison said, "We've staked the whole future of American civilization not on the power of government, far from it. We have staked the future of all our political institutions upon the capacity of each and all of us....to Govern ourselves according to the commandments of God. The future and success of America is not in this Constitution, but in the laws of God upon which this Constitution is founded."
The same Founders who said those things also were wary of a "big brother" government. So am I. When politicians or public figures use religion for unworthy goals, I object to it. I'm sure you do as well. But my objection is not based on a metaphor that was never intended to fully explain what the First Amendment says.