There is just something about inspiration. I have always maintained for example that some of my better ideas have come to me whilst otherwise occupied. To get a picture of what I mean, take Rodin’s “The Thinker” and work out what he is really doing.
Like this morning for example, I am driving to work. There is a slow spot in the traffic, a queue for the next set of lights, and the old mind starts to wander again.
Why is it, after the English spent about 500 years before getting religion out of the governance of their country, after the Pilgrims fled England and the politics of religious persecution, after writing a Constitution granting all freedom of religious worship but excluding it from direct involvement in governance, after all of this history; the U.S. as a nation gives the determined appearance of trying to revert to some form of religious involvement in the governance of their country.
They have not yet asked the Archbishops.
It might not be an individual charismatic Christian fundamentalist.
Or is it?
Tuesday, October 12, 2004
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
Don't worry. Since I have the firm belief that the government is ONLY allowed to have religion if it is specificaly MY religion, the rest is unlikely to happen in a suvivable fashion.
What that means is that I've read enough history to know that a relgion-based governemt will come after me sooner or later. I have no aprehension about the "preemptive" strike. I know better than to wait around for them to come to my door at night in their brown shirts. If any religion (save mine) takes over the government, I have no choice but to concider their actions treason against the Constitution. That means a reversion to early American patriotic practices such as guerrilla warfare.
LibertyBob
Probligo,
I had always thought that Rodin’s sculpture was called ‘The Stinker’. Thanks for clearing that up.
Since LibertyBob is young and has been trained for the last couple of decades in the American government schools’ revisionist history schema perhaps he should be excused for his ignorance of American history. I would expect you, however, to research some primary source documentation to test the accuracy of your wandering mind’s ideological tendencies. Read the Pilgrim’s ‘Mayflower Compact’ signed even before they got off the ship. Read the debated points of the representatives as they decided how the first amendment was to be worded. Note the types of laws that were passed after the ‘Bill of Rights’ was added. Read the context surrounding the Jefferson letter from which the ‘wall of separation’ quote is taken. Find out how the early U.S. Supreme Courts spoke and ruled. Early American patriotic practices included attending Sunday church services in the House of Representatives building, calling for national days of prayer, fasting, & thanksgiving, or heading and/or participating in Bible Societies.
Instead of referring to a movement to ‘revert to some form of religious involvement’, you more accurately would use ‘revert back to some...’
Please don’t try to use history in your opposition to something like this. It doesn’t stand up to scrutiny.
It would be better just to say that the American founders were superstitious and ignorant. We are more enlightened now.
Ya ain’t gotta worry ‘bout us toofless reglar relijus carsmatik funnamentalists. Muhbee those snake hannlers, but not the rest of us’ns.
The Americans I've met who want more religion in our government and schools make the assumption that it will be their religion (exactly as they envision it) that will be enforced. I think most of us are happier with the two separated, but the media doesn't make a point of interviewing the contented masses.
I read somewhere that George Bush is the most ecumenical President we've ever had: he's mentioned Jesus less than most and is the only one ever to have praised Islam. It sounds like he gets his religion from AA, which insists on the acknowledgement of a Higher Power, but isn't picky about which one as long as It supports abstinence from alcohol.
In Query XV of Thomas Jefferson's "The State of Virginia" he wrote,
"The legitimate powers of government extend to such acts as only are injurious to others. But it does me no harm for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods, or no god. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg."
Even though the average person, including those elected to office, may hold to popular religious practices, there have always been those more enlightened individuals who've know better. The problem is that they also knew better than to be to vocal when calling the general populace a bunch of morons.
LibertyBob
Post a Comment