Many, many things have been happening in this country for some time now that astonish me. One has to do with the political onslaught of anti-religion, and especially anti-Christianity.
Prayer and Bibles have been removed from schools and other public places and functions. Religious symbols, especially Christian symbols have been banned everywhere. Christmas has been banned from everywhere you turn, including stores where people shop.
The excuse is they might offend someone. About 85% of the population are Christian and 15% of the population are atheist, agnostic or other religions. The percentages may be a little more or less, but the point is the population of our country is Christian far more than all other categories combined. It makees absolutely no sense to offend the majority of the country to keep from offending a minority of the country.
I have spoken out against this many times. A few others have also. What is really disturbing to me is the clergy are not speaking out against this in the public forum. Time after time, I look for the clergy to step forward and speak out against this, but for the most part, they are silent.
Another thing happening in this country with frequent regularity is the political hatchet jo being done on a few women in this country, who dare to speak out when their beliefs and opinions are not those of the far left. These women are being demonized terribly and unfairly. Sarah Pailin and Miss California USA are two good expamples. These women are being viciously and unjustly attacked. All women should be offended by what is being done to them.
The women’s lib movement has been extremely silent in each of these cases. Instead of the women of this country speaking out in outrage over the treatment given them, They are silent.
The clergy should be ashamed of themselves. Are they vicars of Christ? Or are they just trying to make a soft living masquerading as such? The womens lib organizations should also be ashamed of themselves. They have lost all credibility with their silence.
Dear Buddy Fred,
I am writing this not to start a debate but rather to state my opinion and hopefully others will too.
I have to take umbrage regarding your second paragraph: I am of the belief that prayer should NOT be forced upon school children, particularly now that schools are a melting pot of different religions and cultures. Because there is such a wide diversity amongst school children, I do maintain that the world’s religions should be discussed in the classroom, but definitely not practiced. Religion is a lifelong process and it’s not something that can be taught in schools…it can be talked about, but not forced upon. I also do not think that children should be given time to practice their religion in school. This is what houses of worship are for. Textbooks belong in schools and the home, and Bibles in church and the home.
If your statistics are correct and 85% of Americans are Christian, then I guess I fit somewhere in that 85%. But I also practice doctrines of Judaism, Buddhism, and Randyism…so part of me fits somewhere in that other 15%. However, being part of the 85% Christian population would NEVER EVER EVER make me want to be associated with the followers of Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson, Oral Roberts, and their ilk…NO! NO! NO! And I am sure there are millions of their followers. So I take myself out of that percentage.
As for Miss California: The whole beauty pageant concept is a total waste of plasma and oxygen that could be used for better purposes…like for bread mold and fungi. Her personal opinions are hers and not the nation’s, and I don’t want her being an ambassador around the world speaking on my behalf.
I am quoting this from Wikipedia which better states my view regarding “separation of church and state”:
Separation of church and state is a political and legal doctrine that government and religious institutions are to be kept separate and independent from each other. The term most often refers to the combination of two principles: secularity of government and freedom of religious exercise.
The phrase separation of church and state is generally traced to the letter written by Thomas Jefferson in 1802 to the Danbury Baptists, in which he referred to the First Amendment to the United States Constitution as creating a “wall of separation” between church and state. The phrase was then quoted by the United States Supreme Court first in 1878, and then in a series of cases starting in 1948. This led to increased popular and political discussion of the concept.
Another early user of the term was James Madison, the principal drafter of the United States Bill of Rights, who often wrote of “total separation of the church from the state.” “Strongly guarded as is the separation between Religion & Govt in the Constitution of the United States,” Madison wrote, and he declared, “practical distinction between Religion and Civil Government is essential to the purity of both, and as guaranteed by the Constitution of the United States.” In a letter to Edward Livingston Madison further expanded, “We are teaching the world the great truth that Govts. do better without Kings & Nobles than with them. The merit will be doubled by the other lesson that Religion flourishes in greater purity, without than with the aid of Govt.” This attitude is further reflected in the Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom, originally authored by Thomas Jefferson, but championed by Madison, and guaranteeing that no one may be compelled to finance any religion or denomination.
Under the United States Constitution, the treatment of religion by the government is broken into two clauses: the establishment clause and the free exercise clause. While both are discussed in the context of the separation of church and state, it is more often discussed in regard to whether certain state actions would amount to an impermissible government establishment of religion.