Tête-à-Tête-Tête » Church/State Separation

Ashamed to be a Tennessean

smijer — Fri, 25 Jun 2010 13:43:55 +0000

Today, I am.

Read full post, see embedded content, and comment here!
Posted in: Church/State Separation, Religion
Post tags:

Feed enhanced by Better Feed from Ozh

The first GW

smijer — Mon, 07 Jun 2010 11:00:51 +0000

George Washington by Horatio Greenoug, Photo by Claire Houck, Creative Commons licensed

Riding in the car the other day, I tuned in a segment on the radio that amounted to #1 a hagriography of George Washington, #2 an argument that he was a little-”o” orthodox and devout Christian, and #3 a lamentation that GW was written out of modern textbooks (and when mentioned his religion is given a revisionist treatment). It was from the author of George Washington’s Sacred Fire, Dr. Peter Lillback.

On point one… while remaining cognizant that hagriography isn’t proper history, I enjoyed this aspect of the segment. I like a good hagriography, and there’s hardly a better subject for it than the father of our country. King George is said to have remarked on George Washington’s plan to take a voluntary term limit and pass the presidency along democratically chosen lines that “if he does that, he will be the greatest man in the world.” Considering that GW could have easily chosen to keep the position for life (and set an anti-democratic precedent), his decision to hand over power really does put him in a very good light. This and a number of forward-thinking actions make it difficult to think of GW as anything but great.

The second point was also interesting. It was very partisan (as one would expect on Moody radio), offering evidence for GW’s orthodoxy and devotion uncritically, while glossing over a number of sticky points. I believe that this is one of those cases where the center between two extremes really has a lot to recommend it as being closer to the truth. The evidence presented does in fact rule out the notion that GW was a partisan Deist, hostile toward orthodox Christianity. But, the evidence not presented does soften the notion that he was a devout and partisan orthodox Christian who opposed the spirit of separation of church and state as understood by Madison, Adams, and Jefferson. Nor was he hostile to orthodox religion in the mold of Thomas Paine. He might best be understood as a Christian Deist in the mold of Matthew Tindal – but there is plenty of room for debate and Orthodox Christianity is certainly within the realm of possibility.

The third point was mainly polemic. What Moody calls “historical revisionism” is probably a result of secular partisans playing up the evidence against Washington’s orthodoxy, and even of responsible historians treating the issue as difficult and contentious – denying the view that Washington was clearly and certainly orthodox. On the other hand I had to agree that the state of modern education, and the common disinterest in George Washington and the other founders is regrettable in the extreme. Should educators renew their interest in Washington, I hope they will present his whole life fairly and historically, even the unfortunate bits. And, I hope they will portray modern understanding of his religious views with the nuance responsibility requires.

I recommend the Wikipedia article on GW’s religion – at least as it currently stands. It includes a large segment on Lillback’s book, and helps see how the issue can be clouded by seemingly contradictory evidence.

Read full post, see embedded content, and comment here!
Posted in: Church/State Separation, History, Religion
Post tags: Christianity, Deism, George Washington, Religion, Separation of Church and State

Feed enhanced by Better Feed from Ozh

Pitting the First Amendment Against Itself

smijer — Fri, 27 Feb 2009 21:00:03 +0000

I really don’t think that the right of free speech should belong to the government, or for that matter, any other “institution”. It belongs to people.

Worse yet to give that right to the government in such a way as to undermine freedom of religion for the people the government is supposed to represent.

Bad stuff.

Read full post, see embedded content, and comment here!
Posted in: Church/State Separation
Post tags: First Amendment, SCOTUS

Feed enhanced by Better Feed from Ozh

Unholy Alliance

Buck — Wed, 07 Nov 2007 16:30:48 +0000

or the manifestation of The Will of God ?

Hillary C versus Rudy G!

This is gonna be wonderful.

Read full post, see embedded content, and comment here!
Posted in: Church/State Separation, Uncategorized
Post tags:

Feed enhanced by Better Feed from Ozh

Buzz Thomas

smijer — Thu, 17 May 2007 11:00:57 +0000

10 Things Your Minister Wants To Tell You (But Can’t Because He Needs the Job) for the “steeple dropouts” who grew up on organized religion, as well as for the millions of Americans who, each Sunday, recite ancient creeds about virgin births and bodily resurrections, all the while feeling just a tad unconvinced.

Rev. Oliver Thomas is a Southern Baptist minister and constitutional lawyer who, over the last decade, has been at the frontlines of debates regarding religion, science, and education. Thomas currently serves as Executive Director of the Niswonger Foundation and lives in Tennessee with his wife and two daughters.

Friday at 7:00 p.m. at Rock Point Books, a place I’ve been meaning to check out for a while. They seem to have a lot of local authors come by for book signings.

This is via a friend who plans to attend. I plan to attend with him, if I can. Not that Oliver “Buzz” Thomas and I will agree on much, but it’s true that I grew up in his denomination, and while I left it for reasons of disbelief, I could have just as easily left it for moral reasons. Thomas, according to his writings, sees a solution to some of those moral problems. Good on him. Also, he’s a staunch advocate for first amendment protections, especially in the public schools.

Read full post, see embedded content, and comment here!
Posted in: Church/State Separation, Religion, Uncategorized
Post tags:

Feed enhanced by Better Feed from Ozh

Jew Defends Muslim from Dumbass

smijer — Thu, 30 Nov 2006 18:08:01 +0000

The NJDC gives Dennis Prager a much deserved ass-whoopin over this demonstration of the dumb.

While the NJDC sets the history straight & addresses the constitutional “question” quite well, what struck me was this part:

The answer is obvious — Ellison is a Muslim. And whoever decides these matters, not to mention virtually every editorial page in America, is not going to offend a Muslim. In fact, many of these people argue it will be a good thing because Muslims around the world will see what an open society America is and how much Americans honor Muslims and the Koran.

This argument appeals to all those who believe that one of the greatest goals of America is to be loved by the world, and especially by Muslims because then fewer Muslims will hate us (and therefore fewer will bomb us).

Why does this get me so bad? Well, it’s because the answer really is obvious, and one really must have been believing all that right-wing propaganda for a long time to jump to an “obvious” conclusion that is so obviously wrong and far removed from decency and American values. The real reason? Because of simple, basic, respect. Because of the Golden Rule. If Dennis Prager doesn’t mind being made to swear his oath (should some incredibly backward district elect him to Congress) on a Koran, then he might be excused for wishing to ask Ellison to put his hand on a Bible. But Prager would have a hissy fit at the merest suggestion that he should have to swear on another religion’s holy book. More…

But these naive people do not appreciate that America will not change the attitude of a single American-hating Muslim by allowing Ellison to substitute the Koran for the Bible. In fact, the opposite is more likely: Ellison’s doing so will embolden Islamic extremists and make new ones, as Islamists, rightly or wrongly, see the first sign of the realization of their greatest goal — the Islamicization of America.

Maybe I am naive. Prager probably wouldn’t know naive if it walked up and smacked him on the ass (which, maybe – given his hook-line-&-sinker accetpance of far-right talking points… maybe it has), but hell… maybe I am naive. The idea, of course, is to treat people with respect because it is the right thing to do – not because you are afraid they will bomb you. But here’s where I may be naive – when you do treat people with respect, maybe you make friends. Not friends from the assholes who want to blow themselves up in your Pizza Parlor… but from their sane cousins, neighbors, whatever. Friends are good. When you have friends, you can establish some trust. You can talk to people. You can get people to understand you & you can get to understand them. Everybody figures out that everybody else is a person & whatever their differences, there are no horns growing from the heads of others. When that happens accross “enemy” cultures… there can be hope of turning back on the course to mutual self-destruction. It isn’t about changing the mind of a maniac – it is about reaching out to the “other” and building bridges of respect and trust. Then, the maniacs will be in trouble. Their own country’s police will be a little less inclined to look the other way when it is their friends and friendships that are being targeted.

Maybe that’s a little utopian. Maybe it’s unrealistic. But, I like to believe that sometimes you can do the right thing just because it’s the right thing to do.. and sometimes, it makes life better for you & everyone else, too.

Read full post, see embedded content, and comment here!
Posted in: Church/State Separation, Culture, Justice, Media, Politics
Post tags:

Feed enhanced by Better Feed from Ozh

Reason #5832 to Join the UU

smijer — Tue, 10 Oct 2006 01:09:34 +0000

Because religion gets all the breaks.

That is, at least until the bad religions manage to declassify us, even we non-believers can get on the bandwagon. And we might as well. If you are into schadenfreude, it’s nice to know that when the religious right lobbies on behalf of state sponsored religion, they have to be quietly ~~cursing~~ using slang euphemisms like “darnation” to themselves that the heathen get a few of those same benefits.

From the NYT article:

At any moment, state inspectors can step uninvited into one of the three child care centers that Ethel White runs in Auburn, Ala., to make sure they meet state requirements intended to ensure that the children are safe. There must be continuing training for the staff. Her nurseries must have two sinks, one exclusively for food preparation. All cabinets must have safety locks. Medications for the children must be kept under lock and key, and refrigerated.

The Rev. Ray Fuson of the Harvest Temple Church of God in Montgomery, Ala., does not have to worry about unannounced state inspections at the day care center his church runs. Alabama exempts church day care programs from state licensing requirements, which were tightened after almost a dozen children died in licensed and unlicensed day care centers in the state in two years.

The differences do not end there. As an employer, Ms. White must comply with the civil rights laws; if employees feel mistreated, they can take the center to court. Religious organizations, including Pastor Fuson’s, are protected by the courts from almost all lawsuits filed by their ministers or other religious staff members, no matter how unfairly those employees think they have been treated.

And if you are curious about how Ms. White’s nonprofit center uses its public grants and donations, read the financial statements she is required to file each year with the Internal Revenue Service. There are no I.R.S. reports from Harvest Temple. Federal law does not require churches to file them.
[...]

The special breaks amount to “a sort of religious affirmative action program,” said John Witte Jr., director of the Center for the Study of Law and Religion at the Emory University law school.
[...]

“The religious community has a lot of pull, and senators are very deferential to this kind of legislation,” said Richard R. Hammar, the editor of Church Law & Tax Report and an accountant with law and divinity degrees from Harvard.

As a result of these special breaks, religious organizations of all faiths stand in a position that American businesses — and the thousands of nonprofit groups without that “religious” label — can only envy. And the new breaks come at a time when many religious organizations are expanding into activities — from day care centers to funeral homes, from ice cream parlors to fitness clubs, from bookstores to broadcasters — that compete with these same businesses and nonprofit organizations.

Religious organizations are exempt from many federal, state and local laws and regulations covering social services, including addiction treatment centers and child care, like those in Alabama.

Federal law gives religious congregations unique tools to challenge government restrictions on the way they use their land. Consequently, land-use restrictions that are a result of longstanding public demands for open space or historic preservation may be trumped by a religious ministry’s construction plans, as in a current dispute in Boulder County, Colo.
[...]

Religious organizations defend the exemptions as a way to recognize the benefits religious groups have provided — operating schools, orphanages, old-age homes and hospitals long before social welfare and education were widely seen as the responsibility of government.

But while ministries that run soup kitchens and homeless shelters benefit from these exemptions, secular nonprofits serving the same needy people often do not. And rather than just rewarding charitable works that benefit society, these breaks are equally available to religious organizations that provide no charitable services to anyone.

(All emphasis mine)

H/T to onegoodmove

Read full post, see embedded content, and comment here!
Posted in: Church/State Separation, Culture, Politics
Post tags:

Feed enhanced by Better Feed from Ozh