Wednesday, March 02, 2005

Separate

Whatever happened to separation of church and state?

"Ten Commandments displays should be allowed on government property because they pay tribute to America's religious and legal history, the Supreme Court was told Wednesday, in cases that could render a new definition of the role that religion plays in the life of the nation."

"The idea of having a fence around the Ten Commandments to make clear the state has nothing to do with it, I think that is bending it too far," said acting Solicitor General Paul Clement, in arguing against a strict First Amendment wall between church and state."

Check out the full article

And why do people insist on having the Ten Commandments displayed?

-Jean Chen

4 Comments:

At 5:15 PM, Anonymous Nathaniel M. Smith said...

Let's put the Magna Carta up instead; there are as many or more direct links to that document than to Exodus & Leviticus.

What about those who refuse to salute the U.S. flag & pledge their allegiance to our country in the name of religion? How dependable are those people as neighbors & citizens in a time of terrorists? One group in particular claims it's the equivalent of bowing to an idol -- which is a load of crap, like most of their other quirks -- but what I want to know is, will they shelter anti-U.S. rogues in the name of Christian charity and brotherhood? When political fealty is against the creed of a religion, that religion is against the creed of the nation.

 
At 11:42 AM, Blogger Jay Germ said...

I sense some irony coming through in your reply. It seems that you are using the same worst case scenario logic as some radical Christians. By saying that those who support the Ten Commandments would rather aid terrorists than support their country and government, your argument is just as bad in motive as the fanatics cry that government is trying to ban Christianity in favor of secularism. No proof or logic, simply for effect.

 
At 10:30 PM, Blogger The Green Man said...

I am also somewhat puzzled by Nathaniel's comment here. If it's sarcastic, I should just ignore it. But if there's something serious in there, I'd like to respond.

The "creed of the nation" is really pretty limited. If we believe anything as a Body in America, it's that everyone is entitled to an opinion. Historically, we believe it is most important to permit disagreement when it really counts. We decide over an over that political dissent, and the ability to express our unhappiness with the government and the country, is our most fundamental Right.

If people choose not to "Pledge Allegiance" to a Flag (an "icon" if ever I saw one), that's perfectly OK. In fact, it's even OK not to "Pledge Allegiance" to the nation. Remember, We the People are the nation. I don't need to "Pledge Allegiance" to myself. The Government of the nation works for us. Our legislators and executives should be "Pledging Allegiance" to us, not the other way around.

But even that is too extreme. The Constitution specifically prohibits us from excluding people from office for failure to take some oath or pass some test. We can elect anyone we please, even if they want to dismantle the whole government, or split it up into separate States. The only thing they are required to affirm is that they will support the Constitution as long as they are working under its auspices.

So, back to the point, if there are people in America who feel it is charitable to harbor outcasts, or even who travel to foreign training camps to learn about how "evil" the United States has been, the creed of this nation welcomes them and includes them. This nation is not at odds with any of the religious beliefs you mention.

 
At 9:56 PM, Blogger Editor Choice said...

Many Thanks for your nice blog. I will come back.
I wanted just to mention an interesting site about Religions. With more than 500 pages, Religion News and Articles:Religion Universe: Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism, Islam, Judaism, Taoism (Daoism) and many others

 

Post a Comment

<< Home