So we're getting into the high season for atheists, replete with demands for removal of anything Christian related to Christmas, talk of the solstice, billboards insulting peoples' intelligence, and the ACLU insisting that it is a secular celebration for everyone.
This year, we also have a court case in one of the NJ school systems, where an atheist family has brought litigation against the district for "forcing" their child to recite all, or part of, the Pledge of Allegiance, with the district claiming that it is voluntary for everyone, and moving for dismissal.
Like everyone else, I recited the Pledge for 12 years, but it (the Pledge itself) certainly has more meaning to me now than it did then, when I recite it at meetings for whatever club/organization I'm attending.
I realize the history of the Pledge, that it's contained "...under God..." for only the last 60 years. I think the greater question is why it was added in the first place? Who was responsible for it's addition? What would the reaction of the country have been, had they been polled, or how many would have voted for or against it, had it been put on a ballot, in 1953? With the continued marginalization of the religious from the public square, I think a look at where we've been, and where we're going, is more important than fighting over the rote recitation of a Pledge in schools.
My feeling is that separation of the Church and the State is essential, and benefits both. However, this movement of "practice your religion, but keep it to yourself," is nonsense. Certainly, people are going to form their opinions, reason, and often vote, along the lines of what moral compass they employ -- that's simply human nature.
Attempts to squelch that are not rational, and are simply part of a movement that pursues a Pyrrhic victory -- the removal of religion from public life, at the cost of the great decline of society. To my eyes, we are much worse off, as a society, than in 1953. Should all faith-based hospitals shutter their doors (one in eleven of us will, at some point, use one)? Should faith-based charity cease to exist? They do most of the heavy lifting, both in action and financially. I wasn't alive, and my parents were kids, so maybe I need more perspective from those who lived it. Obviously, the great shame of segregation was still in place then, and of all the progressive movements, this certainly was the most noble.
Since then, we have been constantly reminded of that failing, in situations that simply cannot compare, as a supposed example of how the majority can be terribly wrong. In this case, we are allowing a radical fringe, 6-8% of people who are anti-theists, to drive policy by claiming bias. The fact that fully 90% of us would vote to keep God's name on the currency, and in the Pledge of Allegiance, to them, is immaterial. Many, I suppose, don't care either way, and the sun would continue to rise and set, where it should, if they did away with it. If anyone can argue against the linear decline in society along with active practicing of faith, across the board, over the last 45-50 years or so, I'd certainly like to hear it.
This post was edited on 11/20 9:00 AM by donnie_baseball
This year, we also have a court case in one of the NJ school systems, where an atheist family has brought litigation against the district for "forcing" their child to recite all, or part of, the Pledge of Allegiance, with the district claiming that it is voluntary for everyone, and moving for dismissal.
Like everyone else, I recited the Pledge for 12 years, but it (the Pledge itself) certainly has more meaning to me now than it did then, when I recite it at meetings for whatever club/organization I'm attending.
I realize the history of the Pledge, that it's contained "...under God..." for only the last 60 years. I think the greater question is why it was added in the first place? Who was responsible for it's addition? What would the reaction of the country have been, had they been polled, or how many would have voted for or against it, had it been put on a ballot, in 1953? With the continued marginalization of the religious from the public square, I think a look at where we've been, and where we're going, is more important than fighting over the rote recitation of a Pledge in schools.
My feeling is that separation of the Church and the State is essential, and benefits both. However, this movement of "practice your religion, but keep it to yourself," is nonsense. Certainly, people are going to form their opinions, reason, and often vote, along the lines of what moral compass they employ -- that's simply human nature.
Attempts to squelch that are not rational, and are simply part of a movement that pursues a Pyrrhic victory -- the removal of religion from public life, at the cost of the great decline of society. To my eyes, we are much worse off, as a society, than in 1953. Should all faith-based hospitals shutter their doors (one in eleven of us will, at some point, use one)? Should faith-based charity cease to exist? They do most of the heavy lifting, both in action and financially. I wasn't alive, and my parents were kids, so maybe I need more perspective from those who lived it. Obviously, the great shame of segregation was still in place then, and of all the progressive movements, this certainly was the most noble.
Since then, we have been constantly reminded of that failing, in situations that simply cannot compare, as a supposed example of how the majority can be terribly wrong. In this case, we are allowing a radical fringe, 6-8% of people who are anti-theists, to drive policy by claiming bias. The fact that fully 90% of us would vote to keep God's name on the currency, and in the Pledge of Allegiance, to them, is immaterial. Many, I suppose, don't care either way, and the sun would continue to rise and set, where it should, if they did away with it. If anyone can argue against the linear decline in society along with active practicing of faith, across the board, over the last 45-50 years or so, I'd certainly like to hear it.
This post was edited on 11/20 9:00 AM by donnie_baseball
