Bush and Christians taking over?

[Scott1]

I've seen a few postings about the fear of many non-Christians that the US may be slipping into some kind of Christian Theocracy.....

I think not.... in fact, I just wanted to post this article as evidence of yet another assault:


EXTRA: Declaration of Independence Banned at California School

OS ANGELES (Reuters) - A California teacher has been barred by his school from giving students documents from American history that refer to God -- including the Declaration of Independence.

http://www.catholic.org/cathcom/national_story.php?id=11419

Just food for thought....

 

[Ceridwen018]

I don't think so either, Scott. I think that's just a bunch of media propaganda trying to get people riled up. That article from Los Angeles is absolutely ridiculous though. I don't agree with that at all. Belief in god is a part of our history, and I have no problem with that.

It kinda makes you wonder though--did California ban the D of I because they're fanatic about the separation of Church and state, or because they want to secede from the Union?

 

[HelpMe]

food

for

thought

 

[Mr Spinkles]

I've seen a few postings about the fear of many non-Christians that the US may be slipping into some kind of Christian Theocracy.....

The eye roll says it all. I agree with you Scott, it's silly.

 

[Pah]

food

for

thought

The subject of the thread appears to be Theocracy

Bob

 

[Pah]

I've seen a few postings about the fear of many non-Christians that the US may be slipping into some kind of Christian Theocracy.....

I think not.... in fact, I just wanted to post this article as evidence of yet another assault:


EXTRA: Declaration of Independence Banned at California School

OS ANGELES (Reuters) - A California teacher has been barred by his school from giving students documents from American history that refer to God -- including the Declaration of Independence.

http://www.catholic.org/cathcom/national_story.php?id=11419

Just food for thought....

I'm one of those that fear the imposition of a theocracy and I see the "budding" of it in the argument against homosexual marriage when the sin of Leviticus (sp?) is cited. I see it when there is talk of "stacking" the Supreme Court with judges favorable to views of the radical Religious Right. I see it when there is talk about creationism in school science classes. It appears when there is talk about "taking back the town square". It is apparent in the discussion of voting dictates of a Church. The display of religious commandments in our courts and government areas imply a religious justice.

While it will be neigh impossible to form a complete theocratic government, the trend is obvious. Talk of succession is brandied about by those that want to move to South Carolina and establish a state government along Christian theocratic lines. Organizations have formed (documented in my threads) that espouse the establishment of God's Laws.

Who would have thought that so much organization has gone on to thwart the dispension of justice to homosexuals and succeding to muddy the waters of justice. Given strong, directed fervor of some religious, I believe it possible to usurp the Constitution. Vigilance is needed to see that it doesn't happen and that is dependent on recognizing the ramifications of successful campaigning and religious persausion

My hope is that I am entirely wrong.

Bob

 

[Mr Spinkles]

I'm one of those that fear the imposition of a theocracy and I see the "budding" of it in the argument against homosexual marriage when the sin of Leviticus (sp?) is cited. I see it when there is talk of "stacking" the Supreme Court with judges favorable to views of the radical Religious Right. I see it when there is talk about creationism in school science classes. It appears when there is talk about "taking back the town square". It is apparent in the discussion of voting dictates of a Church. The display of religious commandments in our courts and government areas imply a religious justice.

Yes, but look at it from an historical perspective. All the stuff you've listed here has been going on for hundreds of years--it's still happening, yes, but it's decreasing. Theocratic government isn't "budding" in our country, it's wilting. I think you're right that we have to be vigilant, though.

A California teacher has been barred by his school from giving students documents from American history that refer to God -- including the Declaration of Independence.

I still can't believe this....how ridiculous, lol.

 

[The Voice of Reason]

I agree with Pah. This is one time where I think your youth betrays you, Spinkles. Pah is older than I (not by much), but I think he would agree that over the span of our adult lifetimes, the push to impart religious views into our government are definitely not on the wane - rather, they are on quite a pronounced uptick (witnessed by the very items that Pah pointed out). To be honest, I think that even the most devoutly religious of the Supreme Court Justices would be hard put to incorporate much of the wishes of the religious right into their decisions. Sadly, the attacks on the rights of minorities (homosexuals, in this instance) are a very alarming indicator of that very erosion. Only time will tell how the stacking of the Supreme Court (and THAT is a reality) will impact the rights of us all.

The news item from California is ludicrous. Unfortunately, reprehensible as it may be, this represents the extreme at the opposite end of the spectrum in the "Separation of Church and State" debate.

TVOR

 

[Mr Spinkles]

This is one time where I think your youth betrays you, Spinkles.

You may be right.

Sadly, the attacks on the rights of minorities (homosexuals, in this instance) are a very alarming indicator of that very erosion.

Fifty years ago, there wasn't even so much as a debate on gay marriage, to my knowledge. Now gays are being legally married by judges in some states. How is that an "erosion"?

Of course, we do have those ridiculous amendments...but even if a federal amendment passed that bans gay marriage, I still don't see how that would be an "erosion" of rights....well, gays have never been allowed to marry in this country, so that would be more like a continuation of injustice rather than a spreading of it.

 

[The Voice of Reason]

... well, gays have never been allowed to marry in this country, so that would be more like a continuation of injustice rather than a spreading of it.

Point taken.

TVOR

 

[Pah]

You may be right.

Fifty years ago, there wasn't even so much as a debate on gay marriage, to my knowledge. Now gays are being legally married by judges in some states. How is that an "erosion"?

Of course, we do have those ridiculous amendments...but even if a federal amendment passed that bans gay marriage, I still don't see how that would be an "erosion" of rights....well, gays have never been allowed to marry in this country, so that would be more like a continuation of injustice rather than a spreading of it.

You're right in a sense of the thoughts you've given. The marriages themselves are not an erosion and the injustice is continuing.

Previously, the whole topic of homosexuality was taboo in society - "good" people just didn't talk about it. Today, when complaint is made, the dormant anti-homosexuality became active. Proposals in Hawaii, civil union in Vermont, and mariages in Massacheusetts gave impetus to the discussion of actual denial instead of sweeping it under the table.

It would be an erosion of rights, in my mind, if you recognize that the right to choose marriage and one's marriage partner is innate. The injustice, in my mind, is the outright discriminatory ban on homosexiual marriage and to not recognize the innate rights.

But these may be just nuances of the same "animal".

However, at the risk of debating in this forum, the "budding" is a retrogade reaction to a status quo that assumed the Christianity of the nation. It sprang forth when confronted with the demand for rights and liberty promised by the Constitution. We had always had a difficult time insuring full rights for minorities (slaves and women) but the "lag" time in implementation of rights is becoming shorter and shorter. That also gives urgency and energy to the "nay-sayers".

We have seen the extremist Religious Right grow from nothing before the seventies to a political powerhouse today - 30 years or so. With the knowlegde of "political marketing", pointing to selected focus groups, and growing a "base" it is feasible that a more solid and forceful theocracy can be accomplished in as many years or less.

The time to be watchful and in opposition is now.

Bob

 

[Mr Spinkles]

Point taken!