To the Romans, all religions were equally true.
To the philosophers, all religions were equally false.
To the politicians, all religions were equally useful.
Does this sound familiar? Our politicians keep pulling God and religion into politics. President George W. Bush’s mangling of the wall separating state and church is well documented. In 1954, when President Eisenhower signed the bill adding “under God” to the Pledge of Allegiance (and ironically removing “indivisible”), his words explicitly showed that the idea was to link religiosity and patriotism. In 1988 President Reagan established the National Day of Prayer. On March 27, 2003, House Resolution 153 passed by an overwhelming vote. It urges the President to issue a proclamation “designating a day for humility, prayer, and fasting for all people of the United States.” We are “to seek guidance from God to achieve a greater understanding of our own failings,” and “to gain resolve in meeting the challenges that confront our nation.” The Senate unanimously passed a similar bill. These government actions violate the spirit, if not the letter, of the First Amendment. I say that we are becoming a de facto theocracy.
2006-08-18
13:40:44
·
14 answers
·
asked by
Mr. Mojo Risin
3
in
Society & Culture
➔ Religion & Spirituality
I truly wish that there were more intelligent, observant people like you in this country. Thank you.
2006-08-18 13:47:00
·
answer #1
·
answered by autumnfaerie8 4
·
0⤊
1⤋
First of all, here in Texas (Idaho too) & everywhere else I've lived, Arizona. California, Nevada, Alaska, New Mexico, everyone still says "indivisible" right after "under GOD". Next, there is nothing in the constitution about separation of church & state. If you do not believe, that is ok because separation of church & state actually means the government can't make you. It also means you can't make laws prohibiting others from worshiping either in public or private. Therefore even if you were to find something that says it, you must be sure to follow it as I am sure that you don't want to be guilty of violating it.
2006-08-18 20:54:57
·
answer #2
·
answered by mazell41 5
·
1⤊
1⤋
Both government and organised religion are concerned with controlling human behaviour.Like actors on a stage,they play to the watching crowd.
Wise folk turn their backs upon all the social theatrics and go about their business without taking any notice of what the actors have to say.What happens up there on the stage has no bearing upon what is happening in real life.
2006-08-19 00:21:52
·
answer #3
·
answered by mystic_master3 4
·
1⤊
0⤋
Deep down, every truly religious person desires a theocracy. For theocracy is absolute congruence between the doctirnes of faith and the policies of government. Non-theocratic governments are ipso facto pluralistic and secular, and ultimately enemies to religion as a cohesive social force.
2006-08-18 20:54:04
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
i noticed that you left something out...or rather put something else in its place. i wonder if you did this by accident, or to suit your purpose in making your points more credible. your say that eisenhower added 'under god' to the pledge to link religosity and patriotism. while this may be true indirectly, the point in adding those words was to distance our nation and government from the communist russians. i do agree with you about the philsophers and politicians, but where do you get the idea that romans thought all religions equally true?
2006-08-18 23:47:15
·
answer #5
·
answered by ashley 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
I think people worry too much about religion. Which is why it is such an issue. I dont agree with any of the above theories... how about this: To a rationalist all religons are equally useless... the only purpose they have at all is to try to give people a code of morals to live by... why do we need religions to do this... shouldnt we be able to be moral beings without religion?
2006-08-19 01:16:11
·
answer #6
·
answered by korn_issues_29 3
·
1⤊
0⤋
Don't worry-the USA will never be a theocracy. There are too many factions within Christianity.
By the way the amendment's purpose was to keep the government out of the business of the church, not to keep people with Christian beliefs out of government. Read the amendment.
2006-08-18 20:51:58
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
1⤋
I agree with your statement about the philosophers and politicians. I don't know any Romans, so I can't ask them.
2006-08-18 20:49:58
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
Don't be afraid.
The ACLU hates Christians.
And it has money and power. It will protect you from religious people.
2006-08-19 07:57:17
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
It's a scary thought, isn't it. Anyone know how to rent an apartment in Canada, because I may have to do that soon...
2006-08-18 20:46:45
·
answer #10
·
answered by Girl Wonder 5
·
1⤊
1⤋