| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Brian Westley" |
| Date: |
30 Jul 2004 10:18:08 AM |
| Object: |
op-ed: "godless secularist" should never rule USA |
This religious supremacist needs to hear from some atheists.
In addition to his email, there's a link at the article to
post your opinion on this:
http://www.applegateoregonnews.com/articles/index.cfm?artOID=199027&cp=10963
Politics Benefits From People Of Faith - Godless Secularists Should
Never Rule The USA
By Dennis M. Becklin
Publisher / SouthernOregonNews.com
Medford, Oregon - America is creeping toward a secularist society. Those
who favor it oppose virtually every ethically and morally based position
of those in our country who live their lives and exercise their
political rights in the context of their religious faith.
It should come as no surprise that the "religious right" continues to be
attacked by the non-religious left,Êthe secularist left,Êand elements of
the American media because of its political activism. The non-religious
in our society and in our media are quick to castigate and ridicule
those who haven't gone over to their side.
Ê
It is particularly blatant during this presidential political season.
Ê
Note Ron Reagan, for example, who was aÊshockÊjock presenter at the
Democrat National Convention. He isÊan advocate of unlimited stem cell
research...The son of an American president of faith...A son who denied
the existence of his own soul and became an atheist.
Ê
Young Reagan's qualms about the human soul are non-existent, because he
doesn't believe there is such a God-based concept. Therefore, promoting
the use of aborted fetuses, with the benefit of harvesting their stem
cells, is of little concern to this Reagan.ÊThose on his side of this
ethical debate would just push a boundless limit of stem cell research
in quest of cures...regardless of the loss of unborn human children.
Ê
President Bush has not prevented stem cell research. He has placed
ethical limits on the expenditure of federal money so that the continued
loss of human fetuses is not encouraged by government. One might even
think that government under President Bush values life...One might even
guess that government under President Bush acts as though human life,
including unborn children, actually has a God given soul.
Ê
On the subject of abortion itself, it is fortunate for America that the
Catholic Church has taken sanctions against politicians who talk from
both sides of their mouths concerning abortion. You've heard the baloney
about how John Kerry personally disagrees with abortion, but he's in
favor of a woman's right to choose, which is double-talk for his support
of abortion. The Catholic Church has the guts to stand up and deny such
hypocritical politicians an opportunity to participate in the most
intimate connection with their professed God, the rite of holy
communion, which is the ritual acceptance of the body and blood of
Christ.
Ê
If you're a politician who supports the destruction of human
fetusesÊwhile disregardingÊthe existence ofÊtheir souls, the church
simply believes that you are out of touch with God. Don't come to church
for a photo-op... ComeÊwhen you are obedient to God.
Ê
The Catholic Church is certainly not the only church that professes its
morally and ethically based choices in the political arena. Churches
throughout America are duty-bound to profess their belief systems to all
who will hear. Their parishioners are not their only audience. Churches
in America should amplify their public voices and encourage more of
their members to participate in the political process as candidates and
as morally-based elected officials.
Ê
The secularist left, the non-God group, cannot be allowed to attack the
moral foundations of our society by attacking our religious
institutions. Religion has played a critical role in the establishment
of this country and in its support for personal freedoms here and
abroad...including the right to believe that there is no God.
Ê
If the Democrat Party had a bit more sense and a solid moral foundation
it would encourage its members of faith to take a more prominent role in
its platform and in its proceedings.
Ê
America is not involved in a full-blown religious war yet...but I've had
my fill of the scathing rhetoric and attacks of the godless minority...
including those who speak to America from the pulpit ofÊa national
political convention.
Ê
The separation of church and state in America is a constitutional issue.
The involvement of religion in American politics isn't...and never
should be...
Ê
Dennis M. Becklin, Publisher
SouthernOregonNews LLC
GrantsPassNews.com
MedfordNews.com
NewsAshland.com
Contact info: Dennis M. Becklin may be reached at
dennis@southernoregonnews.com
.
|
|
| User: "Marvin" |
|
| Title: Re: op-ed: "godless secularist" should never rule USA |
30 Jul 2004 01:48:15 PM |
|
|
"Brian Westley" <westley@visi.com> wrote in message
news:410a66b0$0$65604$a1866201@newsreader.visi.com...
This religious supremacist needs to hear from some atheists.
In addition to his email, there's a link at the article to
post your opinion on this:
http://www.applegateoregonnews.com/articles/index.cfm?artOID=199027&cp=10963
Politics Benefits From People Of Faith - Godless Secularists
Should
Never Rule The USA
By Dennis M. Becklin
Publisher / SouthernOregonNews.com
Medford, Oregon - America is creeping toward a secularist
society. Those
who favor it oppose virtually every ethically and morally
based position
of those in our country who live their lives and exercise
their
political rights in the context of their religious faith.
[snip]
Here's my response:
Dear Mr. Becklin:
I found a link to your article in a newsgroup, and I hope
you'll be willing to consider my comments.
I'd like to begin with your title. The part before the dash,
"Politics Benefits From People Of Faith," is certainly true
without question. If it intends to imply, however, that
politics can benefit from people of faith only, you're
mistaken. The second part of your title, " Godless Secularists
Should Never Rule The USA," is also true, but I fear not in
the way you intended. Freedom of religion is basic to our way
of life, and neither a belief system nor a lack of one should
ever rule us.
Our beliefs temper our behavior as individuals, but none of us
has the right to impose the entirety of our beliefs upon
society as a whole. Even if I believed a deity had spoken to
me personally, whether in a dream, a voice audible only to me,
or through the writings in a book, I cannot insist that anyone
live by what I perceive as divine truth.
Morality is something else. We can and do require people to
live by certain moral standards and punish those who fail to
do so. Both the religious and the non-religious will agree
that these certain standards are necessary for the peaceful co
nduct of society, and both groups are likely to use the terms
moral or immoral in their discussion. Some non-religious
people consider capital punishment immoral, for example, and
there could be some religious people who believe, based on the
writings in the Bible or the Koran, that it would be immoral
to do away with it. Our law, however, must deal with the
interest of society, and happily society's interests often
agree with those of at least some religions. While legislators
and judges are undoubtedly influenced by their beliefs, it
would be both unconstitutional and immoral for them to write
their religious beliefs into law.
You made a mistake in your report about Ron Reagan's speech at
the Democratic Convention. He did not, as you said, promote
"the use of aborted fetuses" in stem cell research, but those
fertilized eggs that are routinely discarded after invitro
fertilization attempts. I'm a bit surprised your editor didn't
catch your error. I heard Mr. Reagan interviewed on NPR's
"Fresh Air," and he wondered why the pro-life lobby has been
so silent about the destruction of these fertilized eggs while
objecting so vehemently to their use in research. It does seem
inconsistent.
I'm a bit puzzled that you're pleased by the Catholic Church's
attempts to control the US government. Would you be as pleased
if, say, some influential Islamic cleric threatened some sort
of sanctions against American legislators who refused to pass
laws requiring women to be "covered"? These are both issues
that not even all of the adherents to these religions agree
upon, but for some in each, they're firmly held articles of
faith. I hope you're as outraged as I, now that the context
has been established.
You refer to, "the baloney about how John Kerry personally
disagrees with abortion, but he's in favor of a woman's right
to choose, which is double-talk for his support of abortion."
I think you may be falling into the false dilemma trap here. I
realize it's possible that you believe there should be laws
against all the things you believe are wrong or just
disgusting, but I hope you're reasonable enough to recognize
that some things that would be wrong for you are simply none
of your business when someone else does them--a middle ground,
neither yes nor no. Your belief that a soul sparks into
existence when an egg and sperm unite was used to argue for
outlawing "the pill" when I was in high school, and I believe
it's still used by the Catholic Church (Why aren't politicians
being threatened for failing to support anti-contraception
laws?). If preventing souls from forming was grounds for
opposing contraception, why was abstinence encouraged?
Wouldn't it prevent souls? Regardless of how you or I may feel
about the subject, we need to see that these things are
religious matters, not legal ones. Individuals should, for
their own good, do as their beliefs compel them. To do
otherwise is, for them, sin. But it is not the business of our
government to write sin into lawn no matter how strongly you
and the Pope may feel about it.
Finally, you state that, "President Bush has not prevented
stem cell research. He has placed ethical limits on the
expenditure of federal money so that the continued loss of
human fetuses is not encouraged by government." By the logic
of your statement about Mr. Kerry's position on abortion, this
is clearly double talk for his support of embryonic stem cell
research. Consistency would seem to require him to demand that
all the current "lines" be given decent burials and all the
records of previous research be destroyed. I'm glad he didn't
do that, and I assume his thinking was that the damage with
these was already done and continuing would not make it worse.
His compromise, however, could reasonably raise a question
about just how firmly his beliefs are held.
Thank you for the opportunity to respond to your article.
Marvin Doolin
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Holden" |
|
| Title: Re: op-ed: "godless secularist" should never rule USA |
30 Jul 2004 03:11:19 PM |
|
|
Brian Westley wrote:
This religious supremacist needs to hear from some atheists.
In addition to his email, there's a link at the article to
post your opinion on this:
http://www.applegateoregonnews.com/articles/index.cfm?artOID=199027&cp=10963
Politics Benefits From People Of Faith - Godless Secularists Should
Never Rule The USA
The nation was established as a secular state with tolerance for all
religious beliefs, not a christian state with tolerance for nothing else.
By Dennis M. Becklin
Publisher / SouthernOregonNews.com
Medford, Oregon - America is creeping toward a secularist society.
Thank God!
:)
Those who favor it oppose virtually every ethically and morally based
position of those in our country who live their lives and exercise
their political rights in the context of their religious faith.
Those who favor would like you to continue to live your lives and exercise
your political rights in the context of your religious belief, and they do
so in the context of their belief in the 1st Amendment. They also recognize
that they will be misrepresented at every step, and that every attempt will
be made to make them appear to be soulless demons thirsting for your
children's blood in an attempt to deliver the world to Satan.
It should come as no surprise that the "religious right" continues to
be attacked by the non-religious left,Êthe secularist left,Êand
elements of the American media because of its political activism. The
non-religious in our society and in our media are quick to castigate
and ridicule those who haven't gone over to their side.
And the religious right continually attacks the non-religious left. And the
religious left who believe in other gods. And the religious right who
believe in other gods. And anyone and everyone who holds beliefs different
than their own. They are quick to castigate and ridicule those who haven't
gone over to their side.
It is particularly blatant during this presidential political season.
Ê
Note Ron Reagan, for example, who was aÊshockÊjock presenter at the
Democrat National Convention. He isÊan advocate of unlimited stem cell
research...The son of an American president of faith...A son who
denied the existence of his own soul and became an atheist.
A man who made his own decisions about the meaning of existence. And those
meanings had the audacity to exclude a belief in God.
Young Reagan's qualms about the human soul are non-existent, because
he doesn't believe there is such a God-based concept. Therefore,
promoting the use of aborted fetuses, with the benefit of harvesting
their stem cells, is of little concern to this Reagan.ÊThose on his
side of this ethical debate would just push a boundless limit of stem
cell research in quest of cures...regardless of the loss of unborn
human children.
So in other words, he doesn't agree with you. I think everyone is already
clear on that point.....
President Bush has not prevented stem cell research. He has placed
ethical limits on the expenditure of federal money so that the
continued loss of human fetuses is not encouraged by government. One
That's a mighty fancy way of saying that he prevented stem cell research,
but I'm pretty sure no one is fooled.
might even think that government under President Bush values
life...One might even guess that government under President Bush acts
as though human life, including unborn children, actually has a God
given soul.
And one might even think that he respects an establishment of the christian
religion, huh?
On the subject of abortion itself, it is fortunate for America that
the Catholic Church has taken sanctions against politicians who talk
from both sides of their mouths concerning abortion. You've heard the
baloney about how John Kerry personally disagrees with abortion, but
he's in favor of a woman's right to choose, which is double-talk for
his support of abortion. The Catholic Church has the guts to stand up
Either that or it's the honest admission that the decision is a personal one
and that whatever he personally would do he understands the importance of
allowing people the *freedom to choose* for themselves.
and deny such hypocritical politicians an opportunity to participate
in the most intimate connection with their professed God, the rite of
holy communion, which is the ritual acceptance of the body and blood
of Christ.
If you're a politician who supports the destruction of human
fetusesÊwhile disregardingÊthe existence ofÊtheir souls, the church
simply believes that you are out of touch with God. Don't come to
church for a photo-op... ComeÊwhen you are obedient to God.
Aye, hypocrisy is a funny thing, huh?
The Catholic Church is certainly not the only church that professes
its morally and ethically based choices in the political arena.
Churches throughout America are duty-bound to profess their belief
systems to all who will hear. Their parishioners are not their only
audience. Churches in America should amplify their public voices and
encourage more of their members to participate in the political
process as candidates and as morally-based elected officials.
And is this so that they can establish christian law in this country or so
that they can enforce the right of every citizen to hold whatever religious
beliefs he or she chooses?
The secularist left, the non-God group, cannot be allowed to attack
the moral foundations of our society by attacking our religious
institutions. Religion has played a critical role in the establishment
of this country and in its support for personal freedoms here and
abroad...including the right to believe that there is no God.
Nor do they want to attack your religious institutions, they only want to
preserve the sanctity of our political institutions that forbid the
establishment of religion in our government. Please cite a reason for such a
strange accusation so that there is something of substance for us to
discuss.
And you can't claim that we have a right to beleive that there is no God but
insist that we must force our children to pray to him in school everyday. As
I said earlier, hypocrisy is a funny thing....
If the Democrat Party had a bit more sense and a solid moral
foundation it would encourage its members of faith to take a more
prominent role in its platform and in its proceedings.
This is beginning to sound more and more like a sermon....
America is not involved in a full-blown religious war yet...but I've
had my fill of the scathing rhetoric and attacks of the godless
minority... including those who speak to America from the pulpit ofÊa
national political convention.
Oh no, the religious fundamentalists are mad. I wonder what witch they are
going to burn at the stake this time.....
The separation of church and state in America is a constitutional
issue. The involvement of religion in American politics isn't...and
never should be...
So we shouldn't have religion in government but we should have religion in
government? What were you saying about double-speak earlier?
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Gregory Gadow" |
|
| Title: Re: op-ed: "godless secularist" should never rule USA |
30 Jul 2004 12:45:46 PM |
|
|
Brian Westley wrote:
This religious supremacist needs to hear from some atheists.
In addition to his email, there's a link at the article to
post your opinion on this:
http://www.applegateoregonnews.com/articles/index.cfm?artOID=199027&cp=10963
Ain't it annoying when people are too ignorant to accept that the Founders
*created* the United States as a godless, secularlist republic?
--
Gregory Gadow
techbear@serv.net
http://www.serv.net/~techbear
If it is the act of a traitor to speak out against the
unConstitional acts of my government, to excercise my
rights guaranteed by that Constitution -- the right to
publish my opinions and speak my thoughts, the right
to petition for a redress of grievances, the right to
be secure in my person and property against search and
seizure without due process of law -- then I am a traitor.
And God grant us many, many more traitors, for we are in
dire need of them.
.
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: op-ed: "godless secularist" should never rule USA |
30 Jul 2004 08:54:09 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 30 Jul 2004 10:45:46 -0700, Gregory Gadow wrote:
Brian Westley wrote:
This religious supremacist needs to hear from some atheists.
In addition to his email, there's a link at the article to
post your opinion on this:
http://www.applegateoregonnews.com/articles/index.cfm?artOID=199027&cp=10963
Ain't it annoying when people are too ignorant to accept that the Founders
*created* the United States as a godless, secularlist republic?
And they are not only encouraged to reproduce, but vote, and assume
offices.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "W. Syme" |
|
| Title: Re: op-ed: "godless secularist" should never rule USA |
31 Jul 2004 02:13:50 AM |
|
|
On 30 Jul 2004 15:18:08 GMT, Brian Westley <westley@visi.com> wrote:
A son who denied
the existence of his own soul and became an atheist.
Is Ron Reagan really an atheist?
--
Prove all things; hold fast that which is good. (1 Thessalonians 5:21)
W. Syme (pseudonym), European, non-native English speaker, "soft" atheist.
Email will not be read.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Brian Westley" |
|
| Title: Re: op-ed: "godless secularist" should never rule USA |
31 Jul 2004 02:53:08 PM |
|
|
W. Syme <Winston.Syme.superstitions@fastmail.fm> writes:
On 30 Jul 2004 15:18:08 GMT, Brian Westley <westley@visi.com> wrote:
A son who denied
the existence of his own soul and became an atheist.
Is Ron Reagan really an atheist?
Yes, he's said so explicitly in recent articles and interviews.
---
Merlyn LeRoy
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: op-ed: "godless secularist" should never rule USA |
30 Jul 2004 08:08:17 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 30 Jul 2004 15:18:08 +0000, Brian Westley wrote:
This religious supremacist needs to hear from some atheists.
In addition to his email, there's a link at the article to
post your opinion on this:
http://www.applegateoregonnews.com/articles/index.cfm?artOID=199027&cp=10963
The *****-for-brains is a terminal coward. He doesn't pay any attention
to negative responses.
.
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
