| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"stoney" |
| Date: |
11 Nov 2003 08:05:05 PM |
| Object: |
OT: Religious Insanity Runs Rampant |
http://www.counterpunch.org/madsen10222003.html
October 22, 2003
Religious Insanity Runs Rampant
Can Supremes Send a Message?
By WAYNE MADSEN
Next year, the US Supreme Court has it in its power to strike a blow for
religious tolerance. It will decide if the phrase "One Nation, Under
God" in the Pledge of Allegiance violates the constitutionally-mandated
separation between church and state. Even right-wing Opus Dei extremist
Justice Antonin Scalia has recused himself from the case because he has
already weighed in on the side of religious zealotry and intolerance in
public comments. Before 1954, the "Pledge," originally written in 1892
by a Socialist Baptist Minister named Frances Bellamy, did not contain
the phrase "One Nation, Under God." It was only amid the scourge known
as McCarthyism that the Congress included the phrase at the behest of
the Catholic fraternal organization, Knights of Columbus.
The Supreme Court sans Scalia can help restore the concept that the
United States is a secular nation founded on the principles of equality
under the law. They can fire a shot across the bow of American religious
extremists like John Ashcroft, who has let it be known that to advance
career-wise within his Justice Department, staff attorneys better be
seen at his morning Pentecostal prayer meetings and Lt. Gen. William
"Jerry" Boykin, the Deputy Undersecretary of Defense for Intelligence,
who, while in uniform before evangelical Christian congregations,
lambasted Muslims for worshipping idols and suggesting that God put
George W. Bush in the White House.
Even more alarming is the fact that Congress somehow managed to appoint
a unformed flag -rank officer like Boykin to head up a civilian
political office within the Pentagon --tossing aside America's
long-standing tradition of having the military under civilian control.
The Bush administration is in no place to criticize people like
Malaysia's Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamed, who voiced some patently
anti-Semitic comments at the recent meeting in Kuala Lumpur of the
Organization of Islamic Conference. At the just-concluded Asia Pacific
Economic Cooperation (APEC) conference in Bangkok, Bush told the
Malaysian leader that his remarks about Jews "controlling the world"
stood "squarely against what I believe in." This is where the world can
see through the phoniness of Bush. While Bush rightly criticizes a world
leader for offensive remarks made about one religion, he stands by those
made by one of his top policy-making generals about another. Boykin's
remarks about Muslims were as offensive as Mahathir's comments about
Jews. Bush had a chance to condemn both. But he did not and,
consequently, Bush's own brand of smug Texas-nurtured racism and
xenophobia came across loud and clear to a world rapidly falling into an
endless abyss of fratricidal religious conflict.
Bush is used to getting a free ride from the Supreme Court (just look at
his own selection as President). But the Court has never shied away from
taking a stand on important issues that later spurred history's course
to take a sharp detour. The Court's landmark decisions on school
desegregation helped spur the civil rights movement. A similar hallmark
decision on the separation of church and state can drive home the point
that America is a nation founded upon the principles of freedom of
religion and secularism in government. It is not a nation obliged to
cater to the fears and fanaticism of hate mongers like Jerry Falwell,
Franklin Graham, Pat Robertson, Bob Jones, Tom DeLay, Richard Perle,
Bill O'Reilly, Rush Limbaugh, or Frank Gaffney.
It is time for the American people to realize that the United States
will never defeat terrorism as long as apocalyptic and suicidal "End
Times" cultist Christians reign supreme in the corridors of the White
House, Congress, Pentagon, and the Old Executive Office Building.
General Boykin has demonstrated that his knowledge of Islam is about as
shallow as that of Bush's. In suggesting that Muslims worship idols,
perhaps this Christian purveyor of religious hatred and intolerance
forgot about the Taliban's destruction of the Buddha statues in Bamiyan,
Afghanistan a few months before the 9-11 attacks. In fact, Islam is
based on the rejection of idolatry. Not only should Boykin be fired form
his present position because he violates the tenet of civilian control
over the military, he should be cashiered for his lack of knowledge
about a critical aspect of his job -- the history of Islam and the
Middle East.
The Supreme Court must take note of the Religious Right's intolerance
and injustices when it takes up the issue of the "Under God" oath.
Scrapping it will send a clear message to the likes of Boykin, Ashcroft,
Bush, Mahathir, and Osama bin Laden. That message is that there is no
place in the 21st Century for extremists, be they Christian, Muslim,
Jewish, Hindu, or quasi-secular and neo-conservative promoters of a
racism-imbued Project for a New American Century.
Wayne Madsen is a Washington, DC-based investigative journalist and
columnist. He wrote the introduction to Forbidden Truth. He is the
co-author, with John Stanton, of "America's Nightmare: The Presidency of
George Bush II."
Madsen can be reached at:
(c) 2003 counterpunch
Stoney
"Designated Rascal and Rapscallion
and
SCAMPERMEISTER!"
When in doubt, SCAMPER about!
When things are fair, SCAMPER everywhere!
When things are rough, can't SCAMPER enough!
/end humour alert
alt.atheism military veteran #11
{so much for the 'no atheists in foxholes' rubbish}
.
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: Religious Insanity Runs Rampant |
11 Nov 2003 09:13:11 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 11 Nov 2003 18:05:05 -0800, stoney <stoney@the.net> wrote:
http://www.counterpunch.org/madsen10222003.html
October 22, 2003
Religious Insanity Runs Rampant
Can Supremes Send a Message?
By WAYNE MADSEN
Next year, the US Supreme Court has it in its power to strike a blow for
religious tolerance. It will decide if the phrase "One Nation, Under
God" in the Pledge of Allegiance violates the constitutionally-mandated
separation between church and state. Even right-wing Opus Dei extremist
Justice Antonin Scalia has recused himself from the case because he has
already weighed in on the side of religious zealotry and intolerance in
public comments. Before 1954, the "Pledge," originally written in 1892
by a Socialist Baptist Minister named Frances Bellamy, did not contain
the phrase "One Nation, Under God." It was only amid the scourge known
as McCarthyism that the Congress included the phrase at the behest of
the Catholic fraternal organization, Knights of Columbus.
<snip>
(c) 2003 counterpunch
Stoney
"Designated Rascal and Rapscallion
and
SCAMPERMEISTER!"
When in doubt, SCAMPER about!
When things are fair, SCAMPER everywhere!
When things are rough, can't SCAMPER enough!
/end humour alert
alt.atheism military veteran #11
{so much for the 'no atheists in foxholes' rubbish}
Without Scalia, it's 8 justices; what if they decide a 4-4 tie,
thereby ducking the decision?
drift
.
|
|
|
| User: "Lord Calvert" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: Religious Insanity Runs Rampant |
11 Nov 2003 10:16:36 PM |
|
|
Without Scalia, it's 8 justices; what if they decide a 4-4 tie,
thereby ducking the decision?
Then the lower court's decision stands although only within the jurisdiction of
the 9th Circuit and it cannot be used as precedent in any future case.
Rich Goranson, Amherst, NY, USA (aa#MCMXCIX, a-vet#1)
EAC Department of Applied Rattan Use
"Without faith we might relapse into scientific or rational thinking, which
leads by a slippery slope toward constitutional democracy." - Robert Anton
Wilson
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: Religious Insanity Runs Rampant |
12 Nov 2003 04:28:01 PM |
|
|
On 12 Nov 2003 04:16:36 GMT, forlornh@aol.complex (Lord Calvert)
wrote:
Without Scalia, it's 8 justices; what if they decide a 4-4 tie,
thereby ducking the decision?
Then the lower court's decision stands although only within the jurisdiction of
the 9th Circuit and it cannot be used as precedent in any future case.
Rich Goranson, Amherst, NY, USA (aa#MCMXCIX, a-vet#1)
EAC Department of Applied Rattan Use
"Without faith we might relapse into scientific or rational thinking, which
leads by a slippery slope toward constitutional democracy." - Robert Anton
Wilson
So, a tie would isolate this outbreak of constitutional democracy to
the 9th, a ruling against would promote theocracy, and a ruling
upholding the 9th would cause much consternation among the theocrats,
if I get it right.
Is it legal to bet that it'll come out 4-4?
drift
.
|
|
|
| User: "Gregory Gadow" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: Religious Insanity Runs Rampant |
12 Nov 2003 04:48:46 PM |
|
|
wrote:
On 12 Nov 2003 04:16:36 GMT, forlornh@aol.complex (Lord Calvert)
wrote:
Without Scalia, it's 8 justices; what if they decide a 4-4 tie,
thereby ducking the decision?
Then the lower court's decision stands although only within the jurisdiction of
the 9th Circuit and it cannot be used as precedent in any future case.
Rich Goranson, Amherst, NY, USA (aa#MCMXCIX, a-vet#1)
EAC Department of Applied Rattan Use
"Without faith we might relapse into scientific or rational thinking, which
leads by a slippery slope toward constitutional democracy." - Robert Anton
Wilson
So, a tie would isolate this outbreak of constitutional democracy to
the 9th, a ruling against would promote theocracy, and a ruling
upholding the 9th would cause much consternation among the theocrats,
if I get it right.
Is it legal to bet that it'll come out 4-4?
Only in Nevada.
--
Gregory Gadow
techbear@serv.net
http://www.serv.net/~techbear
"If you make yourself a sheep, the wolves will eat you."
-- Benjamin Franklin
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: Religious Insanity Runs Rampant |
13 Nov 2003 10:52:40 AM |
|
|
On Wed, 12 Nov 2003 14:48:46 -0800, Gregory Gadow <techbear@serv.net>
wrote:
drift@lost.net wrote:
On 12 Nov 2003 04:16:36 GMT, forlornh@aol.complex (Lord Calvert)
wrote:
Without Scalia, it's 8 justices; what if they decide a 4-4 tie,
thereby ducking the decision?
Then the lower court's decision stands although only within the jurisdiction of
the 9th Circuit and it cannot be used as precedent in any future case.
Rich Goranson, Amherst, NY, USA (aa#MCMXCIX, a-vet#1)
EAC Department of Applied Rattan Use
"Without faith we might relapse into scientific or rational thinking, which
leads by a slippery slope toward constitutional democracy." - Robert Anton
Wilson
So, a tie would isolate this outbreak of constitutional democracy to
the 9th, a ruling against would promote theocracy, and a ruling
upholding the 9th would cause much consternation among the theocrats,
if I get it right.
Is it legal to bet that it'll come out 4-4?
Only in Nevada.
HeeHee! {>:)
drift
.
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: Religious Insanity Runs Rampant |
15 Nov 2003 11:57:41 AM |
|
|
On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 11:52:40 -0500, drift@lost.net, Message ID:
<6md7rvg1e5ubfs6cel3ho3i19d5h3ld4er@4ax.com> wrote in alt.atheism;
(snip all)
/silliness mode activated.
Nick=drift
location=lost.net
combine the two: drift at lost dot net....
conclusion. drift factor=max... :)))
/end silliness mode
Stoney
"Designated Rascal and Rapscallion
and
SCAMPERMEISTER!"
When in doubt, SCAMPER about!
When things are fair, SCAMPER everywhere!
When things are rough, can't SCAMPER enough!
/end humour alert
alt.atheism military veteran #11
{so much for the 'no atheists in foxholes' rubbish}
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Lord Calvert" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: Religious Insanity Runs Rampant |
12 Nov 2003 04:54:54 PM |
|
|
So, a tie would isolate this outbreak of constitutional democracy to
the 9th, a ruling against would promote theocracy, and a ruling
upholding the 9th would cause much consternation among the theocrats,
if I get it right.
Depends. If the justices judge on the merits of the case and in accordance with
their previous positions, Newdow will be upheld by a 6-2 margin. O'Connor would
be attacking her own test and Kennedy would be doing a position swap on thie
issue (based on previous opinions) were they to vote against Newdow. I don't
know if they'll be able to ideologically justify that.
There seems to be a belief that the Supremes will not judge the case on the
merits of the argument but instead rule in regards to the custody matters,
which have no relationship to the argument and kick the case back downstairs. I
am not certain what will happen.
Rich Goranson, Amherst, NY, USA (aa#MCMXCIX, a-vet#1)
EAC Department of Applied Rattan Use
"Without faith we might relapse into scientific or rational thinking, which
leads by a slippery slope toward constitutional democracy." - Robert Anton
Wilson
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: Religious Insanity Runs Rampant |
13 Nov 2003 11:07:31 AM |
|
|
On 12 Nov 2003 22:54:54 GMT, forlornh@aol.complex (Lord Calvert)
wrote:
So, a tie would isolate this outbreak of constitutional democracy to
the 9th, a ruling against would promote theocracy, and a ruling
upholding the 9th would cause much consternation among the theocrats,
if I get it right.
Depends. If the justices judge on the merits of the case and in accordance with
their previous positions, Newdow will be upheld by a 6-2 margin. O'Connor would
be attacking her own test and Kennedy would be doing a position swap on thie
issue (based on previous opinions) were they to vote against Newdow. I don't
know if they'll be able to ideologically justify that.
There seems to be a belief that the Supremes will not judge the case on the
merits of the argument but instead rule in regards to the custody matters,
which have no relationship to the argument and kick the case back downstairs. I
am not certain what will happen.
Rich Goranson, Amherst, NY, USA (aa#MCMXCIX, a-vet#1)
EAC Department of Applied Rattan Use
"Without faith we might relapse into scientific or rational thinking, which
leads by a slippery slope toward constitutional democracy." - Robert Anton
Wilson
Sorry, I haven't followed the supreme justices closely, but I'd be
glad if Newdow was upheld.
Seriously, there is going to be much criticism and bellyaching, maybe
downright death threats (there was in Newdow) over this.
I suppose that backflack over the FLA vote and the apparent disregard
some of our elected officials seem to have for the Constitution lends
to the belief that the USSC would cop out.
And after rethinking this myself, I can't imagine the USSC wiggling
out of making a proper decision.
It will be a true test of democracy, don't you think?
Imagine about 85% of the public having the constitution shoved down
their throats? (That's assuming the 85% who say they are religious are
against Newdow)
Time will tell.
Thanks again, Rich!
drift
.
|
|
|
| User: "Lord Calvert" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: Religious Insanity Runs Rampant |
13 Nov 2003 11:41:39 AM |
|
|
Seriously, there is going to be much criticism and bellyaching, maybe
downright death threats (there was in Newdow) over this.
I believe Arthur Goodwin, the 9th Circuit judge who wrote the opinion, received
quite a few death threats too. One member of congress even went so far as to
call him that "damned atheist lawyer." Or course it turned out that Goodwin was
not an atheist nor a liberal. He is a Presbyterian elder and a Goldwater
conservative who was appointed by Nixon and received every single appointment
to the bench by Republicans.
Basically when the Republicans attack the Newdow decision they're attacking one
of their own oft-stated core principles...the concept of governmental power
limited by a constitution...and instead are emulating the values of our
totalitarian enemies in the Middle-East.
Rich Goranson, Amherst, NY, USA (aa#MCMXCIX, a-vet#1)
EAC Department of Applied Rattan Use
"Without faith we might relapse into scientific or rational thinking, which
leads by a slippery slope toward constitutional democracy." - Robert Anton
Wilson
.
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: Religious Insanity Runs Rampant |
15 Nov 2003 12:10:00 PM |
|
|
On 13 Nov 2003 17:41:39 GMT, forlornh@aol.complex (Lord Calvert),
Message ID: <20031113124139.19914.00000184@mb-m02.aol.com> wrote in
alt.atheism;
Seriously, there is going to be much criticism and bellyaching, maybe
downright death threats (there was in Newdow) over this.
I believe Arthur Goodwin, the 9th Circuit judge who wrote the opinion, received
quite a few death threats too. One member of congress even went so far as to
call him that "damned atheist lawyer." Or course it turned out that Goodwin was
not an atheist nor a liberal. He is a Presbyterian elder and a Goldwater
conservative who was appointed by Nixon and received every single appointment
to the bench by Republicans.
Basically when the Republicans attack the Newdow decision they're attacking one
of their own oft-stated core principles...the concept of governmental power
limited by a constitution...and instead are emulating the values of our
totalitarian enemies in the Middle-East.
Since when do any of them (Demo/Indie/Repub) have principles (other than
being re-elected)? When the going gets tough it's "principles be
damned." (which indicates the stated 'principles' weren't principles)
Stoney
"Designated Rascal and Rapscallion
and
SCAMPERMEISTER!"
When in doubt, SCAMPER about!
When things are fair, SCAMPER everywhere!
When things are rough, can't SCAMPER enough!
/end humour alert
alt.atheism military veteran #11
{so much for the 'no atheists in foxholes' rubbish}
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: Religious Insanity Runs Rampant |
15 Nov 2003 12:07:05 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 12:07:31 -0500, drift@lost.net, Message ID:
<5pd7rvgelsd8qfrrhan7th1jjtlvei8il0@4ax.com> wrote in alt.atheism;
On 12 Nov 2003 22:54:54 GMT, forlornh@aol.complex (Lord Calvert)
wrote:
So, a tie would isolate this outbreak of constitutional democracy to
the 9th, a ruling against would promote theocracy, and a ruling
upholding the 9th would cause much consternation among the theocrats,
if I get it right.
Depends. If the justices judge on the merits of the case and in accordance with
their previous positions, Newdow will be upheld by a 6-2 margin. O'Connor would
be attacking her own test and Kennedy would be doing a position swap on thie
issue (based on previous opinions) were they to vote against Newdow. I don't
know if they'll be able to ideologically justify that.
There seems to be a belief that the Supremes will not judge the case on the
merits of the argument but instead rule in regards to the custody matters,
which have no relationship to the argument and kick the case back downstairs. I
am not certain what will happen.
Sorry, I haven't followed the supreme justices closely, but I'd be
glad if Newdow was upheld.
Seriously, there is going to be much criticism and bellyaching, maybe
downright death threats (there was in Newdow) over this.
I suppose that backflack over the FLA vote and the apparent disregard
some of our elected officials seem to have for the Constitution lends
to the belief that the USSC would cop out.
And after rethinking this myself, I can't imagine the USSC wiggling
out of making a proper decision.
It will be a true test of democracy, don't you think?
IMO, this court has already failed the democracy test with the debacle
in 2000. The aspect which was brought up concerning dealing only with
Newdow's standing was one that had not occured to me, but then there
aren't any court cases I'm pursuing to keep 'in the loop.'
The information on how the Justices have ruled in the past is quite
interesting.
/idle curiosity
I wonder if they've already come to their own rulings and are
researching court cases which support their decision.
(snip)
Stoney
"Designated Rascal and Rapscallion
and
SCAMPERMEISTER!"
When in doubt, SCAMPER about!
When things are fair, SCAMPER everywhere!
When things are rough, can't SCAMPER enough!
/end humour alert
alt.atheism military veteran #11
{so much for the 'no atheists in foxholes' rubbish}
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: Religious Insanity Runs Rampant |
12 Nov 2003 04:33:18 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 12 Nov 2003 17:28:01 -0500, wrote:
On 12 Nov 2003 04:16:36 GMT, forlornh@aol.complex (Lord Calvert)
wrote:
Without Scalia, it's 8 justices; what if they decide a 4-4 tie,
thereby ducking the decision?
Then the lower court's decision stands although only within the jurisdiction of
the 9th Circuit and it cannot be used as precedent in any future case.
Rich Goranson, Amherst, NY, USA (aa#MCMXCIX, a-vet#1)
EAC Department of Applied Rattan Use
"Without faith we might relapse into scientific or rational thinking, which
leads by a slippery slope toward constitutional democracy." - Robert Anton
Wilson
So, a tie would isolate this outbreak of constitutional democracy to
the 9th, a ruling against would promote theocracy, and a ruling
upholding the 9th would cause much consternation among the theocrats,
if I get it right.
Is it legal to bet that it'll come out 4-4?
drift
Oh, yes, Thanks, Mr Goranson!
drift
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: Religious Insanity Runs Rampant |
13 Nov 2003 05:40:01 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 11 Nov 2003 22:13:11 -0500, drift@lost.net, Message ID:
<q493rv00sf3vk95ttdoio6dd9aja8engah@4ax.com> wrote in alt.atheism;
On Tue, 11 Nov 2003 18:05:05 -0800, stoney <stoney@the.net> wrote:
http://www.counterpunch.org/madsen10222003.html
October 22, 2003
Religious Insanity Runs Rampant
Can Supremes Send a Message?
By WAYNE MADSEN
Next year, the US Supreme Court has it in its power to strike a blow for
religious tolerance. It will decide if the phrase "One Nation, Under
God" in the Pledge of Allegiance violates the constitutionally-mandated
separation between church and state. Even right-wing Opus Dei extremist
Justice Antonin Scalia has recused himself from the case because he has
already weighed in on the side of religious zealotry and intolerance in
public comments. Before 1954, the "Pledge," originally written in 1892
by a Socialist Baptist Minister named Frances Bellamy, did not contain
the phrase "One Nation, Under God." It was only amid the scourge known
as McCarthyism that the Congress included the phrase at the behest of
the Catholic fraternal organization, Knights of Columbus.
<snip>
(c) 2003 counterpunch
Without Scalia, it's 8 justices; what if they decide a 4-4 tie,
thereby ducking the decision?
I don't know what happens in that case.
Stoney
"Designated Rascal and Rapscallion
and
SCAMPERMEISTER!"
When in doubt, SCAMPER about!
When things are fair, SCAMPER everywhere!
When things are rough, can't SCAMPER enough!
/end humour alert
alt.atheism military veteran #11
{so much for the 'no atheists in foxholes' rubbish}
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
