Religious Americans Want Views Welcomed in Public Square

lkwijy tpac ejfvkol paurvljq zacurl vkuprc hfxwn

lkwijy tpac ejfvkol paurvljq zacurl vkuprc hfxwn

lkwijy tpac ejfvkol paurvljq zacurl vkuprc hfxwn

Excuse me, Dr. Land, but your comment about Rush Limbaugh is ignorant!!!! Rush speaks to about 20,000,000 people a day. Are you suggesting that we Southern Baptist compromise our conservative positions and cross over to the Liberal left-wing side. I think not!!! Maybe you'd better think before you speak about politics.

Hi,
I found your blog via google by accident and have to admit that youve a really interesting blog :-)
Just saved your feed in my reader, have a nice day :)

Dang:

About the 9 trill in debt. What we need is a tax cut. It'll give us a trill when we see Jesus sitting on a cloud. Only God can save us now.

I got an idea. Got this from Chancelor Dr Pastor Reverand Falwell of Liverty University. We need government enforced tithing. The problem is people aren't giving enough of what they got to God.

He didn't say this but I know God is nowhere to be found even though God is everywhere. So with God absent then I'm sure His representatives will collect the tithes for God. And spend them too, Rolls Royce, Hummer, private jet,,,.

The reason why things are in such a mess is we haven't been giving enough to God. How can we expect God to help out if we don't pay God? Prople are praying hard but giving soft. I've heard the president, through federal relief and charitable feelings has granted ministeries in the neighborhood of 5 bill, a nice neighborhood by ordinary standards.

And yes, the money used to buy the government is borrowed from us but it begins as loans from campaign contributors that are paid back one hundred fold once the candidate gets hands on treasury.

Reaction to various comments.
Trakker: The John Adams quote: "Our Constitution was made for a moral and religious people. It is whooly inadequate for any other." Hmmm, let's see. Guantanamo, Abu Ghraid, a pre-emptive war, corrupt lobbyists and legislators, xenophobia, religious bigotry and so on. Can a people with such record be termed moral and religious. Soemthing is inadequate here.

Kareem: You say, "Democracy is bi-partisan." Look around. British, Canadian, French, Australian and other democracies are multi-party systems.

Yest Me 1: Your comment that the US has the best government money can buy. Best? It made W president twice. Buy? With money it does not have. US federal government debt is $9 trillion.

Yest Me 2: As for keeping your head down. Some advice from hockey country: keep your head up, unless you want to get slammed with a body check.

Steve in Md. Bravo!

Creative minds may deny just about anything, as the would be funny if they weren't so scary folks in Iran proved.

If you realy think that our founding fathers did not understand the role of Judeo-Christian morality in our democracy, you may as well believe just about anything. If you dispute this, then you haven't done your homework. One of the first things our congress did was order the printing of Bibles to be used in public schools! How does that sit with your supposed separation of church and state?

In the end, they understood that a morality that placed the welfare of others above their own, as well as acknowledging their own failures in the face of a Perfect God was necessary for American democracy to succeed. Just as the lack of that common decency and the abundance self righteousness, of both liberals and conservatives, is destroying that same democracy, and all the rights and freedoms that came with it.

What are the attributes of people who "accept Christ as their personal savior?" What do they believe? How do they behave? Could we easily identify them if we saw them in the "public square? or read their minds? Do they accept every word in the King James Bible as literal truth?

Can't tell players without a scoreard.

Marcus Aurelius:

David Hume was an honest, thoughtful man. He is my hero. Too bad mnore folks don't know him.

MA - your namesake - was pretty good, too, but he had a bit of a Roman Emporer mean streak. His decision to allow his son to inherit his mantle was the last nail in Rome's coffin. Pity.

To: anonymous:and others who pointed out the phrase, "...by their Creator..."

The use of the generic word "creator" as opposed to "God" or "Yaweh" or "Jehovah", (or for that matter, Allah) is telling.

If one reads the greater writings of the founders (as opposed to the official documents they authored), they will see that the idea of a religion-based government and/or society was soundly rejected. The founders never ruled out a Creator, but as products of the Enlightenment, the concept of a God with a hand in running things on earth was treated with skepticism. In light of the theocracies that had so profoundly cripled Europe after the the fall of the Roman empire (a fall precipitated by the transformation of the empire from a secular to a religion-based form of government), the idea that wisdom of any kind had had a guiding hand in the historical course of these countries was dismissed out of hand.

America is certainly not a Judeo/Christian nation in foundation, practice, or character. If we follow the roots of our culture, we find Rome. We are a Roman-style Republic in foundation, practice, and character.

Mr. Land,

Thank you for saying this. It should not even need to be said. Some of your co-religionists are very very scary people.

On another note, I wonder if anyone else finds the term "Judeo-Christianity" absurd. Those two religions are incommensurable. Otherwise it would not have been necessary to forcibly convert Jews; sieze their children because they were "baptized" by a neighboring Christian child;or, in the US, write convenants into real estate laws preventing Jew from living in certain neighborhoods (something my father experienced). The paths to "salvation" in the two religions are entirely different (which is to say that Jews don't really accept that concept), and the term Judeo-Christian amounts to a bone thrown by Christians to Jews suggesting that the later are tolerated as long as they don't get uppity.

Of course, if the term is meant to imply that we should be "respectful" of the great monotheisms, then we should say that America is a Judeo-Christo-Islamic nation, but I suspect many would rather scratch their own eyes out than do that. If we said America is an "Abrahamic" nation, too many people would confuse it with Lincoln.

Those who suggest this is a Christian nation are naive historically.

They should familiarize themselves with the writings (primary sources) and recorded lives of our founding fathers. Products of the enlightenment they were not swayed by "faith over reason", quite the opposite.

I believe it was Henry David Thoreau who said, "If you would convince a man that he does wrong, do right. But do not care to convince him. Men will believe what they see. Let them see."

I suggest a look at the church attendance patterns of George Washington and Thomas Jefferson and their burial choices. The majority of our founding fathers were Deists philosophically, Agnostics or Atheists in practice

Anonymous writes:
"Denial that the founding fathers were judeo-christian really hurts the credibility of those arguing we are not a nation founded on judeo-christian ideals."

The point is that these "ideals" were not original to Judaism or christianity, the founders merely came to understand some of them within the "package" of their religious tradition. They are actually just a collection of "beliefs" gleaned from any number of sources, that came to be referred to as "Judao-Christian." Some of these "beliefs" were not religious at all, and in fact it is apparent that John Locke and David Hume had more to do with the intellectual foundation of this country than Jesus ever did. Christians who attempt to appropriate these ideas as proprietary to their faith are committing plagiarism. And most of the founders knew this. Jefferson spent far more time with Blackstone, Locke and Hume than he ever did with Jesus Christ.

Mr. Land's clear renunciation of the idea of a Christian Nation is welcome, but he seems to backslide a little at the end with a vague endorsement of "a religiously pluralistic, as opposed to a secular society."

Historically, theologically, and LEGALLY we are a secular society that guarantees freedom of religion. The Declaration of Independence, from which Mr. Land quotes, did not establish the legal basis for our country. We had a Revoluntary War to win and Articles of Confederation to fail, before we established a country with the Constitution.

The Constitution does not substantively mention God anywhere, by design. At the time, several states had established religions. The Constitution pointedly did not do so, much to the angry dismay of Church leaders at the time. The only mention of religion at all was the First Amendment guarantee of religious liberty and the prohibition of a religious test for office.

The Constitution's deliberate creation of a secular society that protects religious liberty is what has made our country great.

Incredulous

You forgot the rest of the sentence..."by their Creator".

Denial that the founding fathers were judeo-christian really hurts the credibility of those arguing we are not a nation founded on judeo-christian ideals.

If the question "Is America a Christian nation?" had been posed to me even one year ago, I would have emphatically answered, "Yes!!!", and then launched into several talking points about the unprecedented traditions of charity, chivalry, and generosity that have propelled this country to the top as the global superpower. I would have cited all the Anglo-American contributions to the cause of Christianity in the world that I was thankful for, from President James Monroe's 1819 common sense against European expansionism -- a global blight whose vaccine is, to my absolute conviction, LONG overdue, after reading Ralph Peters' "New Glory: Expanding America's Global Supremacy" -- to William McKinley's "Protestantization," if that's the right word, of the society of my own home country, the Philippines, to Ronald Reagan's new American optimism infused with the moral clarity of Pope John Paul II against Soviet communism, yesterday's Islamic fascism.

As for religious liberty itself, I thoroughly commend Dr. Land for his steadfastness in championing the most basic right for civil society to flourish. However, I also commend the Council on Foreign Relations for at least beginning to see the light about Christianity's role in American history:

http://www.foreignaffairs.org/20060901faessay85504/walter-russell-mead/god-s-country.html

Of course, if "Is America a Christian nation?" means "Is Christianity the state-sanctioned religion of America?", then the answer would have to be a resounding "No." In the end, though, given the apocalyptic menace from the usual (Shiite) Islamic fascist or Northeast Asian Stalinist suspects, I expect that Judeo-Christianity must necessarily assume a place at the very core of the identity of the United States of America. Paradoxically speaking, a healthy American civil society rooted in Judeo-Christian virtues will be a most suitable foundation to construct an American, NOT a European, new world order... composed of Latin America, Africa, Iran, India, and maybe even China.

Steve, Jack, the point of this "thing" here is to find common ground that "faiths" can use to diplomatically settle their differences. They gonna "study war no mo" is the desired end product. The radical right's "ink" in the white house does seem to have good reason to hope they succede, make it. The adventures of W in Iraq. I take it you're not holding out much hope. And you don't encourage me that there will be a diplomatic solution either.

Permit me please, after that long comment, one more item.

Go back a year or two. Remember ex Judge Moore of the Alabama Supreme Court, who was removed for putting a stone monument of the 10 commandments in his courthouse. Isn't it so interesting that this is the same Judge who said a little earlier "Gays who adopt children should be executed".

It all goes to show you that the right wing extremist hypocrits are just that. Blind people in their view of society, who can't remember something about "thou shalt not kill", one of the commandments. Need I say more about the mentality of these people, and the real goals of their religion - the end of our freedoms, replacing them with a potentially murderous theocracy. Don't we have enough of those types in the world under a related extension of the Bible?

We have met another real enemy, it is amongst us, and it often wears the collar or follows the collar. One of their ilk resides in the White House, look what he has brought to the world, both here and abroad. No wonder why.

Jesus was opposed by a domination system, secular by the Romans, and religious by the Temple-centered Pharisees, chief priests and scribes, who dominated the captive Jews through power. Jesus preached and promised a Kingdom of God, where existing world powers, religious and secular, would no longer dominate the people. Thus, until the Kingdom of God lays claim to the world as we know it, the US cannot call itself a Christian nation. This is not saying that all of our laws eminated out of the Hebrew and Christian Scriptures. Many have, but many laws have come from other, mainly English, cultures.

In normal times I wouldn't object to nominal religious displays in public area. We live in a different time though. Thanks to Pr. Bush selling our Republican party to the extreme right wing who think they can legislate our societies values from their bible, everything has to be viewed through this prism. Ending Stem cell research and a womans right to choose, teaching "intelligent design", the denigration of our gay citizens rights to equality, even stopping uterine cancer through childhood injections of a new vaccine are all part of the religious rights attempt to impose their view of morality on citizens who do not believe as they do. Please don't give me the comment that the nations laws are based on Judeo-Christian 'values', for they are not the values of a majority of the people. All the religious right offers us is to slide down the slopes toward a theocracy where we become like those who would murder us because of their interpretation of their holy book.

We must never forget that the bible proscribes death for so many things, e.g. working on the sabbath, being gay, sex outside of marriage wearing different types of cloth, etc etc. It is in some ways a vicious book from a time of ignorance and superstition. It is not unlike what led to the Taliban, who executed women as sport, and to terrorize other women, in their American built stadium for sex outside of marriage, or the religious laws that make women who are victims of rape guilty, while the men often go free in some societies, because the 'judge', chosen for his religious beliefs, decides "what God wants".

In the name of God and Jesus, Christianity murdered 10's of millions of Muslims during the crusades, setting the stage for the extremism found in parts of Islam, its their warped form of "never forget". Add the witch burnings (the church and the person who called a neighbor a witch shared in her property of course), and torture / death for those who dared challenge the church which said the sun revolved around the earth, and the earth was flat, etc etc. This whole problem of religious extremism is simply based on a desire for power and money by some religious leaders who fear their preachings are becoming irrelevant as more and more people gain real knowledge about the world, and the religious orders and their scribes no longer control what is printed, read, and learned, and now there is the internet. We're in a time frame which reminds us of our African-Americans stirring for equality beginning in the 50's, as television brought to these people the pictures of how the whites lived. We also need to remember how religious belief and so-called 'God fearing Christians' fought tooth and nail to continue the Jim Crow era of virtual slavery of our Black citizens while they reached the ultimate level of hypocrisy with their professions of faith, and of course their Bible, which allows slavery.

Our people have to ask if their religion is one of those that says "check your brain with your coat" at the door, and to not listen to those who say that embracing religious beliefs decides whether you will go to Heaven or Hell when you die. Do you believe that Mohammed Atta is in Heaven with his God promised 72 virgin concubine? As a personal note, it seems that when we die, we die, but our genes live on, shared with others, in our decedents. Our awareness goes back to the state it was before we were born. I don't remember suffering during that time. As for the final answer, my PHD biotech friends say that within the next 25-50 years we will create life from non-life in the lab, and understand how it comes about naturally given enough time and the right conditions. We'll also see the development of 'computer systems' that will in every sense be aware of their own existence, same time frame. Then perhaps the world will see organized religion for the monster it can be in so many ways. The place for religion needs to change, its goals should be to help our fellow human beings live a better life, not carrot and stick terrorizing the people with their holy book, which is in many ways the source of so much waste and death. If there is something beyond, I'm sure we'll be rewarded, and for the right wing extremists, just maybe they'll come to understand how much havoc and suffering they cause to others. Please never forget also that our President Bush prayed before he went to war in Iraq. What he got us was not a tragedy but a catastrophe, but that is another, though related story.

W. Lee, the right of self defence is natural law. Jesus is perceived to be a great peace maker. Colt fire arms chose to call their caliber revolver a "peace maker." Yep.

So Greece and Rome weren't Democratic? Actually, the concept began centuries before both civilizations began. Sumer had the very first one, and then the idea widened out to other regions. Our version is merely the new kid on the block. It seems to be the best so far, but there are bumps and abrasions along the way.

Some of the most evil, overbearing, nastiest, inconsiderate, narrow-minded, ill-tempered, immoral people on the face of the earth are religious extremsts, whether they are Christian, Jew, Muslim or other. Unfortunately, we'll have these types forevermore.

Another thing: I do not believe in compassion especially toward those I perceive as a danger to my or my family's well-being. This country is considered to be compassionate, but that does not include those who would hurt us, no matter how hard the revisionists and apologists try. For that matter, should this country be invaded, and it will, guess who would die first, and it wouldn't be those who fight back.

Mr. Land has redeemed himself, with one caveat: He implies that religous = moral. This is foolish. Religous people sometimes are moral, sometimes not. And many religous people (generally the more religous you are the more intolerant and immoral you are) are immoral. So religous does not correlate with moral -- or intelligent for that matter (negative correlation).

...John Adams, the nation’s second president, said, “Our Constitution was made for a moral and a religious people. It is wholly inadequate for any other.”

Not everything a President says is necessarily true. (one only has to look as far as GWB for proof). This statement implies that our Constitution is inadequate for non-religious people, e.g., atheists, and is unnecessarily divisive.

Keep head down!

It would appear to me that the "moral majority" suffers from a lack of common sense. They have everything going for them but are not satisfied with everything. There's more?

Well, there's the REAL power, kingdom and glory. But that can only be had by a single individual. Who'll it be? Billy, Pat, Orel, Jerry, or Reverand Haggert? Maybe if we make a deal with the pope? Nope! The pope is also a candidate. Surely not a "coalition of the willing?"

Heads up is the order but that's foolhearty. It invites a review of just who we are. We enjoy a lot. There's no accounting for the billions of dollars taken in. There's tax free bank accounts for ministrys and there's tax deductions for our "gifter's to God." Then there's the killer, tax exemption for our real estate, gives fair minded Americans a sick stomach. But it's worse than that.

We threaten the children with the fires of hell. We say they are absolutely real but have no evidence to support that. The question is not if but when will someone show up in court claiming emotional disturbance going back to being threatened with hell by a religion. There goes those unaccounted for, tax free, tax deductible dollars righ out the window.

May I suggest the "Elmer Fudd" routine. Be vewy vewy quiet when hunting converts. Shooting off the mouth claiming absolute truths when the dumbest hillbilly knows there are none can only alert the wabbits. Take Elmer's advice and avoid wabbits born in Brooklyn. They can be devistating. So keep the head down, be vewy vewy quiet, worship all you please but please to let others enjoy the American dream, life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

"All men are created equal" is a Biblical concept? Nope! As America's slave owners were fond of pointing out, the Bible is chock full of references to slavery. Christ went out on a limb by complimenting a man for being kind to his slave, but said nothing about "equality."

It's sadly familiar to see revisionist American history that tries to make America more Biblical, but less often do you see cases like this where the Bible itself is revised to make it more like American history.

who is a true christian and is america not a true christian country? Richard from Ghana

So let me get this straight, the idea that it is a self-evident truth that all mankind is created equal and endowed with inalienable rights is a judeo-christian concept? Really?!?! Where is that in the Bible?

Sadly, most authoritarians (whether on the left or the right) fail to make a distinction between the state (government) and the society. This is the root of many of our problems. Down with statism! Up with liberty!

MKH, ditto

Did you know that religions alone actually own real estate, "their own property."

All real estate except for church property is taxed. Thus we are all RENTERS from our government. The RENT is called real property taxes. Plain and simple, don't pay the taxes and get evicted. Religion is exempt. Is that a violation of the first amendment? Do the tax laws "establish" religion, all religions?

Not all religions are exempt. The Scientologists are not "official" and therefore their real property is taxed just like it was a business. This is a clear example of government establishing religion by recognizing it, "officially" in the tax laws. "No law shall establish....???"

Worshippig "disgusting things" is CONTROLLED by the established religions. So don't worry about that.

A "religiously pluralistic" is not in opposition to a secular society. Secularism has been turned into a dirty word by religious fanatics (much like right wing political fanatics have turned "liberal" into an insulting epithet.)

Fact is, religious viewpoints in America are not only "welcome in the public square" they positively dominate it.

Yest me, I don't comprehend your argument, though I agree in part. You disavow the legitmacy of the democracies of the Greeks and Romans because they had slaves..... Then do you also dsicount the democracy of America, did she not also have slaves. Share with us a better reason for them not being the first democracies.

I say that the first were in the first civilizations: Africa. Democracy is bi-partisan in definition: 1)Freedom to do; i.e. rights, and 2) Procedural. By which do you define Democracy?

I generally don't mind religious views being present in the public square - as long as the "religious viewer" is paying for it that is.
If my government uses my tax dollars to pay for anything religious, it's using those dollars to pay for something I don't believe.

Then I have to think again.

If we can somehow agree that the government can't pay for religious views, then what if a certain religion comes to worship pornographic imagery that digusts us at large, are we to allow it to present its images in the public square? Who is to judge what is and is not religiously presentable in this public square?

Why can't the churches just display these things and ideas on their own property?

I neither want my government to support nor suppress religion with my tax dollars. I would like to see our species dump religion and mysticism on its own, without coercion. I wish I could have faith that this will happen ...

Some say that both the Greeks and Romans had democratic governments. I softly disagree. The first democratic government on earth was America. It began well north of where both the Greeks and Romans left off. I'll let this be my total argument on that point, Greeks and Romans both had emperors, slaves...

The great experiment that is us was unique in the annals of man and therefore had some up-hill sledding to do that is not yet done. Money rules us. We do have the best government money can buy. And recently our government has come under attack from folks claiming to be conservative. So they are. They seem to me to be hell bent on establishing the kingdom of God. Since it's God then kingdom is alright. I disagree. Kingdoms are out and that includes the kingdom of God.

Conservative - keep things the way they are and if things have changed then change them back. How far back must we go to get to the kingdom of God?

http://www.hoax-buster.org/gov101 will take you as far back as humanly possible in my opinion. Didn't you ever wonder who drew the 6th line in the sand and why he did it?

I am adverse to the title "Christian Nation", because of the twist played on the sepeartion of Church and State. How can this be a Christian Nation with out laws based on biblical teachings, or at least guided by Biblical wisdom? There is nothing Christ-like about our leaders or the decisions that they make. Let alone the way that we live.

Christian Nation is a nonclementure describing the majoritys' means of worship.

Anyone can come up with something for "all men are created equal" even me. I like to ask questions. Does the set, all men, include Moses, Jesus, Muhammad, Joseph Smith, George W Bush, homosexuals, women, kings, nobility, crooks and liars, senators, governors, and all you might care to add never forgetting one's own self.

If we're going to separate men into classes of unequals what rule will we apply? Mark Twain suggested the Almighty Dollar that now enjoys universal worship. Say it isn't so. Do we really have the best government money can buy? How's things going in government these days? How's things been with you lately? Worshipping the wrong God can be devistating and even more so it that God turns out to be the Devil. http://www.hoax-buster.org/sellyoursoul but don't expect much for it. The big bucks, the almighty dollars go to those who lead the multitudes to hell.

The statement, "all men are created equal" is necessary to create democracy. Everyone has equal rights under the law and political power to determine the law. It has been falsely interpreted to mean, "at birth." And it can be played with to say it means all sorts of things.

Selling the idea wasn't all that easy. It was a great experiment that has yet to end. It must, by the very nature of what it is be continually sold. And it suffers the hazzard of guirrila warfare.

Democracy can never win. It can only survive. Democracy can only lose once while it's enemies can lose and lose and lose some more. As long as they survive, the ones that would destroy democracy, democracy is at risk. That never ends.

It's all about individual rights both under the law and to make the law and nothing more. What superstitions the founders had or didn't have is irrelivant. However, those same faiths in the supernatural are democracy's great enemy. It is them that install kings and destroy the individual's right to sin, be immoral publically or in private even. Jesus is the great enemy of democracy, worse than a king, the king of kings.

Jesus has been found in the written historical record. She was a would-be king that was convicted of blasphemy, claiming to be the son of God. http://www.hoax-buster.org

Protecting democracy from kings begins at church. Religion is the great enemy of democracy.

While I disagree that equality and freedom are exclusively Judeo-Christian values, Mr. Land is right about a religiously pluralistic society and a secular government.

In another thread, I mentioned that displays from all religions should be welcomed in town squares, since those are properties for the public's use. But similar displays do not belong in government buildings such as courthouses. I think many people focus both positively and negatively on Christianity because of its numerical majority. It's important to remember, in my view, that the principle of freedom of religion applies no matter what religion is in the majority.