'It's red meat for pundits,' concedes Harvard chaplain Greg Epstein, who prefers the word 'humanist.'
Comment: by the way the comment written on 05/02/2008 4:15:22 Am is kinda not mine... i was trying out something.. so sorry johndavidprince... ^^
Comment: oh my goodness, i plagrise johndavidprince.. sry.. ^^ anyway i wanna comment on his comments.. the values of secularism is decided by man themselves. It changes with the society perception or what humanist likes to say "evolves" with time.. for example in the past abortions tend to be view as evil in the mainstream.. but now people think differently.. they feel that getting your unborn kid killed is just killing a bunch of cells.. perfectly alright.. and now there are laws that legalise abortion.. humans have a tendency to go deeper into immorality.. just like cooking a live frog, you won't cooked it with boiling water straight but you will boil it slowly alive.. thats the same as human beings.. we hardened ourselves to this "little stuff" such as abortion or homosexualism.. next we will consider suicides as a choice in the name of freedom.. finally we degrade ourselves further because what we considered right is wrong now.. Yes, i am a christian and i support the fact of a government that lets the Bible be their rulebook.. i wanna clarify certain stuff regarding having multiple wives... what God intended in the Bible is a man to a woman.. see Genesis which i believe u are very familiar since u can quote so many verses.. He created ONE man and ONE woman for the purpose of marriage and bind into a single entity.. it is never God's intention for a man to have multiple wifes... but u will say what about the jewish patriachs that have mutiple wives.. God never say a single word that he endorse mutiple relationships in his Bible.. although He remain silent towards for example Abraham mutiple wives.. that doesn't mean He approves it.. another example again Abraham lied to one of the pagan kings regarding Sarah his wife.. but God did not bellow his voice and condemn him immediately.. does that mean God promotes deception.. no obviously, the Bible clearly states deception is a sin.. i believe the way of you interpreting the Bible is not taking the entire thing into context.. which is why u are making such erroraneous statements.. i think i spell that error word wrongly ^^
Comment: This is not in any way an argument for atheism; rather it is an argument for true Liberty.
Christians, Muslims, and Orthodox Jewish religion love to toss around the words secular and atheist as if they are the same thing. This is the height of idiocracy and ignorance. Secularism is a style of government. Atheism is a system of thought or belief in the lack of belief in any higher power or God. Secularism is the separation of God and the State or God and government. Atheists do not separate anything; it is the absolute rejection of any belief in God. Secularism is a methodology, a system, or a form of governance. Secular government separates religion, church, or God from government in order to protect all thought, belief, and religion. The government must remain secular so that Christians can continue to believe as they see fit and the sane applies to Muslims Buddhists, Hindus, and Atheists or Agnostics, any belief. Secular government is not atheistic government; rather it is the removal of religion from government so that all the other rights that we enjoy may exist. Without secular government there would be no free speech, free thought, free expression, free belief (freedom of religion), or even the ability to have fair due process.
Without secular government and the protection of our separation of church and state we will eventually evolve into a Theocracy. When secular government goes the way of the Dinosaurs we loose religious freedom. (Many Christians feel that religious freedom means the freedom of Christianity and nothing else) The dominant religion will always take the positions of power and thus enforce its will or faith (theology) upon the entire population if the state gives up on the restriction in the constitution of government promotion of religion and the establishment of any state religion. Many Christians and Muslims or Jewish followers feel that all other religions are not real, true, or correct versions of faith, which denotes all other religions to the classification of non-religion. This is a sad reality when you converse with religious people you will find that the main three religions share this false religion dogma. The sick fact that all three use terms like heathen, apostate, blasphemer, and non-believer which is the same as infidel.
Comment: hi everyone i am new here.
Comment: hi
Comment: This is for those who doubt the need for secular government in the US.
We do not consider that much of the covenants or Biblical law is not legal in our modern secular world. Christianity, Judaism, and Islamic religious beliefs have one thing in common, the Old Testament and many of the same prophets. Think about or read the Old Testament or New Testament and consider what verses are by modern legal standards, not legal. The list is long. If you do not believe me, please do the research for yourself. Here are some verses that are against the law in the U.S.A. and the modern secular world.
(Leviticus 20:13/24:16/24:10-15/25:44//27:29/, Numbers 15:35-36/31:31-40, Deuteronomy 22:28-29/21:15/21:18-21/22:13-24/13:6-18, Hosea 2:2-13/9:12-16, Exodus 35:2/21:7/22:18/22:20/22:19/31:14-16, Zechariah 13:3, Judges 11:30-40, Daniel 11:30-39, Jeremiah 12:14-17, Matthew 5:25, Samuel 15:3/10:21, 1st Samuel 15:3, 1st Timothy 2:12, Psalm 12:3/137:8-9 These are only a few examples. Concubines and multiple wives are illegal in the modern world yet are permitted within the Bible. I am thankful for secular, rational government otherwise we would live in a nation reminiscent of Afghanistan under the Taliban. Yet there are some people here in the U.S.A. that would be perfectly fine with Biblical Law becoming the Law of the Land. This is why we must defend the separation of Church and State by denying or refusing government Promotion of Religion. If we do not we loose our precious Liberty. Some Christians would argue that Christ would not enforce these verses. They would be incorrect due to the very fact that Christ was Jewish and held Moses Law in high regard. Christ mentions Old Testament Law many times through out the Bible. Jesus refers to Moses directly in verses (Matthew 5:17, John 5:45-47, Luke 24:44, John 6:19-23, and Hebrews 11:23-29). At any time Christians can revert to the now illegal aspects of the Bible. There is much in the Bible that is unethical, immoral, and despicable. Unfortunately it is the God of the Bible who is the one acting with such ugly behavior. This is the reason why religion and government must always be separated as our constitution has wonderfully provided for.
Comment: Hay Florida:
Thank any God you want for that.
There are many Biblical verses about the forbid the use of molten images, or any image bowed down to and worshiped like God, in the Old Testament and New Testament. Yet a license plate is a very molten image. Image worship seems to be the trend with many of the religious followers these days. Some people want everyone to see their cross, fish, or other image depicting that they are special due to their chosen label. This is their right, but it is not the proper or constitutionally acceptable place to display religion, your license plate. If Florida will be allowing religiously specific license plates, will they allow Atheist, Muslim, Buddhist, Hindu, Satanic, Jewish, or whatever my personal God symbol happens to be on a State Issued, tax payer Funded, personalized license plate? Would the state of Florida allow a ? mark for the Agnostics? I doubt it. The excuse would be vast and wide for why, just as the lame excuses for why the state of Florida has no respect for the constitution and its ban of any state promotion of religion. The explanations will sound patriotic on the surface but in the end they will be only an excuse for why Florida does not have to enforce the constitution or respect for other differing individuals. Will Florida allow someone to put am ???I Hate God??? statement as their license plate? I doubt it. Would Florida have to make room for a ???My God is Better than Your God??? or ???Satan loves You??? statement on their plate? Now that would be constitutional.
Comment: Without secular government, Liberty would become extinct.
This is not in any way an argument for atheism; rather it is an argument for true Liberty.
Christians, Muslims, and Orthodox Jewish religion love to toss around the words secular and atheist as if they are the same thing. This is the height of idiocracy and ignorance. Secularism is a style of government. Atheism is a system of thought or belief in the lack of belief in any higher power or God. Secularism is the separation of God and the State or God and government. Atheists do not separate anything; it is the absolute rejection of any belief in God. Secularism is a methodology, a system, or a form of governance. Secular government separates religion, church, or God from government in order to protect all thought, belief, and religion. The government must remain secular so that Christians can continue to believe as they see fit and the sane applies to Muslims Buddhists, Hindus, and Atheists or Agnostics, any belief. Secular government is not atheistic government; rather it is the removal of religion from government so that all the other rights that we enjoy may exist. Without secular government there would be no free speech, free thought, free expression, free belief (freedom of religion), or even the ability to have fair due process.
Without secular government and the protection of our separation of church and state we will eventually evolve into a Theocracy. When secular government goes the way of the Dinosaurs we loose religious freedom. (Many Christians feel that religious freedom means the freedom of Christianity and nothing else) The dominant religion will always take the positions of power and thus enforce its will or faith (theology) upon the entire population if the state gives up on the restriction in the constitution of government promotion of religion and the establishment of any state religion. Many Christians and Muslims or Jewish followers feel that all other religions are not real, true, or correct versions of faith, which denotes all other religions to the classification of non-religion. This is a sad reality when you converse with religious people you will find that the main three religions share this false religion dogma. The sick fact that all three use terms like heathen, apostate, blasphemer, and non-believer which is the same as infidel.
Comment: The term Secular has been tainted by many in the US to mean Atheism with out thinking about why government is Secular. Secular government is the removal of religion from state, the removal of religion from reason, logic, and law while respecting its existence outside of government. Secular Government protects the freedom of religion by not including it in the laws that govern the nation. Steven Waldman (speaking of faith NPR) could not be more incorrect when he mentions the founding fathers personal belief as proof that religion or the church should fuse with government. State written prayers, church/religion, or state belief systems violate the individuals right to believe as they choose. Steven Waldman should realize that a secular government keeps any singular form of religion from taking control of the government. A secular system of democracy is the cornerstone to the foundation of the amendments that allow citizens the right to believe in any or no religious system. The separation of church and state or the anti-establishment clause of the constitution allows Christian religious conservatives to practice their faith as they see fit. As well it protects the Buddhist, Hindu, or any other religion, the freedom of religion does not mean that any one religion has a right to use the state as a tool for self-advancement. The argument that the separation is a gray area is a fallacy. A nation is either secular or theocratic. There is no gray area. The separation of church and state was not intended for the flourishing of any one religion. It was intended to keep all belief free by keeping the state out or belief. There is no mention of any sectarian definition of God used in any historical document of the US, nor should there be. Waldman should remember that there was no founding faith outlined in the declaration of independence or the constitution. I would ask Waldman who???s God does it refer to? Does religion truly make for improved civic or individual behavior patterns? Some of the worst elements of society have been devoutly religious, Hitler, the BTK killer, the leaders of the Christian and Muslim crusades, the witch hunters of Europe and early America, Bin Laden, and on and on it goes. Yes there was Stalin and Poll Pot but they pale in comparison to the religious violence perpetrated over the thousand of years. So I would argue that the founding fathers knew history well and that is why they created a secular government even while they may have been religious themselves. It is sad that many Christians hear the term religion and think only of themselves. How greedy and self-serving. We must realize that secularism rejects religion in government while recognizing its right to exist separate from government, in the privacy of your home and places of worship. It recognizes God given rights while not recognizing any particular organized religion.
Comment: Chris Hedges claims that some atheists want to eradicate religious fundamentalists. Christopher Hitchens may want terrorists dead bur I am sure he would rather see the fundamentalism die off and not the actual innocent population. Hedges plays with word context to suit his defense of faith, a faith that cannot be proven nor disproved. Hedges claims that loneliness, beauty, love, alienation, suffering, and death are outside of ???rational deduction.??? He must not have taken biochemistry, psychology, or much sociology otherwise he may realize that we have found many of the factors, chemical, or neurological processes of those aspects. I respect his writing skills and his abilities as a journalist, but he is missing the point of what most atheists believe. Atheists do not want to convert you they only want to be left alone by those who wish to convert them. He fails to give any breath to those atheists. Hedges violates his own disdain for fundamentalism by being fundamental about people like Dawkins for using their imaginations. Hedges is a non-fundamentalist absolutist attempting to rewrite history. Chris Hedges tries to place the blame for horrid events in history upon reason, logic, and science, while excusing human nature. If we truly used logic or reason humans would realize the folly of genocide, hate, and living in ignorance. Logic and reason are not theology or ideology, instead they are the only process that separate us form the earthworm. He maintains that the evil in human nature is something we should just accept. I postulate that Hedges exposure to war and injustice have left him without hope. Hedges should remember that reason or logic are not ideology, they are methods for which he owes his entire education and ability to create a complete sentence.
Comment: contin. hedges- He displays an ignorance of history, vocabulary and other aspects of psychology with many of his statements. I was most disturbed by his disrespect for education as indoctrination. The last time I checked 2 plus 2 equals 4 and there is no debate on that fact. Giving our youth facts is not indoctrination. Hedges should realize that science is a method not a religion. Science can be use for good or evil, rather it is mankind with preconceived notions forged by religions that try to misuse science to rebuff their set beliefs, science must remain neutral. Science is the use of reason and logic through methodology to reach or obtain truth and fact. Religion is theology. It does not even approach theory, for theory has some evidence to back it up. Religion is faith. Science is not a faith, as Hedges would claim. His book is a sly attempt to modernize religion while neutralizing those who dare question if there is a God or not. It is also an attempt to excuse religion of its role in modern society and shift the blame to science or reason. The Enlightenment was a major event in history without it we would all be living in theocracies. It was religious people who added some aspects of the Enlightenment to their tool belt of control, while sadly misinterpreting the real use of the scientific process.
Comment: -Logic and reason are not theology or ideology, instead they are the only process that separate us form the earthworm-
I do not care if God is real or not. It cannot be proven either way, instead I would like to concern myself with matters more pressing than an argument that cannot be argued. Weather or not the Bible is the word of a God can be argued, but that is not why I am challenging the convoluted logic of Chris Hedges. He has an interesting while disturbing comprehension of the Human condition. His book, I don???t believe in atheists: have only two things correct. 1.Humans can exhibit the best of behaviors and the worst of behaviors. 2. Fundamentalism is the root cause of much of societies suffering. Where he goes totally wrong is that he ignores the fact that Hitler was a believer in Divine Right or Divine Providence while proclaiming his and the German devotion to Christianity and God. It is proven history through the study of Hitler???s speeches that the basis of the supremacist utopia preached by the Nazi leader mention his devotion to his religion. Not his devotion to science. Hedges also attempts to blame the entire history of slavery on science or the Enlightenment of Europe, while denying the historical aspects of the use of Biblical verse to create the foundation for the despicable act of slavery. Chris Hedges also makes a stretch to include the plight of the Native Americans as the direct result of the Enlightenment, science or reason. Sorry, Religious bigotry was also a prime factor in the attempted extermination of the Native Americans. He tries to blame the British Imperialism on Darwin and the Enlightenment. Darwin was rejected by many of the social power structures of Britain at the time. The industrialists or supremacists of the time, taking advantage of Darwin???s insights and an innocent science, heralded eugenics as their tool of control. Hedges combines secularism with atheism with questionable motives. Hedges should remember that without secular government he would not have written some of his earlier books. Secularism is not the belief that God does not exist. It is the removal of God from government while respecting the belief of God outside of government.
Comment: As well it protects the Buddhist, Hindu, or any other religion, the freedom of religion does not mean that any one religion has a right to use the state as a tool for self-advancement. The argument that the separation is a gray area is a fallacy. A nation is either secular or theocratic. There is no gray area. The separation of church and state was not intended for the flourishing of any one religion. It was intended to keep all belief free by keeping the state out or belief. There is no mention of any sectarian definition of God used in any historical document of the US, nor should there be. Waldman should remember that there was no founding faith outlined in the declaration of independence or the constitution. I would ask Waldman who???s God does it refer to? Does religion truly make for improved civic or individual behavior patterns? Some of the worst elements of society have been devoutly religious, Hitler, the BTK killer, the leaders of the Christian and Muslim crusades, the witch hunters of Europe and early America, Bin Laden, and on and on it goes. Yes there was Stalin and Poll Pot but they pale in comparison to the religious violence perpetrated over the millennia. So I would argue that the founding fathers knew history well and that is why they created a secular government even while they may have been religious themselves. It is sad that many Christians hear the term religion and think only of themselves. How greedy and self-serving. We must realize that secularism rejects religion in government while recognizing its right to exist separate from government, in the privacy of your home and places of worship. It recognizes God given rights while not recognizing any particular organized religion.
Comment: The term Secular has been tainted by many in the US to mean Atheism with out thinking about why government is Secular. Secular government is the removal of religion from state, the removal of religion from reason, logic, and law while respecting its existence outside of government. Secular Government protects the freedom of religion by not including it in the laws that govern the nation. Steven Waldman (speaking of faith NPR) could not be more incorrect when he mentions the founding fathers personal belief as proof that religion or the church should fuse with government. State written prayers, church/religion, or state belief systems violate the individuals right to believe as they choose. Steven Waldman should realize that a secular government keeps any singular form of religion from taking control of the government. A secular system of democracy is the cornerstone to the foundation of the amendments that allow citizens the right to believe in any or no religious system. The separation of church and state or the anti-establishment clause of the constitution allows Christian religious conservatives to practice their faith as they see fit.
Comment: "Secular", as described by Ms. Miller's teacher, was not a neutral word if it was used to differentiate non-religious governments from those in which 'those speaking for God made the rules - rules that sometimes were corrupt and unfair". All governments sometimes make corrupt and unfair rules, including secular governments. The real advantage of some - not all - secular governments is that the government does not penalize any particular views on religion. There is no guarantee that they will not be corrupt and unfair, about religion or about anything else.
Moreover, countries that do have official state-recognized religions, like many of the European countries, also do not penalize religious belief (or lack of it) and some countries with secular government have penalized religious beliefs.
Describing secular vs religious government as in the article contributes to the use of 'secular' as a negative rather than a neutral term.
Comment: I enjoyed reading the article titled "In Defense of Secularism." I also learned the word "secular" as referring to something that has nothing to do with religion. In spite of having what many people would call secular leanings. I am in agreement with the last sentence of the next to last paragraph, preferring to call myself a humanist.
Comment: In her 25 February 2008 Newsweek ???Belief Watch??? editorial entitled ???In Defense of Secularism,??? author Lisa Miller laments the evolution of the definition of the word ???secularism??? as it is currently applied in describing our federal government. In alleging modern misuse of the word, she simultaneously neglects the reality that the word ???religion??? also has changed in meaning since its 18th century use in the First Amendment.
Then, unlike now, the phrase ???Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion??? meant that there was to be no establishment of ??? in 21st Century vernacular ??? any single Christian (or Jewish) ???denomination??? by our federal government. This can be seen in a plethora of primary documents written by our Founding Fathers, and in light of contemporary events relative to their lives.
The Establishment Clause certainly was not intended to mean government devoid of, antagonistic to, or apathetic toward ???Almightie God??? (The First Virginia Charter, 1606), who is the God ???of the Christian Faith??? (The Mayflower Compact, 1620). This is the same God that our Patriot Founders politically referred to as ???Creator,??? ???Supreme Judge of the world,??? and ???divine Providence??? (The Declaration of Independence, 1776).
The regular practice of Christian worship and celebrations by our Founders is widely documented by a multitude of sources. These men were Presbyterians, Anglicans, Baptists and Catholics who all respected the legal right to freely worship the God of the Bible and the Torah, as the following words of George Washington, written to a Jewish synagogue in Savannah, Georgia reflect: ???How blessed is the nation whose God is Jehovah.???
???Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion??? was understood to mean that, unlike the tradition in England and other parts of Europe in the 1700s, the recently formed federal government of the United States of America ??? created by a Constitution overtly reflecting Biblical principles ??? was lawfully forbidden from instituting the formation of a national Christian denomination.
Ronald S. Toth
Newton Falls, Ohio
Comment: When religion and politics are meshed, both are weakend.
Comment: It should be understood that organized religions (all of them) are products of man. While I agree with the moral code of books like the Bible and the Bhaghavad Gita, it is a fact that these books were written by MEN. And not only were these written by men, they were compiled and canonized by men, as well. Regarding Christianity, for every book included the Bible's New Testament, there are ten that are excluded. The Council of Nicaea canonized the texts almost THREE HUNDRED years after Jesus died.
To those hard-line Christians who take the Bible as ???the Word of God,??? it is important to know that a person wrote it. When you stop to think about this, you may realize how ABSURD it is to take something so literally. Imagine if someone were compiling a similar book today. They would most likely not be taken seriously. Is it then so hard to see why it???s important to separate church and state?
Like someone said earlier, it is akin to governing based on Grimm???s Fairy Tales and Aesop???s Fables (which also have great morals. And aren???t Jesus??? parables just as similar?)
Comment: Death is absolute, inevitable and eternal, and anyone who attempts to convince you otherwise is a liar, a fool, or a parasite. Many men believe this, but fear the wrath of the mob will fall upon them if they speak this simple truth.
Religion, in any of it's forms seeks to subjugate the human mind to a non existent superior power and influence behavior by promises of rewards in a non existent afterlife. It is in fact nothing more than a mental affliction cruelly thrust upon children by superstitious parents who can not accept their own mortality, and is the foundation of great evils the world over. Merely a glorified Ponzi scheme, at the root of bigotry, intolerance, hatred and war.
I care not for company of those who believe, with neither preference nor distaste, but I have a furor for those who would use the indoctrination of the feeble minded as a means of usurping power or wealth.
If these zealots who preach to me of their faiths wanted to be taken seriously, I suggest they police their own temples, mosques and churches, and publicly stone those who would use their beloved gods as a means to surround themselves with material gain or political power. Yet by denying the existence of these wolves in clerics clothes, they prove themselves yet again blind to even the most obvious of realities.
As for the rest of you, believe what you may, and conduct your life as you see fit, and I shall do the same. But in the event any of you desire to inflict your beliefs upon me or mine, I must remind you of one point. Not believing in your devils does not mean I do not understand their methods! Rest assured, be it Jihad, or Armageddon, there are some amongst you who do not need to hide behind terms like secularists or humanist. We are in fact QUITE comfortable telling you your god is a lie, and quite willing to defend our beliefs with force if need be.
And in the interim, we shall watch you continue to slaughter each other from afar with great relish.
Comment: I don' t believe we live in a secular society, nor should we. We live in a society that believes and is based in the belief that there is a higher power, without subscribing to one in particular. It is with this belief that our fore fathers wrote the constitution that should be the foundation of all proceeding laws. The constitution is not a living, breathing, changing constitution. It is Americas basic freedoms and rights, it is our history that could not and should not be changed. We have God given rights. It is this belief that brought pilgrams to and establish America and also the belief that led to Lincoln to freeing the slaves. Freedom is our God given right, and we will protect and still do protect it with our lives. We are the strongest nation for a reason. Secularism doesn't work in Russia, and it wont work here. Individuals seeking better lives and the persuit of happiness is what drives this country. Big governement and entitlement programs sucks the life and drive out of the free spirit.
Comment: EVERY BODY KNOWS VARY WELL THAT THE DEBATES ABOUT SECULARISM GROWING UP IN THE
WORLD.ESPECIALLY IN THE 3.TH IMPROVE??NG COUNTRY SUCH AS IN TURKEY.THIS TROUBLEMAKER
HAS BEEN ORIGINATED PROPHET PRODUCING CENTRE IN (MIDDLE AGE) MIDDLE EAST.
SOME POLITIC??ANS CREATE THESE ARGUMENTS FOR TO ESTABLISH AND HUNT BALLOTS.
BALLOTS
Comment: the religionistas are numbskulls, and flabby thinkers. God is a concept for people too lazy to think for themselves. organized religion is pablum for unthoughtful people who want someone else to run their lives. Christians, Muslims, Jews...it is all the same mindless giving up of one's own responsibilites to a "higher power" who will supposedly save you if you just believe. It smacks of Fairy Tale.
Comment: Why so negative my friend? Even God is a creation of the human mind. Agree, when u just copy a naive childish picture of him from your forefathers- indeed it doesn't need much thinking. On the other hand, just to surrender as you do is also a sign of lazyness. Yes, in our times of ever faster growing knowledge its real a task to keep an overlook, to keep everything together, and to see God. Dont make it too easy!
Comment:
Yes, god is a creation of the human mind, and clearly not divine. As such, it must be reviewed rationally, and then relegated to the same place where genocide, war, and hatred belong.
Not all we have created was in our best interest
Comment: Dowkin's attack on religion gives reason to religious people to speak of hatred and Dowkin calls him self a humanist like people here in Sweden who are actually fighting religious belive as something evil.. Secular people must recognise that they are also belivers and that there is no rational ground to state that some bodys belif is non-existent in his or her's own mind (heart). Ettore Nobis.
Comment: Has anyone else noticed that the language used by the ultraconservatives to describe seculars, atheists etc. is frighteningly close to that used by hitler in reference to jews? The aggression of the ACLU and others in defence of the non-religious has been overbearing at times, but justified considering the howles of the paranoid blaming less than five percent of the U.S. population for all of our problems. To not defend yourself in such circumstances is to invite disaster
Comment: Tell me one of the Ten Commandments in The Holy Bible that in following would do this country any harm? Even if you are so far from God that His word means nothing to you, the Bible is the original Humanist handbook! Anyone who calls themselves a Humanist, secular or not, should not stand against the God of the World!
"Let no debt remain outstanding except the continuing debt to love one another, for he who loves his fellowman has fulfilled the law. The commandments, "Do not commit adultery," "Do not murder," "Do not steal," "Do not covet," and whatever other commandment there may be, are summed up in this one rule: "Love your neighbor as yourself." Therefore love is the fulfillment of the law." Romans 13:8-10
A true Christians duty is to love all of God's creatures as He loves us in order to bring people to Christ and their ultimate salvation. A true Christian cannot advocate sin though, per the Bible. We will never all agree, but seperating Humanism from true Christianity makes no sense at all.
Comment: But the seventh day is a Sabbath to the Lord your God; you shall not do any work???you, your son or your daughter, your male or female slave, your livestock, or the alien resident in your towns
Seems to me, the part about slavery seems a bit unjust to the slaves, don't you think? Plus how will the Mexicans ever get the landscaping done?
Comment: Slavery was the reality of the time. Thank the Lord we live in a country where this isn't our reality. You could easily have been born into slavery in another part of the world to a non-Christian owner. At least if he or she was a Christian you would get a day off. :)
Comment: I think it all boils down to how people cope with their fear of death, collectively and as individuals. Nothingness is a tough sell, of course. Not much upside being a secular humanist, other than not having to say things you really don't believe. As a Humanist Jew, I really don't want to impose my beliefs (yes, we do have beliefs) on anybody else. While I don't believe that theistic beliefs, faith and prayer are necessary for ethical behavior, I certainly don't begrudge others having those ideas and practices.
Comment: And Christian 'jihadists' is not a perversion of the Christian faith? Oh... thats ok though huh?
Comment: Like Ms. Miller I grew up and attended public schools in the 60???s and 70???s. And at that time ???secular??? was used to imply an impartial form of government where each was free to worship (or not) as each saw fit. And when that was the case, as it was in the 60???s and 70???s and even into the early 80???s that was fine. However, secular humanism has been twisted into a religion in and of itself, practiced with all the fervor and passion of evangelistic Christianity, fundamentalist Islam or ascetic Buddhism. In doing so, it has abandoned its unbiased approach and now stands in direct conflict with any other belief systems that does not recognize it as preeminent and superior to all other beliefs. Secular humanism is no longer an idle bystander, guardian of fairness and keeper of freedom that it once represented. Today it is actively involved in changing the face of our country and government to a form that bears little resemblance to what was originally in place and certainly not what the majority of the Founding Fathers intended. And its activism is what most evangelicals (myself included) stand against. The god of secular humanism, relative truth, stands firmly at the forefront of these changes. Those who disagree and believe that right and wrong DO exist, that truth is NOT relative and that the individual???s primary purpose in life is for the common welfare (which is in the Constitution) rather than self-gratification and self-aggrandizement (disguised by the secularists as self-esteem and personal fulfillment ??? neither of which is mentioned or guaranteed by the Constitution) are under attack by the secular humanists. And this is turned around by humanists to appear to be the opposite ??? that they are under attack rather than the aggressors. A view of the landmark decisions from the past 40 years show the opposite ??? nearly every landmark case was found in favor of secular humanism and every one of them overturned long-standing practices that could be traced to the roots of American independence. In the words of the bard, ???Methinks thou protesteth too much.??? And the final odd twist is this ??? in becoming an active player in politics rather than a guardian, secular humanism has become THE state-sponsored religion. By its own definition, is that not unconstitutional? Interesting ??? in the end we inevitably become what we fear most.???.
Comment: I, like Greg Epstein, am a 'humanist'. I'm comfortable being called 'Secular Humanist' because there are those who believe in a supernatural/divine being or force who also call themselves humanists and I am decidedly secular--dealing with things that can be 'defined by time and space', or 'not overtly religious, ecclesiastical or clerical.' I find it interesting how many leaders of the religious right call atheists God-hating. Strange, but why would someone who does not believe in 'God' hate him/her/it/them? You don't hate something you don't believe exists. I have often found that people who feel secure about the validity of their beliefs, or where EVIDENCE for their beliefs is abundant, are comfortable with themselves and have no need to berate those who believe differently or impose their beliefs on others. As society finds less meaning, significance or validity in religious doctrine, people increasingly are becoming more secular. I think this is seen as a threat by some religionists and they therefore lash out at what threatens them. Today, more than ever, it's clear that belief in a God is not the determining factor of moral/ethical behaviour. Moral/ethical people exist both in the God-fearing camp and in the secular/humanist camp.
Comment: It never ceases to amaze me how far right wing Christian "jihadists" will go to undermine and criticize the rights for which our country stands for. By perverting the term "secular" to imply God-hating is as un-American as you can be. And this comes from people who claim moral superiority while wrapping themselves in the flag.
Comment: Spoken with MUCH moral superiority...
These 'rights' that you talk about, would that include the free expression and exercise of religion? How about the freedom of speech, to say what they believe?
You see, 'seperation of church and state' is not a right given to us, as the author so eloquantly put, endowed upon us by our Creator, but a legal idea which did not exist until the 1930s and can easily be change by a legal decision in the oposite direction.
Comment: Your creator? How absurd.
Comment: You should look this up also --> German Christian (Deutsche Christen) A pretty interesting protestant group with frightening parallels with some of today's movements. Hitler may not be a true Christian but he surely know how to exploit the lack of the separation of church and state in World War 2 Germany.
Comment: Actually, Hitler showed what happens when the STATE takes over religion, and not the other way around. The same can also be said for the likes of Henry VIII. Throughout history it is the state that has abused religion, bending it to do its bidding, and NOT the other way around. The Ottoman turks for example used Islam to control and supress, not the other way around.
Comment: emmarcee,
You should do more research, this is straight from the guy's mouth.
". . . the luxury, the perversion, the iniquity, the wanton display and the Jewish materialism disgusted me so thoroughly that I was almost beside myself. I nearly imagined myself to be Jesus Christ when he came to his Father's Temple and found the money changers."
"My feeling as a Christian points me to my Lord and Savior as a fighter. It points me to the man who once in loneliness, surrounded by a few followers, recognized these Jews for what they were and summoned men to fight against them and who, God's truth! was greatest not as a sufferer but as a fighter."
Not only that, he also signed The Concordat between the Vatican and the Nazis that ffectively legitimized Hitler and the Nazi government to the eyes of Catholicism, Christianity, and the world.
Nope, Hitler identifies himself as a Catholic, it was Himmler who was crazy about those Norse religion. Hitler didn't agree about bringing back the pagan religion.
"It seems to me that nothing would be more foolish than to re-establish the worship of Wotan. Our old mythology ceased to be viable when Christianity implanted itself. Nothing dies unless it is moribund."
Still, you could say he's not a true Catholic, which is a fine point and could be argued that Stalin and Pol pot isn't a true humanist either because they didn't value human lives first.
However, let me point out that Stalin and Polpot's crime wasn't motivated by secularism, but Hitler was motivated by religious conviction.
Still, you are right, Genghis was supposed to believed in Shamanism and I apologized for the mistake. Still, his crime wasn't motivated by his religion, rather the dreams of conquest.
dewcooper,
Let's run the number shall we? I'll give you a hint 9 crusades + the european inquisition + the Goa inquisition (that took place in India and prosecuted Hindus) + Slavery (sons of Ham, wink wink)
And should I point out that some groups of the Christian right want to do the same thing as the Taliban's did? Supression of women, censorship, religious law?
Comment: Excellent point! Although I do think bringing back Wotan and Thor would be better than now... it was a warfaring religion for a warfaring people... christianity is a peacful religion for a warfaring people as can easily be seen in how easy we will go to war for religion in the last 2000 years.
Comment: emmarcee,
You should do more research, this is straight from the guy's mouth.
". . . the luxury, the perversion, the iniquity, the wanton display and the Jewish materialism disgusted me so thoroughly that I was almost beside myself. I nearly imagined myself to be Jesus Christ when he came to his Father's Temple and found the money changers."
"My feeling as a Christian points me to my Lord and Savior as a fighter. It points me to the man who once in loneliness, surrounded by a few followers, recognized these Jews for what they were and summoned men to fight against them and who, God's truth! was greatest not as a sufferer but as a fighter."
Not only that, he also signed The Concordat between the Vatican and the Nazis that ffectively legitimized Hitler and the Nazi government to the eyes of Catholicism, Christianity, and the world.
Nope, Hitler identifies himself as a Catholic, it was Himmler who was crazy about those Norse religion. Hitler didn't agree about bringing back the pagan religion.
"It seems to me that nothing would be more foolish than to re-establish the worship of Wotan. Our old mythology ceased to be viable when Christianity implanted itself. Nothing dies unless it is moribund."
Still, you could say he's not a true Catholic, which is a fine point and could be argued that Stalin and Pol pot isn't a true humanist either because they didn't value human lives first.
However, let me point out that Stalin and Polpot's crime wasn't motivated by secularism, but Hitler was motivated by religious conviction.
Still, you are right, Genghis was supposed to believed in Shamanism and I apologized for the mistake. Still, his crime wasn't motivated by his religion, rather the dreams of conquest.
dewcooper,
Let's run the number shall we? I'll give you a hint 9 crusades + the european inquisition + the Goa inquisition (that took place in India and prosecuted Hindus) + Slavery (sons of Ham, wink wink)
And should I point out that some groups of the Christian right want to do the same thing as the Taliban's did? Supression of women, censorship, religious law?
Comment: Where are your numbers?
Comment: To be fair, the word "secular" does mean non-clerical, and as a Christian conservative I am firmly opposed to the context in which those who claim to defend my point of view utilize it. I was completely engaged and in agreement with Ms. Miller's article up until the very last paragraph where in her description of secularism she attempts to state the forefather's intentions with our constitutional form of government. If you're going to talk about religion and our founding fathers, then why not explain to me why the monuments in Washington, D.C. are riddled with Biblical scriptures - same as many of our founding fathers' historical documents. I tell you what, Ms. Miller, show me - LITERALLY - show me, the article of the U.S. constitution that specifies and explicitly uses the words "separation of church and state." If you can do that, then you will have hands-down won the secularism argument - otherwise, all attempts to re-write American history should cease.
Comment: Read this letter from Thomas Jefferson.. http://www.loc.gov/loc/lcib/9806/danpre.html kinda spells it out to me... maybe you interpret it defferently than me.
Comment: First, Jefferson's letters are his opinions and not part of the Constitution. Second, the context of the letter concerns a township that tried to make church membership a requirement for voting, which is against the first ammendment. That is completly differnet from the governemnt allowing people to exercise their religious beliefs...
Comment: To be fair, the word "secular" does mean non-clerical, and as a Christian conservative I am firmly opposed to the context in which those who claim to defend my point of view utilize it. I was completely engaged and in agreement with Ms. Miller's article up until the very last paragraph where in the her description of secularism what she attempts to state the forefather's intentions with our constitutional form of government. If you're going to talk about religion and our founding fathers, then why not explain to me why the monuments in Washington, D.C. are riddled with Biblical scriptures - same as many of our founding fathers' historical documents. I tell you what, Ms. Miller, show me - LITERALLY - show me, the article of the U.S. constitution that specifies and explicitly uses the words "separation of church and state." If you can do that, then you will have hands-down won the secularism argument - otherwise, please stop with the attempts to re-write American history.
Comment: OK, don't tell me Hitler who wanted to revive old European paganism and liked Hindu Swastika was a true Catholic. Genghis Khan was not a budhist. Seems like Dracon has a major problem.
Comment: dewcooper,
Please do some research and learn how to spell before posting as it highlights your intelligence
Hitler,Musollini were Catholics. Hitler said he was doing God's work when he kill the jews
Stalin,Pol pot were atheists, although Stalin went to an Orthodox seminary. His mom wanted him to become a priest
Marx didn't kill anyone, he just proposed the idea of communism.
Genghis Khan was reportedly a Buddhist, his successors switched to Islam though
So your point is quite moot, only Stalin and Pol pot were atheist, even then their crimes didn't come from religious conviction to Atheism or the promotion of Atheism. Unlike the crusades, Religious prosecutions,Spanish inquisition, the witch trials, blowing up abortion clinics
And let's don't start on the war on terror, where some supporers believed killing the ayrabs is a step towards jesus's return
Lastly, about the U.S. being a Christian nation, Please do yourself a favor and go read the treaty of Tripoli.
Comment: People can claim to be whatever they want. Looking at history , ALL of these individuals acted against God, killing others in mass numbers far exceeding the crusades, inquisition and witch trials. Stalin and Pot killed those who did not hold their religious beliefs or beliefs that they deemed 'acceptable'. Under communism, religion plummets as worship for God was replaced with 'worship' of country and force was used to bring about this change.
Even today, Christians are killed and persicuted in the Sudan (10,000 Christians killed) and in China.
And at no time did I use the term 'Christian Nation'. I simply pointed out the terms and phrases used in the Declaration of Independance and the US Constitution, illustrating the point that this country was not founded to be 'against God' as the author's teacher taught.
Comment: Perhaps in some ways you are both correct. Worship, in ANY form is an abomination against the will of man. Be the false god be Jesus, or Marx, the result is always tragic.
Comment: Wow, even in the 1970s, kids were being wrongly indoctrinated. The Constitution did not create a secular government, as the author's teacher wrongly taught, but a governemnt that does not suppress any religion. Our inalianable rights come from our Creator, not our government. The governemnt cannot supress religious speech or expression, as stated in the very first ammendment written in the bill of rights. The notion of 'seperation' is not even a law but a legal idea.
Comment: Keep faith at home,keep reason in Goverment. Each can be free to worship as one likes.I don't need your version of God. I have my own. That why a brain was given to men and women.If I was a women I would abolish religion.
Comment: If you were a woman you might have something more intelligent to say.
Comment: How has that 'reason in government' been working for you?
Comment: How has Faith in government worked for you?
Comment: I put little faith in government...
Comment: while it is true that the seperation of church and state insures that we do not have to accept any paticular ideology in order live in comparative freedom and saftey, it is also true that faith has come under attack in this country; as though it were something to be discarded because it is no longer needed in the intellectual enlightenment of the 21st century. We,because of this train of thought do not need God because we have become God. Then tragedy strikes,and we find that in our dispair, our search for why, we realize that we are not God...and we seek answers and comfort from the one who is.
Comment: I've just received another e-mail from well meaning family and friends who believe America should become a theocracy. Like sheep to slaughter they find solace in like thinking of blind followership that they tout as leadership. They mean well, I tell myself. These are nice people who don't understand their destructive nature, I say. Yet, I look to the future of what they would make; the future of force and destruction in the name of religious mono-thinking. I am scared for who we as Americans are and who we will become if these people succeed. I pray for reasonable minds and secular societies and I am proud of being a patriot.
Comment: Let's look at what 'secular' societites have done, before you toss about the 'destructive nature' of theocracy: Stalin, Marx, Hitlin, Musilini, Pho Pot, Khangis Kahn, were all secularists. They killed MILLIONS, many of whom were their OWN countrymen. How many have died in a 'theocracy'?
Comment: Please reread your history books. As many people have died in religious wars over the centuries as in secular wars. Protestans vs Catholics, Christians murdering Jews, Christians vs Muslims. In our own life times, Christian Serbians have killed Muslim Kosovars. In our own country people were murdered for being 'wtiches'. In Europe, untold numbers have died for witchcraft and heresies - well beyond the infamous Spanish Inquistion. Christian may have the worst record in history for killing people for the simple reason that the murdered had different beliefs, including different Christian beliefs. In modern times we have the means to kill in greater numbers, thats why six million Jews died. Jews have been the whipping boy of modern times, whole villages in the pograms of Christian Russia, lynchings of individual in the southern United states. As far as humans are concerned religion is as good a reason to kill as any, and better than most.
Comment: Run the numbers and look at WHY these wars happened. Kosovo had nothing to do with religion, but land. In the Sudan alone, over 10,000 Christians have been murdered. Don't think you will come even close to that number in witches or the Inquisition.
Comment: Your delusional to think Kosovo had nothing to do with religion...The whole region has been plagues with religious fighting since the rise of the Ottoman empire...its just a matter of who's version of history you have read. Look at the Christian vs Christian fighting in Ireland... how many Irish have killed each other just because of they were Catholic or Protastant. So don't try to say it's all over land.. land has a major influence but these people have hated each other for years...land is just an excuse to kill any one that doesn't beilve in the same delusion that you believe in.
Comment: Kosovo started when the Ottoman's used Islam to control the population, forcing those who wanted to keep their land to convert (but yet they never had to practice Islam). Those who kept their faith and did not convert, lost their land, title and power. The recent war was one side trying to get their land back from the other. Northern Ireland was a war against British control and rule.
Comment: I've just received another e-mail from well meaning family and friends who believe America should become a theocracy. Like sheep to slaughter they find solace in like thinking of blind followership that they tout as leadership. They mean well, I tell myself. These are nice people who don't understand their destructive nature, I say. Yet, I look to the future of what they would make; the future of force and destruction in the name of religious mono-thinking. I am scared for who we as Americans are and who we will become if these people succeed. I pray for reasonable minds and secular societies and I am proud of being a patriot.
Comment: Although I am a Christian, I understand that any nation may be made up of many people who believe differently. A healthy amount of "secularism" is needed in running the nation to ensure that people of different faiths are treated as equally and as fairly under the goverment's rules and practices as possible.
Unfortunately - Americans have taken the "separation of church and state" to mean throwing out all references to character, integrity, self-respect and dignified behavior because it smacks of forced morality.
But, if you look at what has really happened in the US over the last few decades - we could really use some character instruction as a nation - because integrity and character are truly lacking.
Comment: I agree that the nation needs those things.. I disagree that religion of any sort has the copyright to integrity, character and self respect. These value are human values not just christian, islamic, jewish, hindu, etc... values. The reason these values are diminishing is because parents of all walks of life and religions, aren't teaching these to their kids. Parents have been letting TV, video games, and now the internet take the place of teaching thier children good work ethic and values.
Comment: I agree totally and it is getting worse. I have worked with kids for about 23 years and their behavior has deteriorated markedly over the time, accelerating in the last 10 years. Parents for a number of reasons, have turned over the parenting to the schools, who over praise kids for every little thing they do short of murder, the internet, their peers and the terrible terrible influence of modern music.
Comment: The same cries came from Plato, and were as equally as absurd!
In truth, you remind me of Chicken Little!
Comment: I had the opportunity to research the history that went into the acceptance of the amendment to our constitution of freedom to practice one's religion and the separation of religion from government. History establishes that when government tries to control religious thought and belief, and when religion tries to control government by interjecting over reaching religious thought, both religion and government are corrupted and the citizen is hurt. Presently, there is proof of that in those countries in the middle east where the "mullahs" are dictating their beliefs to their government. I can only hope that our presidential candidates and other people will recognize the importance and need for the traditions of "secularism" in our government, which is intended to avoid creating religious extremists who control government and who have become the "crazies" of our time. Let us hope that our government, avoids the pitfalls that history has proven exists when we mix the two.
Comment: I think you meant to write that "secular" *doesn't* mean "godless."
Enter comments if any for reporting abuse
SPORTS Speedo's new and controversial high-tech LZR suit is helping swimmers smash dozens of records. How the company plans to capitalize on Olympic gold.
Sponsored by
|
AFRICA These are among the ruling party's weapons against opposition voters. Still, the population clearly didn't cooperate in Friday's vote.
Sponsored by
|
