Freethought & Rationalism Archive

lunachick · 12-23-2002, 02:26 AM

That's what scares me, too. It's the confusion of religion with patriotism. A very dangerous place for religion to be, I think - the political psyche of a nation being almost wholly based on a misguided representation of a 'moral and righteous' uber-lord. Fundamentalist Christian America scares me as much as fundamentalist Islam or fundamentalist Judism does.

We have got to get rid of those Abrahamics! Between them, they will totally annihilate this pretty blue/green planet.

[ December 23, 2002: Message edited by: lunachick ]</p>

Daggah · 12-23-2002, 03:54 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by fromtheright:
<strong>Doesn't sound much like an "establishment" of religion to me. It's not Congress making a law. In fact, it's not law at all, is it? </strong>

Ever heard of the 14th Amendment?

fromtheright · 12-23-2002, 06:01 AM

Daggah,

Ever heard of the 14th Amendment?

Sure. I stand somewhat corrected (incorporation is a doctrine that is debatable, though I don't reject and mostly accept it).

So, how does his speech violate the 14th Amendment?

The Devil's Advocate · 12-26-2002, 09:11 PM

I'd be interested to see some of those Constitutional arguments. Or do people just like throwing out random amendment names and hope it somehow supports their position? If so, try the 26th or the 21st. They don't seem to get used a lot and I think they are starting to feel neglected.

Viking · 12-26-2002, 10:50 PM

Well one thing is for sure: Bush is not taking any chances by appealing to the Xian majority. His remarks are no doubt lawful, but they are certainly offensive.

copernicus · 12-27-2002, 06:55 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by GaryP
I think that a Xmas greeting is probably OK legally. But all this God talk is very annoying coming from the country which intially came up with the concept of separation.

Gary, I'm not so sure that the US is the country that first came up with separation of church and state. That movement started in Europe, as anti-Catholic sentiment escalated into the Protestant movement. Secularization of government really started with the power struggle between sovereigns and the church.

Toto · 12-27-2002, 07:52 PM

Separation of church and state was an American innovation. Most of Europe still has established churches,

In a related bit, there was a good article by Matthew Engel in the Guardian about GWB' Christmas Card

Quote:

. . . .

Inside there is a gold-embossed seal and a biblical quotation: "For the Lord is good; his mercy is everlasting; and his truth endureth to all generations (Psalm:100, 5)". "

. . .

Every nation is screwed up about something. With us Brits it's class (oh, OK, and sex). With the Americans, it's religion. "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion," says the first amendment, which is interpreted to mean the complete separation of church and state. But it is an itch they just have to keep scratching. On the one hand, everyone is so touchy that the president of the United States . . . cannot wish anyone a happy Christmas without risk of offending someone who would prefer to celebrate Hanukah, Diwali, Eid-ul-Fitr or nothing at all; indeed none of us can - it is a solecism here to say "Happy Christmas" to a stranger. On the other hand, he feels free to bash us with a random biblical verse. Baffling.

. . .

I may be over-worrying about that aspect, because I have now discovered how many cards the Bushes sent out. One million. ONE MILLION! When Eisenhower began the tradition of official White House cards in 1953, he sent out 1,100. Even Bill Clinton, who was everyone's friend, stopped at 400,000. The Bushes have sent out a million. Blimey.

My card was postmarked Crawford, Texas. I rather presumed that in keeping with White House environmental policy, cards to Washington would have been posted in Texas, and cards to Texas posted in Washington. But apparently they all came from Texas, none of them going near Crawford, which has not handled a million letters in its history, but were specially postmarked through a deal with the post office. The exercise was paid for by the Republican National Committee.

There was another word on the card. The back revealed it was made by Hallmark. The Clintons used a rival company, American Greetings. According to the New York Times, Hallmark gave $110,000 to the Republican party during the 2000 election, and nothing to the Democrats. Happy everything.

Another story on the Christmas cards

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

12-23-2002, 02:26 AM	#31
lunachick Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: NZ Posts: 7,895	That's what scares me, too. It's the confusion of religion with patriotism. A very dangerous place for religion to be, I think - the political psyche of a nation being almost wholly based on a misguided representation of a 'moral and righteous' uber-lord. Fundamentalist Christian America scares me as much as fundamentalist Islam or fundamentalist Judism does. We have got to get rid of those Abrahamics! Between them, they will totally annihilate this pretty blue/green planet. [ December 23, 2002: Message edited by: lunachick ]</p>

12-23-2002, 06:01 AM	#33
fromtheright Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Huntsville, AL Posts: 633	Daggah, Ever heard of the 14th Amendment? Sure. I stand somewhat corrected (incorporation is a doctrine that is debatable, though I don't reject and mostly accept it). So, how does his speech violate the 14th Amendment?

12-26-2002, 09:11 PM	#34
The Devil's Advocate New Member Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: USA Posts: 2	I'd be interested to see some of those Constitutional arguments. Or do people just like throwing out random amendment names and hope it somehow supports their position? If so, try the 26th or the 21st. They don't seem to get used a lot and I think they are starting to feel neglected.

12-26-2002, 10:50 PM	#35
Viking Regular Member Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: Duluth, MN Posts: 151	Well one thing is for sure: Bush is not taking any chances by appealing to the Xian majority. His remarks are no doubt lawful, but they are certainly offensive.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.