Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

ch-scene - Re: Regional bashing

ch-scene AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: RTP-area local music and culture

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Duncan Murrell <dvmurrell AT nc.rr.com>
  • To: RTP-area local music and culture <ch-scene AT lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: Re: Regional bashing
  • Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 07:38:48 -0500


On Nov 11, 2004, at 11:29 PM, Chris Rossi wrote:

It seems to me that the intelligent way to sell seperation of church and state is to not stress so much the freedom of the state from religion, but the freedom of religion from the state. Do folks really want the gummint telling them how to worship? It seems like even the not so brilliant would be able to see that even amongst christianity there's no real consensus on how it ought to be practiced and what exactly jesus thinks it is we all should do. It always seemed obvious to me growing up that seperation of church and state was primarily to protect religion. Large chunks of New England were founded by followers of weird ass sects of Christianity that were persecuted in England where the state religion was a different weird ass sect of Christianity. The beauty of the secular state is it allows us all to live and work together regardless of what we call God. That doesn't seem like too sophisticated a concept to me. Normal people ought to be able to grok that.

rossi



It's funny you should mention it, because one of the country's more conservative Protestant sects -- Seventh Day Adventists -- publish a magazine called "Liberty", to which I subscribe. The magazine runs, issue after issue, vigorous and reasoned arguments for the separation of church and state, _specifically_ from a desire to be free from government. This is a magazine aimed at the general reader, specifically members of the church, and so it doesn't fall into academic speak or legalese very often. Judge Roy Moore was roundly criticized in the magazine, for instance. They've also got their eye on instances of what the editors think are free-exercise issues -- such as the government banning prayer from places they think it ought to be allowed, as long as it isn't coerced prayer. All of this derives from their particular theology, specifically their understanding of the End Times, a small part of which involves government coercion in religion. So they want no part of it.

Pick it up some time to see how conservative Christians talk when they're talking about _strengthening_ the wall between church and state.

d





Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page