Flame — HabitableZone

Flame » in reply to Eloquent divisiveness

re: Eloquent divisiveness
TB — (archived)

And what about those who don't have religious faith? Will atheists and agnostics be excluded from consideration under a RomneyRegime?

Consideration of what? Exactly what boon of the State are atheists going to miss out on? What did they miss out on under Reagan? What parties aren't they going to be invited to?

Frankly, the intolerance seems to run the other way. While people are telling me that we are just inches from theocracy, I'm seeing a lot of open hostility to religion from a lot of quarters lately.

In the cultures we are fighting in this war, atheists are killed. Killed. Yet the merest mention of a "war on civilization" gets the horselaugh from most liberals. Go figure. This country is probably the most religiously tolerant on the planet, atheists, Bhuddists, you-name-it-ists.

"Americans acknowledge that liberty is a gift of God, not an indulgence of government."

Actually, no. Compare and contrast this assertion with "the tree of liberty is watered with the blood of patriots". We earned our liberty, Mittens, your God didn't hand it to us on a platter. And it takes a lot more than prayer to hang on to it.

True enough as far as the literal meaning goes, but what this phrase essentially means (if, for example, Ayn Rand made the same point) is that liberty is an inherent right of humanity due to their nature as reasoning individuals. Far too many people are beginning to believe that rights and freedoms are things governments allow you to have as a boon of the State.

Another point that should not be forgotten is that religious leaders and churchgoers were, in fact, on the front lines of the abolition and civil rights movements, and it's likely they wouldn't have succeeded when they did without them. After all, the man's name was not Professor Martin Luther King.

Log in or register to post.

The whole thread (144 posts)