Sex, Religion and, Yes, Politics
Harper's party too sure God is on its side.
Punishing sinners?
My mother taught me, as undoubtedly your Mom taught you, not to discuss sex, religion or politics -- the only things really worth discussing.
May my mother's soul rest in peace as I now discuss all three.
There have been, over the past few months, two books on religion and they have been runaway best sellers, God is Not Great by Christopher Hitchens and The God Delusion by Richard Dawkins. Both authors seek to demonstrate that religions are a bad thing. Why they took so many words to say this is beyond me for who could deny their case? It's a slam dunk. Religions are why people kill each other as put so well by Macaulay in his "Lays of Rome":
And how can man die better
Than facing fearful odds,
For the ashes of his fathers,
And the temples of his Gods
Permit me first to offer my definition of "fundamentalism" as the belief that the Bible must be literally taken as the "word of God."
I daresay that the Christian religion has been responsible, in its time, for more deaths than any other means save natural causes.
Case against Christianity
Let's just look at a couple of lingering Christian hangovers.
The Crusades, as George W. Bush discovered, is a white hot word in much of the Muslim world and his ignorant use of the word has contributed in no small way to the troubles in the Middle East and elsewhere
The 30 Years War ending with the Peace of Westphalia in 1648 in essence (for the first time) created and defined nation states each with the right to Christian worship either as Protestants or Catholics while defining the issues and the future battlefields for which Europeans could thenceforth fight their wars. In fact, I would argue that the two World Wars are parts of the Westphalian hangover.
The Roman Catholic Church, the largest of the Christian churches, having killed millions in the name of its particular Jesus, has a much more complicated and painful hangover than any other.
The Catholic Church today is the catalyst for God only knows how many deaths in Africa because of its attitude to birth control and AIDS. Rome, with an hypocrisy only religion could muster, denies the use of condoms but then, after the unwanted babies are born and AIDS extended, brings the mercy of God to the parents of unwanted children and the victims of AIDS.
My own church, Anglican, to which I cling by the slenderest of threads, is self-immolating over the question of gay marriage and gay priests. Homosexuality, which unlike adultery and coveting other men's wives, is not in the Ten Commandments, has torn out the guts of a major part of the "corporate church."
Bringing back the Crusades?
What is, to me, astonishing, is that, especially here and in the United States, organized and fundamentalist Christianity flourishes and more and more is controlling the political agenda including getting into wars which exude a strong odour of Christian v. Muslim.
Whatever satisfaction the Christian churches may bring their communicants, they have presided over unending grief, prejudice and indeed violence for centuries and should be condemned by all who want to have a secular nation, not one run by people who see the obligation they feel to their particular strand of Christianity as defining their obligation to the public which elects them.
Am I too harsh?
Take the case of criminal law. While no government in my lifetime has found a way to reform all criminals, some have tried. Conservatives on both sides of the 49th parallel care little for reform but believe that punishment in ever increasing doses takes care of sinners. They have a substantial "hang 'em high" philosophy, which, in the United States, has brought world leadership in persons jailed and persons executed.
If one listens to the pronouncements of the Canadian Conservative Party it's clear that they regard societal revenge -- jail, jail, then more jail -- as the fundamental tenet of the justice system.
Vote religiously?
We're coming to a federal election and the need for us to make up our minds about whom we should vote for. We are often advised to vote the man (woman) not the party. This advice can only come from people who don't understand the system.
MPs don't much influence the system much less run it. In order to have some understanding of what a government will do, one must know something about where parties stand and upon what principles they will govern.
I don't want a party with Christian moral principles. If nothing else, I see where that's taken America, and by extension Canada, under the Bush II regime.
I don't want Christian principles. I want decent decisions based upon justice for all and sound judgment in the public interest.
Nothing personal, Jesus
But does that, for my vote, exclude the deeply religious?
Yes. I don't want criminal law or social laws or human rights based upon fundamentalist's notion of Christian principles. Indeed, I don't want government by people who, in order to get political support, must pander to the religious right.
Does this all mean that I reject the teachings of Jesus?
No, I reject government based upon what someone thinks was the message of Jesus or the word of God or both.
I support with every fibre of my being the right of people to hold whatever religious views they wish -- I simply don't want to be governed by them.
Wanted in Thailand
Postscript: there is an alleged serial pedophile from B.C. on the loose in Thailand. When oh when are we going to understand that pedophiles are sick people and should be treated as patients and quarantined until doctors can state that it's safe to release them? Putting them through the justice system merely ensures that they will be back on the street uncured.
Related Tyee stories:
- Conservatives: Muffled, but how Moderate?
Candidates have denounced abortion and 'the gay agenda.' And vowed to 'change laws to reflect biblical values.' - God and Science, Riddle Me This
What gave existence its first shove? - Richard Dawkins Won't Repent
Interview with 'God Delusion' author.
![[Tyee]](http://thetyee.cachefly.net/ui/img/ico_fishie.png){kind=small}
Dale Jackaman
22-10-2007
Tell that to....
Tell all that to the fundamentalist Christian candidates in the Conservative party, all of whom are thoroughly muzzled by the PMO's office so John Q. Cluelessvoter doesn't get wind of who and what they really are.
And tell that to the millions of Canadians who are about to get their hopes for cures dashed by much the same now infecting our medical and scientific community.
http://www.cmaj.ca/cgi/content/full/176/5/601
and
http://www.cmaj.ca/cgi/content/full/176/5/611
Keep at em' Rafe.
D.
nightbloom
22-10-2007
Is this a recycled article?
Is this a recycled article? I keep reading the same rant here.
Not defending the Crusades or the Thirty Year's War, but haven't we heard this all before? Besides, the latter was political, with religious and ethnic pretexts. Let's not be simple-minded here folks. Saying Catholics started all Europe's wars and massacres is no more valid than saying the Jews did. A lot of inhumanity went on for a lot of complex reasons & pretexts, committed by a wide variety of people. Let's not vandalize history any further with falsehood and half-truth.
There's a lot of condoms being thrown at Africa right now. It's our substitute for policy. I'm not convinced lack of access to condoms is the cause of AIDS in Africa, any more than it is in latex-saturated gay male communities in North America. Besides, not having sex never killed anyone. Whatever their merits, can you honestly claim that Christian sexual ethics are the real problem on that continent? Gimme a break.
And the RC Church does not teach that the Bible is the literal word of God from cover-to-cover. That's so, like, a- thousand-years-ago, Rafe. Catholic perspectives on Biblical text is radically difference from the Muslim perspective on the Koran. Most Protestant sects teach Biblical literalism (of the New Testament, at least), as do many of the free churches in the Americas, and of course the hard-core Evangelicals (a modern phenomenon). Not the RCC.
Enough Catholic-bashing at The Tyee please. Get your facts straight.
Fiat lux
22-10-2007
Anybody who studied history
Anybody who studied history without any religious, or jingoistic bias knows the facts of ethnic cleansing and mass murder by all major religions, especially by all Christian and Muslim sects.
To spread the only true faiths, or course.
After WW2 all the major Christian sects hotly denied any support for Hitler's antisemitic hysteria. I have to emphasize that neither of them supported, or excused the death camps, as only a very small percentage of people across Europe even knew about them until after the war.
But the ghettoes and the mass deportations were well known, seen by millions and excused by the clergy as "punishment for the crucifiction of Christ", from the pulpits and in schools, where the teaching of religion was compulsory in most countries. I had 11 years of it and remember very well what we were taught.
All the Churches willingly supplied thousands of clergy for Hitler's Wehrmacht and Waffen SS. The vast majority of SS units had the whole complements of Christian padres, as were all the satellite armies, with officer ranks.
After the war I knew 2 catholic priests in the refugee camps, who were former SS captains, or Hauptsturmfuhrers. The clergy of other religions had the same ranks by the thousands.
Yet, after the war it was all denied and all their superiors could talk about were the the very few who were incarcerated in the KZ camps, like Pastor Niemoller.
The rest were going along with the nazis very happily and it was estimated that about 50,000 nazi war criminals, including Eichmann and Bormann, have been able to escape Europe with Vatican passports, dressed as priests.
I picked up an old book at a store on Pender St. about 40 years ago, with the collection of the sermons of a famous Hungarian priest with the Slavonic name of Ottokar Prohaszka, full of vicious, disgusting, antisemitic propaganda, now denied by the Church.
Yet the book was published with their approval, carrying the usual "Nihil obstat Nr 2844. Dr.Theophilus Klinda praeses. Imprimatur. Strigonli, die 3. Augusti 1929. Dr.Stephanus Breyer eppus.vic. gen. ad. int " declaration carried on all official Church releases.
I still have the book and remember very well the sermons, blessings and holy water sprinkled on our guns when we went into combat "fighting for the leader with the cross on his chest, and those of us who will die will sit at the right hand of Jesus the very day".
The great leader was Adolf Hitler and we weren't even Germans, but, our government, like our quisling governments now, have sold us to his "great cause".
The least they could have done was to stop lying and admit they made a mistake and ask for forgiveness from the public.
I'm still wondering what God said to them when they arrived at the Pearly Gates?
Ed Deak. Big Lake.
Booker
22-10-2007
Christian Right
Rafe makes all the right points, but I would have liked to hear a little more about the role the Christian Right is currently playing in his party. The major expose by The Walrus Magazine from October of last year should be updated.
http://tinyurl.com/2g33wp
It is pretty amazing that the prime minister has to keep a large section of his caucus muzzled in order to maintain his government, and the major media have not done any digging to inform the public of what we can expect from a Harper majority.
The tide of religious fervor that swept the United States (and that exists in pockets in Canada, particularly in Harper's Alberta and parts of BC) seems to be reversing somewhat and that has to be a disappointment to the Conservative Party of Canada. Just as they get into power the Inquisition is coming to an end in Harper's motherland (the U.S.). At least the taboo about criticizing religion has been broken, thanks in part to the bestsellers mentioned above.
James Burns
22-10-2007
Rafe is bashing all religion
Rafe is bashing all religion with a particular focus on fundamentalist christianity. The RC church comes in for special mention, because of its rather horrible past and present behavior. If Rafe had said something unfair about the RC church you might have an argument to make NB, but he didn't, so stop trying to play the victim.
By actively discouraging contraception, particularly condom use, the RC church is contributing to the problem of AIDS in Africa, and it should be rightly condemned for that stance. Abstinence should certainly be promoted as a possible option, but it is laughably unrealistic to promote abstinence alone.
Most religions are stuck with medieval beliefs that don't fit well to modern times. Their prescriptions are overly simplistic, vague and shorn of any sense context. Why would anyone want to follow the morality of ancient warring tribesmen? It's the epitome of idiocy and a lack of imagination.
Stump
22-10-2007
the only quote worth knowing on this topic
"Man will never be free until the last king is strangled with the entrails of the last priest.
- Diderot
alive
22-10-2007
Then and now!
Seems to me that Rafe was a member of the W C Bennet regime, that old master of BS was quoted to say that God was on his side!
Did Rafe resign?
murdock
22-10-2007
Vote against the 'system'
We can still vote the person, just as long as they do not stand for any 'party'.
What difference would this make to our system were it filled with 200+ MP's whom are 'independants'?
I see a really nasty time coming for our 'public house' unless the populace actually manages to 'take it back'!
KWD
22-10-2007
solution?
Claiming that, “religion has been responsible, in its time, for more deaths than any other means save natural causes” is more than a little simplistic. It’s like saying guns kill people. And therefore it follows that the obvious solution is to bring in gun control. A quick read of today’s CanWest media will tell you how well that’s working.
What is equally simplistic is Rafe’s solution. Apparently he thinks “decent decisions based upon justice for all and sound judgment in the public interest” is the path to salvation. So, who makes these decent decisions and sound judgments? But more importantly, who decides what is decent and what is sound?
If you want to find out who’s making those decisions south of the border read:
www.truthdig.com/report/print/20071022_on_the_eve_of_destruction/
murdock
22-10-2007
a better quote:
“When the power of love overcomes the love of power, the world will know peace.”
~ Jimi Hendrix
maybe a better one than spreading more death?
KWD
22-10-2007
incomplete link
For some reason the link won't complete. "on_the" is followed by eve_of_ destruction.
James Burns
22-10-2007
Mommy dearest
But hey, since we're on the subject of RC church, here is an article that is a kick in the ass to the normal hagiography of that "saint" Mother Teresa:
Teresa emitted a continual flow of promotional misinformation about herself. She claimed that her mission in Calcutta fed over a thousand people daily. On other occasions she jumped the number to 4000, 7000, and 9000. Actually her soup kitchens fed not more than 150 people (six days a week), and this included her retinue of nuns, novices, and brothers. She claimed that her school in the Calcutta slum contained five thousand children when it actually enrolled less than one hundred.
and
She claimed to be above politics when in fact she was pronouncedly hostile toward any kind of progressive reform. Teresa was a friend of Ronald Reagan, and a close friend of rightwing British media tycoon Malcolm Muggerridge. She was an admiring guest of the Haitian dictator “Baby Doc” Duvalier, and had the support and admiration of a number of Central and South American dictators. (for the whole article go to: http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2007/10/22/4727/
Hmmm... makes her out to be a more of a goblin in a habit.
nightbloom
22-10-2007
All the same recycled
All the same recycled silliness. Everyone gets to work out their favourite peeve. Have ideologies, nationalisms, and ethnicities not also contributed to genocides...? I suppose Stalin and Pol Pot were Papists in The Tyee’s Mickey Mouse History of the World. Has our throw-away ‘condom culture’ eliminated HIV among gay men, or resulted in a drastic reduction in the number of abortions? Nope and nope. I’m certainly glad we’ve got them, but let’s not get all dogmatic about latex. Don’t you think poverty, social disintegration, prostitution, war, and an itinerant labour market might have a teeny-weenie part to play...?
Doh! Forgot to mention those.
But it’s all been said before. Rafe has recycled material he’s already published here several times, and the trained peanut gallery here applauds him every time. You don’t even make him work for it. Aside from his factual glosses, he’s done nothing to take the subject or his critique up a notch. I don’t like the politicization of Christianity represented by the Christian right either, but can we drop all the other ill-informed, anti-historical, counter-factual editorializing?
gaulois
22-10-2007
Extending the blame beyound organized religions
It would be fair to mention that most organized groups throughout history have ended up screwing the people. Of course, religion has been the main theme around which humans have grouped themselves and therefore have caused the most harm.
But blind belief in dogmas are not isolated by any mean to gods or religions. Even without religions, mankind would still harm itself. Think of communism, capitalism, and market liberalization. I am convinced that environmental groups will end up causing similar harm. After politics mixing with religions, we will now have politics mixing with the environment. Oh boy...
We would be far better off IMO to let people think for themselves. Perhaps medias need to think that one through...rather than preach to us about the evils of religions. Right, Rafe???
seth
22-10-2007
Harper's Theocons
There have been many articles and comments decrying the influence of evangelicals in Canada's new Conservative party. In fact, its parent political body - the Alliance - -was named after the evangelical church attended by Steven Harper and many of his MP's. Certainly Harper has been very effective in muffling the voices of his religious based MP's in preparation for his party's shot at a political and moral majority.
The mainstream media in recent years has refused to investigate and even ridicules those who warn of the religious rights virtual ownership of the Conservative party from constituency associations to nomination meetings to members of parliament. Indeed the same media has ignored the warning in the book American Theocracy about evangelical groups attempting to seize Democratic party (aka Liberal) congressional district associations.
Recently as this AM Bill Good ridiculed a caller who thought Steven Harper's Theocon ties would be excellent opposition ammo in the next election.
What is required is that a group (Liberal party?) spend some money and time investigating the Conservative party in an effort to determine the exact number of evangelical MP's, candidates and constituency associations. Massive anecdotal evidence is insufficient to convince the current bunch of incompetent journalists to even cover the story.
nightbloom
22-10-2007
Belonging to religious
Belonging to religious churches and associations is not a crime in Canada (yet), seth. Canada's still a democracy. You might not like the constituencies they appeal to, but those people are Canadian citizens too, and have chosen to express their enfranchisement by supporting that brand. Just as you have exercised yours by supporting the party that most resembles your political colouration. Just as you can't stand their church halls, large families and white picket fences, I'm sure they feel the same way about your abortionists, drug dealers and lax judges. You deserve each other. Unfortunately, the rest of us moderates are stuck listening to it all.
My point: stop attacking the constituencies (be it Catholics, Albertans, Jews, what have you) and stay focused on the ideas. The voters will decide.
G West
22-10-2007
The 'story' of the early Church
The history of the early Church and how it differed from secular or pagan culture can't be understood without acknowledging that the earliest Christians were apocalyptic believers.
Like many evangelicals and apostolic Christian sects today they thought that the end of the world was imminent and it influenced the way in which they chose to live: Just as support for similar ideas has gotten the west into an unwinnable war against an equally fundamentalist 'tactic' called terrorism.
Many early Christians espoused a pious, ascetic life, deserting the city and the secular world for a life of solitary or communal prayer and self-denial, an approach they shared with the Essenes.
The notion of impending doom and the sense of the world as a fundamentally sinful place were disastrous for the western Empire and its future just as it is dangerous for our future as a decent and peaceful society today.
If it motivated people to work for change there might be some hope; instead it encourages communities to isolate themselves and turn inward - whilst blaming the 'rest of us' or ‘the Muslims’ for the situation. That, in my opinion is one of the basic problems with religious fundamentalism: A kind of naive simple-mindedness that it shares with both neo-liberal thinking and Islamic fundamentalism.
Eddy Haskel
22-10-2007
The Human Condition
I heard an interview with a Catholic Priest whose message was that the Christian community should pull up it's socks and begin a more humanistic approach towards each other as well the society in general. He had taken the social climate of jurisdictions with an over-abundance of religeous fundamentals, like South Carolina, and compared them with jurisdictions where the political climate was more secular, like New York State or California. What he found was, that the more religiously inclined the state, the greater the incidence of societal losers like petty criminals, drug users, unemployed, et al. And that the more secular states had better social programs and less incidences of social nuicances. His findings indicated that the religeous states simply left it up to the churches to provide social services and that the churches cherry picked thier projects, leaving many to fall into the abyss. The secular states were more inclined to carry on inititives from a state level and therefore were more universal in the delivery of the services. Although I use the USA in my examples, the author said he looked around the world and found the same thing everywhere. I think his observations are quite interesting and, if applied to the Middle East, are like finding sand at the beach.
DNA
22-10-2007
Harper and religion
I haven't seen evidence that Harper's political policy and actions are a direct result of his religious beliefs-whatever they are. Lots of people (like Rafe) seem to know, but I've seldom heard or read of Harper expressing them in any detail.
Indeed, I'm not sure what "Christian moral principles" are. Tommy Douglas, a Baptist minister, I presume was influenced by them. Stephen Harper, who lists the evangelical Christian and Missionary Alliance as his denomination, is too. Their political policies though turn out quite different.
In this country, unlike in "God blessed America," religion seldom enters the political arena. On the whole I don't see Harper departing from this tradition. If Rafe has evidence that he has, he should present it.
ME2
23-10-2007
Moe about Catholicism
Ed Deak notes that relatively few Europeans knew of Hitler's Death Camps. And that was certainly also true of us here in North America.
The same cannot be said of the Catholic Church, since it had access to the most efficient information-gathering system ever devised by an organisation, the Confessional.
In order to maintain his/her status as a legitimate, practicing Catholic, one is duty-bound to confess one's sins to a priest at least once a year. For most Catholics in those days the common practice was at least once a month.
If one commits a Mortal Sin, (See Wiki or the site below for definition)
http://www.saintaquinas.com/mortal_sin.html
then for as long as that sin remains unconfessed, the sinner is automatically denied entrance to Heaven, and on Earth access to Communion, the most important of all rituals for a Catholic.
You can be sure that in Hitler's Germany, which at that time was 50-50 Catholic - Protestant, there were plenty of soldiers, guards and citizens working in the Death Camps who had participated in the atrocities that were happening, or who knew full well of them. It is inconceivable that the knowledge of what was going down was not passed on yo priests in the Confessional, since Mortal Sins were being committed - in Spades.
It is also inconceivable that Rome was not almost immediately aware of that situation via the infomation flow upward through the hierarchy. One would expect then, that out of concern for the souls of its faithful - if not out of concern for the Jews - that Rome would advise European Catholics that participation in the atrocities would bring about immediate excommunication, the most poweful tool in its rgulatory arsenel.
Instead, Rome abided with the Concordats it had signed with Hitler and Mussolini, and kept its mouth shut. It did, of course, salve its conscience by secretly aiding a few thousand Jews to flee.
And then there's the RC Church's failure to speak out re the Death Squads etc and etc in Latin and South America. THAT story's worth telling too.
The point is, Nightbloom, that once all religious hierachies achieve power, they become corrupted by it, and quickly forget (or re-intepret) the moral values which gave them birth but which they still OUTWARDLY profess while seeking more power.
Thus, Harper and Bush's hook-up with the Fundamentalists is a thing to be feared and fought against.
cboo44
23-10-2007
Politics and Religion
"My point: stop attacking the constituencies (be it Catholics, Albertans, Jews, what have you) and stay focused on the ideas. The voters will decide."
Couldn't have stated any better. Let's do the research and make our choices based on what the politicians actually DO, not what some commentator THINKS is their motive. ACTIONS speak louder than editorial perceptions.
nightbloom
23-10-2007
Let’s leave the Death
Let’s leave the Death Camps out of it for now, because the reality is that German Catholicism was far more resistant to Nazi ideology than the ultra-nationalist protestant churches. There are legitimate reasons for this, related to the odious history of government persecution of Catholic minorities in Germany (Bismarck’s Kulturkampf), as well as the rigid hierarchal filters and intellectual rigor of the Roman Catholic Church in Europe. That isn’t to say there weren’t some real stinkers in the bunch, but RCC resistance to extreme ideologies is a deep-seated trend, whether we’re talking about Nazi Germany or Communist Poland.
ME2, no one denies the corrupting influence of power – all power, all institutions. It’s the nature of institutions, especially in the absence of accountability mechanisms. We need to get realistic about that and stop all the baby-talk here.
Let’s look on the good side for a moment: the Western Separation of Church & State is embedded in the Gospels themselves (“Render unto Caesar…”). Gwest idiotically condemns early Christians for not playing along and refusing to worship the Roman Emperor/Dictator (the State incarnate) as a god. But the fact remains that the modern principal of the Separation of Church and State owes a massive debt to those early martyrs. That whole concept was new, and early Christians died for it brutally by the thousands. This separation was given further reinforcement by the later collapse of the Roman Empire in the East, which allowed the Papacy to emerge from under the thumb of the State, a separation which put its stamp on Roman Catholicism. The separation of temporal authority and spiritual authority became an acknowledged principal in Western thought. This contrasts with the course of events in the Eastern Roman Empire (Byzantium) where Church structure and State authority went hand in hand (a trait which made it difficult for Eastern Orthodox churches to resist government coercion, as occurred when Eastern Orthodox countries fell under dictatorships of the left or the right during the past century).
This is all part of the recorded history of our civilization’s development, and should be known to you already, if the public school system were doing its job. No wonder the liberal nihilist boobs want to shut down the Catholic schools in Canada – the latter are actually providing an education rather than functioning as a glorified daycare service for the middle classes and the working poor.
nightbloom
23-10-2007
Correction - I meant the
Correction - I meant the collapse of the Roman Empire in the West (which lent the Papacy its subsequent character, and reinforced the separation of temporal and spiritual authority in Western policical thought & institutional development).
And yes, I know that "principal" should be "principle" in this instance...
I'm tempted to write an addendum to my first paragraph, contrasting the Catholic experience in France and Germany, but that would be didactic. Suffice to say that Catholicism in Germany was somewhat left-of-centre when it was political at all (i.e. the Catholic Centre Party), but in France was characterized by Ultra-Montanism as a result of post-Revolutionary backlash forces (i.e. conservative, monarchist, anti-Jacobin, anti-Bonaparte elements were driven out of public life and sought institutional refuge in the French military and the French church...with ill effects down the road when France was split between the Free French in exile, the occupied northern territory of France, and the collaborationist Vichy regime in the South).
I could go on...But all this to say that one size does not fit all when it comes to making broad-brush assertions about Catholics, and simple-minded bromides and anti-Catholic prejudice don't do justice to the historical realities. Popular assumptions about German Catholicism in the Nazi period (promoted by risible smear-jobs like "Hilter's Pope" and other Daniel Goldhagen-style samples of historical revisionism, uncritically promoted in the mainstream press) are simply counter-factual and ahistorical.
These threads never seem to get past this kind of silliness.
rafe
23-10-2007
And the RC Church does not teach that the Bible is the literal w
to the touchy Catholic who accuses me of not doing my reasearch ... at no time did I suggest that RC's were literalists. This is, I find, not uncommon with gaith based religions - adherents neither read well nor think at all
Frank
24-10-2007
Separation of believers and deniers
On the subject of "the separation of church and state" and your view that its a "fundamentally Christian precept". On what basis? The time of the martyrs? Inconsequential.
For most of the past two thousand years since Christianity was invented, the Church has shown little inclination to be left on the outside.
The history of Christianity demonstrates very little in the way of even sympathy for the idea of separation of church and state.
Instead, the Church took upon itself the right to decide who was a legitimate ruler and who wasn't.
Fact is, the only time Christianity has ever called for the separation of religion and politics is when it wasn't the dominant religion.
Frank
24-10-2007
Mickey Mouse History of the World
I believe this is also called "not wishing to campaign on one's record".
The Church has a bad record so let's ignore the inquisitions that are so centuries ago and talk about the positives?
A simple question, has there been a right-wing group ever that has wanted to campaign on their record?
Whether it be the Church, the monarchists, the Conservatives or whoever, is there a single group on the Right that doesn't ask that the past not be brought up?
Eddy Haskel
24-10-2007
Right -Wing Record?
Has a right-wing group ever campaigned on thier record? Sure! Ralph Klien in the late nineties recieved 57% of the popular vote with the slogan suggesting the record speaks for itself.
Eddy Haskel
24-10-2007
And who can ever forget the
And who can ever forget the "4 more years" hysteria from Ronald Reagan?
ME2
24-10-2007
Separation ??? HAH
Separation of Church and State? That's an illusion. In the US, Kerry and a number of other campaigning Catholic Democrats were threatened with excommunication by RC clerics if they did not actively oppose Abortion - instead of saying "I personally do not support abortion, but I do support the right of a woman to have that choice"
Some years back, when a Canadian parliamentary committee was struck to look into the right-to-die issue, Chretien made sure that 10 of the 12 members were RCs. So whom do those politicians of various religious persuasions represent - us or their churches?
Since we fear encouraging the spectre of religious intolerance, most of us hesitate to bring up a political person's religious preference. However, true to the hypocrisy for which religion is well known, since that unwritten rule is not a legal one, they dont have to obey it. But they retain the right to scream if WE don't, right?
It is long past time that we did some screaming ourselves.
The brain
24-10-2007
And this Dawkin's stuff
It doesn't take a man of brilliance to spew off evolution as the reason for being. What makes Dawkin's so popular, is he attacks full on, anyone who doesn't have a belief in evolution/atheism... and he isn't polite about it. And guess what... being blunt, abrasive, rude and downright ignorant sells books these days! Dawkins has made alot of money...
And those religious writing conterparts... a few of them are also making money on Dawkin's "opposition". Reminds me of flies on...
When it comes to the origins of life, folks, the word "deconstruction" comes to mind. Scale and timelines... and if God does exist, where does God come from? Try evolution. Its the only explanation. And could this universe hold the potential to give birth to life (and highly evolved life at that) in terms of environmental scale and infinite timelines before the big "bangs" began to reshape what we see now? Was there any great "rush" to make it happen during the pre big bang existence of the universe? When it comes to billions if not trillions of earth years in a scale as large as the pre big bang existence of the universe itself, anything is possible. Only a fool would declare that it is not... especially so when one compares the timelines and scale of earth to the universe itself.
And what would it take in terms of acts and feat's of might to define one's self as a living God... to be the father/creator of life? To be the one responsible for the universe's "big bangs"? To simply live forever and keep your words true?
Life had to come from somewhere. It's own origins simply couldn't have designed itself. But to think that an evolved life form could not evolve to the point of becoming intelligent enough with a long enough life span to pull off designing life on a planet such as ours, taking into account its changing environments as a catalyist for life's adaptions, is to not give this universe enough credit... once again. Yes... Dawkins is oh so smart to declare evolution as the origin of life on one hand, and at the same time, dismiss the potential existence of highly evolved life with the potential to design complex life in the universe with the other hand.
Its like... acknowledging infancy, but denying adulthood. (yawn)
Does the universe hold the potential to give birth to a real, living, life designing God? Only a hypocritical dullard like Hawkins would declare that the universe does not hold this kind of potential. And only a misfit money grubbing ego tripper would make milage of such a stance. And on that note, there's not much else to say...
Lorne Mccuaig
Revelstoke, BC
G West
24-10-2007
On the subject of the separation of church and state
Perhaps I could introduce a little something from Thomas Jefferson:
"Christianity neither is, nor ever was a part of the common law. In every country and in every age, the priest has been hostile to liberty. He is always in alliance with the despot, abetting his abuses in return for protection to his own. Among the sayings and discourses imputed to him [Jesus] by his biographers, I find many passages of fine imagination, correct morality, and of the most lovely benevolence; and others again of so much ignorance, so much absurdity, so much untruth, charlatanism, and imposture, as to pronounce it impossible that such contradictions should have proceeded from the same being. And the day will come when the mystical generation of Jesus, by the supreme being as his father in the womb of a virgin will be classed with the fable of the generation of Minerve in the brain of Jupiter.
History, I believe, furnishes no example of a priest-ridden people maintaining a free civil government. I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should 'make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,' thus building a wall of separation between church and State. Millions of innocent men, women and children, since the introduction of Christianity, have been burnt, tortured, fined and imprisoned; yet we have not advanced one inch towards uniformity."
from Thomas Jefferson, letter to Dr. Thomas Cooper, February 10, 1814.
Stump
25-10-2007
Christian goodness
I have a monstrous Bartlett's quotations at home, and so-called Christian virtues are far older than Christianity if the proverbs and quotations that predate the religion are any indication.
Let me know if you need any examples.
Frank
25-10-2007
The Walrus
by the way, the Walrus has an article on the same topic from last year.
http://www.walrusmagazine.com/articles/2006.10-politics-stephen-harper-and-the-theocons/2/
G West
25-10-2007
Perhaps Rafe was thinking about something like this
http://www.catholic.org/international/international_story.php?id=19561
Could I quote a few passages - just to keep things moving along?
This seems to support the view that change is needed:
This tells us what the Vatican policy is:
The Catholic bishops of South Africa, Botswana, and Swaziland categorically regard the widespread and indiscriminate promotion of condoms as an immoral and misguided weapon in our battle against HIV/AIDS for the following reasons. The use of condoms goes against human dignity. Condoms change the beautiful act of love into a selfish search for pleasure-while rejecting responsibility. Condoms do not guarantee protection against HIV/AIDS. Condoms may even be one of the main reasons for the spread of HIV/AIDS.
Cardinal Alfonso Lopez Trujillo, head of the Pontifical Council for the Family, has elaborated on the latter point: “In the case of the AIDS virus, which is around 450 times smaller than the sperm cell, the condom’s latex material obviously gives much less security... to talk of condoms as ‘safe sex’ is a form of Russian roulette.” Cardinal Trujillo called on ministries of health to require “a warning, that the condom is not safe” on packages distributed worldwide.
Great stuff, eh?
Do I really need to post a couple more paragraphs about Benedict's policy?