Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
John M
climber
|
|
I fail to see the wisdom of this argument.
switch it around..
put yourself in a Muslim country being asked to pray to Mohammed.
If you don't pray, you figure you will lose your case.
would you feel that this is fair?
|
|
Todd Eastman
climber
Bellingham, WA
|
|
No compensation of any sort for the prayer time for the head-nodding selectmen, council members, judges, or other elected wankers, but pay the staff that have to sit through this crap. It is being done on the public purse...
|
|
bluering
Trad climber
Santa Clara, CA
|
|
John,
#1 this is not a Muslim country
#2 we do not force people to pray, we respect religious liberty to not do so.
|
|
mtnyoung
Trad climber
Twain Harte, California
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - May 5, 2014 - 11:42pm PT
|
Hello Cragman,
Would you also say "good on" the city councilmen described in Dave Kos' post?
|
|
Greg Barnes
climber
|
|
It's offensive to the large number of people who are offended by stupidity. Why announce at the start of a town meeting that at least one of people at the meeting wants to spout some nonsense about myths and made-up stuff that no one except kids and fools believe? Especially since there's a good chance that none of the people at the meeting actually believe in god, they may just not want to offend their neighbors and families by admitting it.
As a father of young children, I struggle to deal with how I'm going to introduce them to the subject of religion. Any time that organized religion rears its ugly head in public affairs is highly offensive to me personally. The only reason I can respect people who say they are religious is that I know that a lot of them are lying about it, but they don't want to offend their families, communities, coworkers, etc. There are so many (often pretty good) reasons to lie about belief in god that it's easy for people to think that this actually is a religious country.
If push comes to shove, I bet the "truly religious" fraction of US adults is probably about the same as the "true believers in conspiracy theories" - probably about one in 4 (or “at LEAST one in 4” to quote South Park...). I can not come up with any rational way to respect someone who truly believes in god. Luckily even people who appear really religious could well be lying about it.
All you need to do is see what happens to a presidential candidate who appears deeply religious - they tank in the polls. Who in their right mind would let someone who actually believes in the afterlife to have access to the nuclear trigger?
Religious proselytizers would do well to contemplate the true nature of religion in the US and the developed world. Majority non-religious...even if most are far too polite to mention it.
Yeah, not doing too well on being polite right now...sorry about that.
|
|
mtnyoung
Trad climber
Twain Harte, California
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - May 5, 2014 - 11:43pm PT
|
Bluering - you miss the whole issue don't you?
This isn't a Christian country either.
|
|
mtnyoung
Trad climber
Twain Harte, California
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - May 5, 2014 - 11:44pm PT
|
And Bluering, if you argue that this is indeed a Christian country, please, please tell me how it is that you think you are somehow different (other than by what you each call yourselves) than that Muslim fanatic that you so loathe?
|
|
mtnyoung
Trad climber
Twain Harte, California
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - May 5, 2014 - 11:52pm PT
|
Greg,
...I can not come up with any rational way to respect someone who truly believes in god.
I can (although I agree with almost everything you put in that post - even the funny part).
Take my friend Ron as an example. You know who he is; you may even have climbed with him.
Ron is deeply Christian. I utterly respect his beliefs for two reasons:
1. He really lives what he believes in (he "walks his talk");
2. He doesn't proselytize (you'd have to ask him to even find out he's religious).
He and I are fantastic friends even though I'm a fundamentalist agnostic.
|
|
bluering
Trad climber
Santa Clara, CA
|
|
It's offensive to the large number of people who are offended by stupidity. Why announce at the start of a town meeting that at least one of people at the meeting wants to spout some nonsense about myths and made-up stuff that no one except kids and fools believe? Especially since there's a good chance that none of the people at the meeting actually believe in god, they may just not want to offend their neighbors and families by admitting it.
As a father of young children, I struggle to deal with how I'm going to introduce them to the subject of religion. Any time that organized religion rears its ugly head in public affairs is highly offensive to me personally. The only reason I can respect people who say they are religious is that I know that a lot of them are lying about it, but they don't want to offend their families, communities, coworkers, etc. There are so many (often pretty good) reasons to lie about belief in god that it's easy for people to think that this actually is a religious country.
If push comes to shove, I bet the "truly religious" fraction of US adults is probably about the same as the "true believers in conspiracy theories" - probably about one in 4 (or “at LEAST one in 4” to quote South Park...). I can not come up with any rational way to respect someone who truly believes in god. Luckily even people who appear really religious could well be lying about it.
So, Obama, the Pope, and countless other "Christians" are just stupid fools? But Atheists are the profound, wise ones? Nice!
MTnyoung, it is a bit of both. We were largely founded as an independent break off of the Britain. But, we let people practice freely their own faiths. Hence, the 1st.
|
|
mtnyoung
Trad climber
Twain Harte, California
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - May 6, 2014 - 12:00am PT
|
Bluering, it is "a bit of both" of what?
And who is the "we" that you're speaking of as in "we let people practice?" ("We" as a country I guess?).
Yes, the Christian religion is a large part of our history and our heritiage. And yes, this country's people are still predominantly Christian (so to speak, and allowing for the "fakes" that Greg described).
But we are no more a Christian country than we are an atheist country. Or the first amendment is meaningless.
|
|
Fat Dad
Trad climber
Los Angeles, CA
|
|
I haven't read the opnion yet but I can see both sides of the issue. The example of invoking God at the beginning of a meeting is a pretty well established concept in this country. Congress always begins each new session with such an invocation, and the Court had long ago applied a tradition exception to permit such an activity without finding that it violated the Establishment Clause. It could be the opinion was based mostly on the specific facts at bar, rather than intending to create broad precedent.
However (bluering), Kagan's point is a compelling one and it is disappointing that you don't see the impact she suggests that such practices have. Her view, as with Ginsburg's, Marshall's, etc., is the benefit of having more than just white males on the Court. They impart a perspective many of them may feign to but will never understand. Scalia, though clearly brilliant, is probably the most intellectually disingenuous justice in recent memory.
Having said that, those on this site who clearly hate religion need to distance themselves from those feelings when reviewing the issue. The Establishment Clause does not guarantee you an absolute right to be free from others who practice their faith publicly, even though many are prone to unwanted and insincere displays. That discomfort is the price of a free society.
|
|
Todd Eastman
climber
Bellingham, WA
|
|
Which Christians are the true Christians?
|
|
mtnyoung
Trad climber
Twain Harte, California
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - May 6, 2014 - 12:04am PT
|
The government does not have rights. The city council is the government.
Basic, basic civics. They whole foundation of our system of government.
Wouldn't any real American get that?
|
|
ontheedgeandscaredtodeath
Social climber
SLO, Ca
|
|
There is an inherent tension in the first amendment. I think a lot of the anti prayer litigation is form over substance. I mean who actually really cares if some city council says prayer? If they impose some Christian "value" instead of the law it's a problem but otherwise who cares what they do before conducting biz.
The real problem with first amendment jurisprudence is the citizens united and the money is speech cases.
|
|
mtnyoung
Trad climber
Twain Harte, California
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - May 6, 2014 - 12:08am PT
|
I haven't read the opnion yet but I can see both sides of the issue. The example of invoking God at the beginning of a meeting is a pretty well established concept in this country. Congress always begins each new session with such an invocation, and the Court had long ago applied a tradition exception to permit such an activity without finding that it violated the Establishment Clause. It could be the opinion was based mostly on the specific facts at bar, rather than intending to create broad precedent...
At least this is an intelligent and rational comment.
For these same reasons we invoke God on our coins and bills (for example).
But the argument is of limited utility.
There is, after all, also historical/traditional precedent in this country for human beings owning other human beings based on their race :)
|
|
Todd Eastman
climber
Bellingham, WA
|
|
The SCOTUS ruling was a simple political statement from the bench. They had the majority, they ruled.
|
|
mtnyoung
Trad climber
Twain Harte, California
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - May 6, 2014 - 12:14am PT
|
The SCOTUS ruling was a simple political statement from the bench. They had the majority, they ruled.
Aha, now we're joined by a fundamentalist cynic :)
|
|
bluering
Trad climber
Santa Clara, CA
|
|
Blue,
The court didn't say that the city council prayers are protected by the First Amendment.
They said that they are not prohibited by it. It's an important distinction.
Isn't this the essence of the 1st?
|
|
Norton
Social climber
the Wastelands
|
|
and let's say the town council is made up of mostly Muslims.....ok?
anyone who supports the Court's decision have a problem with letting them read from the Quran and pray to Muhammed?
that would be just fine, the Court did not say WHAT religion is ok did they?
|
|
ontheedgeandscaredtodeath
Social climber
SLO, Ca
|
|
Actually first amendment cases often have unusual alliances. Dunno about this one cause I haven't looked at it but the pure speech cases as opposed to the money cases have odd majorities.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!