Well, I don't see christianity becoming a minority religion in the US any time in my lifetime or my grandchildren's.  Unless, of course, one excludes Spanish-speaking Catholics from being Christians.

On Mar 3, 2006, at 8:57 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

        I have a fairly straightforward question or set of questions: What does it mean to say that the United States is a Christian country or that Christianity is, in the United States, the "official" religion? Is this a descriptive claim?  More Christians than members of other religions?  A historical claim? Christianity has played an important role in American history? Does it mean we're dedicated to Christian values only? Or perhaps it means that only moral values acceptable in the United States are ones that are derived from Christianity? (Which version of Christianity?) Moreover, whatever it means, does it entail that other religions are unwelcome in the United States, or though welcome are merely tolerated and should refrain from advancing their values in the public square?
 
        I would suggest that state legislatures or Congress can say what they want? Descriptively, this is not a Christian country, or if it is, it will in the near future no longer be one.  In the future, it might be a Muslim, Hindu, etc. country, and I think anyone committed to the values of religious liberty and tolerance will reject the idea that American constitutional values countenance the idea that this is an X country, where "X" stands for a particular sectarian religion.
 
        It's not at all clear to me why committed Christians or committed religionists cannot embrace their religions without seeking the imprimatur of official endorsement.  But if they cannot, it's important to remember that soon their religion might be descriptively a minority religion, and the entire framework of constitutional religious liberty might be reinterpreted into the values of a future majority religion that Christians might not be terribly fond of.
 
        Domestic religious imperialists ought to think twice about the reasons for holding up their faith as the one true faith and seeking to express this commitment in law, whether they conscientiously believe it or not. And just as soon as they attempt to make their religion the law by constraining mildly or ferociously other conscientious practices, many other religionists and secularists together will reject, even by force, their imperialism.
 
Bobby

Robert Justin Lipkin
Professor of Law
Widener University School of Law
Delaware


-- 

Prof. Steven D. Jamar                               vox:  202-806-8017

Howard University School of Law                     fax:  202-806-8567

2900 Van Ness Street NW                  

mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Washington, DC  20008   http://www.law.howard.edu/faculty/pages/jamar/


"The most precious things one gets in life are not those one gets for money."


Albert Einstein



_______________________________________________
To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu
To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see 
http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw

Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private.  
Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can 
read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the 
messages to others.

Reply via email to