But creationists and their ilk are either ignorant Authoritarians or lying
Authoritarians. Further, I believe they are a great danger to our freedoms
and liberties as long as they are given voice and can inform policy
decisions. We have had to rely heavily on the courts to protect us and I
really believe that is a bad habit we need to break.

I suppose it was at one time a matter of political expediency that caused
conservatives to ally themselves with fringe elements of the religious
right, but at this point it seems to me that conservatism has been infected
with memes that will eventually undo them if rationalism prevails.

The funny thing about it is that one would expect conservatives to *be* the
rational pragmatics as opposed to the irrational dogmatics.

rob

You say:
"I believe they are a great danger to our freedoms and liberties as long as they are given voice and can inform policy decisions. We have had to rely heavily on the courts to protect us and I really believe that is a bad habit we need to break."

But aren't there just as many strong liberal points of view, people that are given voice and can inform policy decisions, at least in the prior ten years? While you may be pointing to a specific religious issue, the liberal ideas I'm thinking of* can be founded in their 'beliefs' of what is the right way to do something, the only way, no matter how many times they are shown it's wrong.

And what do you mean by relying heavily on the courts? Removing christian symbols from Christmas displays, while leaving Jewish and Islamic symbols? Do you mean such horrors as forcing the removal of a 85 year old plaque of the ten commandments from the lobby of a public courthouse? Praise be the right thinkers, the country is saved! Sorry, just having fun.

As I've said many times before, I try and hold no religious views. (not opinions, just beliefs) But I don't think religion should be banished, it should be kept around as an opiate for the masses, as it were. Rich asked why Amerikka seemed to have such issues while the UK doesn't. I was trying to find this stat, I only found indirect quotes: the US has 40% (seems high) religious participation while the UK has only 2% (seems too low). So this is fertile ground for more wackos, more chance that they will hold visible positions. Not calling this wacko, but would you find the same 'homosexual' issues being discussed in San Francisco city council being discussed in Green Bay, Wisconsin? I'm sure there are non religious ideas being discussed somewhere that would raise red flags in most intelligent people, but an issue like ceremonialism is on reporters short list of newsworthy topics. In 1998 if a southern black church was struck by lightning, even if the reporter said it wasn't burnt down by a human hand, it would be a news item because at first there were 'fears' it was an arson fire. (A poor allegory, hopefully you can understand what I'm trying to say).

Kevin T.
* No examples, sorry. Make up your own. Free swim.

_______________________________________________
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Reply via email to