In the "Theocracy, Secularism, and Democracy" thread, Steve said:
...Simply letting conservatives pursue such a flawed strategy is no skin off
our backs. Instead it seems that Rorty and many others must have some other
problem with religion in political discourse besides that it is unconvincing.
Freedom of religion which is consistent with 1st amendment secularism is taken
by the militant secularist to an extreme of freedom _from_ religion. We ought
not have to listen to religious talk in politics. We have a right not to have
to hear it. A couple of years ago I would have agreed. Now I am not so sure.
dmb says:
The problem is that it's just not a matter of which side is giving the better
reasons. It's also about who is better at giving their reasons, regardless of
how good or bad those reasons actually are. It's about cash. The more you have,
the louder your voice. This is what the right does so well. As Crawford put it
with respect to the right-wing think tank that paid him to come up with reasons
to love oil, these well-funded think tanks produce the best ideas money can
buy. Somehow, climate science is divided along the same lines. Gee, I wonder
how much that "science" cost them?
And if you're losing the debate, what could be better than changing the meaning
of the terms used in that debate. There is a new encyclopedia on the web for
those who think the dictionary has a liberal bias. Welcome to the world of
"conservapedia", where right-wingers get their own definition of everything. I
heard a news report about their hilarious article on Einstein's theory of
"relativity", which is apparently needed because liberals have used it to
promote relativism. Just for fun, I checked to see if they had an article on
"secularism".
Secular(Redirected from Secularism)The term secular is generally used to mean
"worldly, as differentiated from ecclesiastical." The term has changed meaning
dramatically over time. Its original definition preserved its Latin meaning -
"of an age" - as evinced in the Secular Games, or the Carmen Secularae ("Song
of the Augustan Age") by Horace.The term may be a euphemism used by atheists,
since atheism generally has negative associations in the United States. Atheism
actually isn't secular (common mistake) because in a secular society everyone
is considered to be legally equal no matter what they believe in or don't
believe in. Atheism is a religious point of view that God(s) do not exist and
is therefore not all inclusive.The United States was founded as a secular
republic, where religious freedom is affirmed in the Constitution and where no
special religion is established. However, 'secular' here is not a synonym for
'atheistic' as secular society includes both Atheists and
believers. Moreover, it is impossible to fully separate a legislative or
educations system from moral beliefs and its sources, and the Bible overall was
the primary foundational single source for America's principles and
precepts.Hunter Baker in The End of Secularism, distinguishes between pluralism
and secularism, and argues that while the latter has rejected religious
foundations of traditional morality, yet secularism itself is an ideology based
upon certain philosophical foundations, with its own presuppositions. Rather
than being the impartial referee it is promoted to be, when this becomes the
orthodox ideology of a nation, it works toward censoring that which opposes it,
stifling religious life and discourse.
See also
Opposition to Christianity
That's right, this is the more trustworthy and unbiased encyclopedia because,
unlike those partisans over at Wiki, Conservapedia says:
Moreover, it is impossible to fully separate a legislative or educations system
from moral beliefs and its sources, and the Bible overall was the primary
foundational single source for America's principles and precepts. ...secularism
itself is an ideology based upon certain philosophical foundations, with its
own presuppositions. Rather than being the impartial referee it is promoted to
be, when this becomes the orthodox ideology of a nation, it works toward
censoring that which opposes it, stifling religious life and discourse.
I wonder if Steve or his man at Princeton are working from this definition. It
does characterize secularism as "orthodox" if not militant and they all say
secularist are censors of religious speech whose goal is to stifle religious
life as such. They all point out that secularism is not an impartial referee
but just another perspective no different from believers.
Moq_Discuss mailing list
Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
Archives:
http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
http://moq.org/md/archives.html
