I heard this recently from an ultra-conservative acquaintance of mine: "in America, we have freedom of religion, not freedom from religion. Almost everyone in America is a Christian. Atheists are not welcome". I've heard this before, but now I'm curious to see how theists en masse feel about this topic. So, if you're a Christian, please vote in the poll, and feel free to state your vote, and the reasons for it, on the thread.
EDIT: Sorry about the US-centrism. If you're a member of any democratic government whose constitution includes religious protection, then go ahead and vote !
Freedom OF religion
Moderator: Moderators
-
McCulloch
- Site Supporter
- Posts: 24063
- Joined: Mon May 02, 2005 9:10 pm
- Location: Toronto, ON, CA
- Been thanked: 3 times
Re: Freedom OF religion
Post #2Would you mind opening up the scope to include citizens of other western democracies which have (varying degrees) of constitutional protection of religious freedom? I sometimes get the idea that Americans think that they are the only ones dealing with these important issues.
Re: Freedom OF religion
Post #4Fair enough -- if you're a member of any Western democracy whose constitution involves religious protection, then go ahead and vote ! I don't mean to be US-centric, I guess I'm just nearshighted that way.McCulloch wrote:Would you mind opening up the scope to include citizens of other western democracies which have (varying degrees) of constitutional protection of religious freedom? I sometimes get the idea that Americans think that they are the only ones dealing with these important issues.
Post #5
I have to say, given the wording of the questions, it is not a suprise the last choice has all the votes at this point. I'm not sure what purpose polls that have such 'leading' questions serve. Sorry to be so negative, but I get a lot of such polls in the mail from all manner of groups, both on the left and the right, and I find them annoying and sometimes ridiculous and/or depressing.
Yes, I have heard comments somewhat similar to the one quoted in the OP, and there are not a few Christians who feel that the U.S. is a 'Christian' country or should be a Christian country in the sense that the laws support specific (usually conservative) Christians beliefs, or that Christianity should be granted special status. Although I don't think the number of such people is insignificant and many of them are very vocal, I think it is definitely a minority view among Christians.
If anyone has more scientific poll results along these lines, that would be interesting.
Yes, I have heard comments somewhat similar to the one quoted in the OP, and there are not a few Christians who feel that the U.S. is a 'Christian' country or should be a Christian country in the sense that the laws support specific (usually conservative) Christians beliefs, or that Christianity should be granted special status. Although I don't think the number of such people is insignificant and many of them are very vocal, I think it is definitely a minority view among Christians.
If anyone has more scientific poll results along these lines, that would be interesting.
Post #6
I'm not sure how I could word this more "scientifically". I tried to give a range of options, from the most conservative extreme (my denomination only !) to the most liberal extreme (religion is irrelevant). If you'd like to run a counter-poll, I'll gladly vote on it.micatala wrote:I have to say, given the wording of the questions, it is not a suprise the last choice has all the votes at this point.
Post #7
My objections are more related to the 'loaded words' than to the options.
It is an unfortunate fact of language that, through usage, some words come to have additional 'emotional content' that is not present in the strict definition. In some cases, certain words become 'code words' that have an implied meaning to at least some people.
Obviously this is somewhat subjective. In my view, for example, the words 'supreme,' 'infidel,' 'second-class citizen' and perhaps even 'atheist' carry baggage that doesn't need to be there. Infidel is usually used as an insult or pejorative. To say one's denomination is 'supreme' is to imply a certain amount of arrogance. Certainly to ascribe to someone 'second-class' status is pejorative, and doing so on the basis of group identifications is also not good, especially when the 'at best' is added.
It just seems to me that almost no one, even if they did believe the U.S. should be a Christian theocracy, would answer yes to this question simply because the wording tries to suggest a person who answers yes is an arrogant bigot.
It is an unfortunate fact of language that, through usage, some words come to have additional 'emotional content' that is not present in the strict definition. In some cases, certain words become 'code words' that have an implied meaning to at least some people.
Obviously this is somewhat subjective. In my view, for example, the words 'supreme,' 'infidel,' 'second-class citizen' and perhaps even 'atheist' carry baggage that doesn't need to be there. Infidel is usually used as an insult or pejorative. To say one's denomination is 'supreme' is to imply a certain amount of arrogance. Certainly to ascribe to someone 'second-class' status is pejorative, and doing so on the basis of group identifications is also not good, especially when the 'at best' is added.
It just seems to me that almost no one, even if they did believe the U.S. should be a Christian theocracy, would answer yes to this question simply because the wording tries to suggest a person who answers yes is an arrogant bigot.
-
The Persnickety Platypus
- Guru
- Posts: 1233
- Joined: Sat May 28, 2005 11:03 pm
Post #9
Was America founded by godly men? This seems to be the common consensus, but I have heard that quite a few of the original founders were not religious at all.
The constitution was made with absolutely no regard to Christian interests, as the first amendment can attest to.
"The Government of the United States is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion." Treaty of Tripoli, unanimously approved by the Senate in 1797.
"The purpose of separation of church and state is to keep forever from these shores the ceaseless strife that has soaked the soil of Europe in blood for centuries." John Adams, 1803.
I cannot fathom how anyone would come to believe that our country was founded on Christian principles.
The constitution was made with absolutely no regard to Christian interests, as the first amendment can attest to.
"The Government of the United States is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion." Treaty of Tripoli, unanimously approved by the Senate in 1797.
"The purpose of separation of church and state is to keep forever from these shores the ceaseless strife that has soaked the soil of Europe in blood for centuries." John Adams, 1803.
I cannot fathom how anyone would come to believe that our country was founded on Christian principles.
Post #10
I think StephS' general comment is correct. See here for example.
Note that Godly men does not necessarily mean any particular brand of Christianity, or Christianity at all.
I do think that many in the present day try to engage in 'revisionist history' in order to grind their political axes. I think this happens both with conservatives and liberals, although I am more aware of examples of conservatives and fundamentalists putting heavy emphasis on the idea that 'the founding fathers agree with our point of view.'
In addition we do need to separate the charactersistics of the men who developed the constitution from the actual document that they produced. Just because the constitution was drafted by Godly men with particular religious views, does not mean these views are embodied in the constitution.
I would agree that the Constitution certainly does not give Christianity any particular special status, and we should not do so today. Each should feel free to worship or not worship as he or she sees fit.
Ben Franklin wrote: “In the beginning of the contest with Britain, when we were sensible of danger, we had daily prayers in this room for Divine protection. Our prayers, Sir, were heard, and they were graciously answered… do we imagine we no longer need His assistance?” [Constitutional Convention, Thursday June 28, 1787]
Thomas Jefferson wrote:“ The doctrines of Jesus are simple, and tend to all the happiness of man.”
“Of all the systems of morality, ancient or modern which have come under my observation, none appears to me so pure as that of Jesus.”
"I am a real Christian, that is to say, a disciple of the doctrines of Jesus."
“God who gave us life gave us liberty. And can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are a gift from God? That they are not to be violated but with His wrath? Indeed I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just, and that His justice cannot sleep forever.”
Note that Godly men does not necessarily mean any particular brand of Christianity, or Christianity at all.
I do think that many in the present day try to engage in 'revisionist history' in order to grind their political axes. I think this happens both with conservatives and liberals, although I am more aware of examples of conservatives and fundamentalists putting heavy emphasis on the idea that 'the founding fathers agree with our point of view.'
In addition we do need to separate the charactersistics of the men who developed the constitution from the actual document that they produced. Just because the constitution was drafted by Godly men with particular religious views, does not mean these views are embodied in the constitution.
I would agree that the Constitution certainly does not give Christianity any particular special status, and we should not do so today. Each should feel free to worship or not worship as he or she sees fit.
