NOTICE: The forum will be down for maintenance beginning at 7PM (NH time) this evening. It should be up again by 9PM. Please forgive the inconvenience and feel free to e-mail firstname.lastname@example.org if you have any questions or support requests.
Great text to read "How We Got That Way Baptists on Religious Liberty and the Separation of Church and State".
This will help in dealing with the claims that separation of Church and State was an invention of communists or atheists. It is part of the Baptist heritage. So how did something that is part of the Baptist heritage wind up in our unique arrangement of government? "... Baptists in America united with those of diverse religious views, many of whom were very rationalistic, to move closer to the ideal of religious liberty."
Often times this battle is between "both religious zealots who arrogantly advocate a medieval theocracy and secular zealots who condescendingly dismiss the role of religion altogether" as Walter points out in another article on the BJC site.
The elitists fear an ever growing political advocacy that is present in the common man and woman. It offends their sense of the class structure and their own morally corrupt world view. What better way to maintain this elitist structure than to indoctrinate a child at a very early age?
I like what is in that article that ChrisforLiberty presented in his opening post,
"The Queen attempted to build a tent big enough to accommodate a passionate, powerful, and proliferating pluralism. She failed. The old dream of the Medieval Synthesis with all of life united around a single ruler and a single expression of religion was slowly crumbling in the dust of blazing individual freedoms. In the end, the so-called Elizabethan Settlement settled nothing."
Compare this to today and the similar movement to establish a pluralistic society with enforced multiculturism all under the 'big tent' of centralized government.
« Last Edit: April 25, 2003, 12:15:15 pm by exitus.. »
". . .the foundations of our national policy should be laid in private morality. If individuals be not influenced by moral principles, it is in vain to look for public virtueâ€ -- U.S. Senate's reply to George Washington's first inaugural address