Wednesday, August 27, 2003

Larry Darby, the Alabama spokesman for the American Atheists, and Judge Roy Moore are opposite sides of the same coin. Darby wants to establish atheism as the state sponsored belief system. Roy Moore is a demogogue playing on the injured feelings of people who have been told that their faith is offensive to their government. Neither seems to understand the true meaning of the Constitution, and both are subtle liars. The true creed of this nation is tolerance. It is not a true part of Christianity to use government power to establish itself. The fact that churches bearing his name did so for hundreds of years and still seem inclined to do so, proves that they are not really his church. There is a distinction between people voting for laws that reflect their own sense of morality, and voting to establish a particular religion's doctrines as the law of the land. When asked how he was able to govern such a large people, Joseph Smith, the first prophet of the LDS church, said "I teach them correct principles and they govern themselves." That is a succinct statement of the proper role. Churches can preach, teach, exhort, persuade, but not force. Governments cannot truly establish freedom of religion and conscience if they prohibit all expressions of religious faith in the public arena. The problem with the supreme court's rulings lies in the sophistry that no one can be made to feel stigmatized by prayers or saying the Pledge of Allegiance. That single dictum has wrought havoc, and is the basis of political correctness. It leads to the absurd result that in the name of tolerance we must not tolerate anything. It's "Don't ask. Don't tell." applied to one of our most fundamental civil rights.

Tuesday, August 26, 2003

How cute! While, I think that Roy Moore is proving that he shouldn't be a judge in any court, and I wouldn't have him as a Justice of the Peace, that's no reason to insult Christianity, Judaism and Islam by comparing them to ghouls from H. P. Lovecraft. Furthermore, it's not even a sound logical argument to compare a monument to a state-funded and enforced church.