Quote:
|
Originally Posted by j8ear
Sorry but I am not following your logic at all.
Secularists claim to be fighting a was against the "Evangelical Fringe," as they like to frame it. You know, the separation of church and state, blah, blah, blah, I'll impose my lack of morals on you...but don't you dare impose your morals on me, relativism crowd.
Her position seems reasonable to me, well connected with reality, and while only an 'account of her speech' from an unidentified source, doesn't really seem out of this world or even remotely in conflict with the stated goals of the secularist position.
What say you?
-bear
|
For starters, I'd say the attempts to clean up Politics on TFP are working
I'm enjoying reading and participating these days. Kudos to you, Bear, for being part of the fix. I only hope I am, too.
But to the point...
(fine print first) (this IS from an unknown source, and may or may not be accurate)(but since you don't seem to mind the sentiment, let's pretend it's accurate)
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by j8ear
Secularists claim to be fighting a was against the "Evangelical Fringe," as they like to frame it. You know, the separation of church and state, blah, blah, blah, I'll impose my lack of morals on you...but don't you dare impose your morals on me, relativism crowd.
|
This is a great paragraph to me, because I disagree with almost ALL of it. Great, because maybe I can come to at least understand...
I don't think secularist 'frame' anything, but if they do I sure don't see "War" talk. (Perhaps I just don't hang out in the secular smoking area.) I most CERTAINLY don't see anyone in that crowd saying "I'll impose my morals on you". What I see them saying is "leave me alone to have whatever morals I want".
That last sentence really seems to be the key to me. Somehow, both sides feel the other is pushing their values on the other. And neither thinks they are doing the pushing.
My take: when you have issues with Gays in the military it seems one side IS pushing. If I'm gay, there's a job that would benefit my country I can't have.
Another example: Someone can believe the 10 commandments are the word of God if they want to. But when you put them on the wall in a court of law, it seems to be pushing again. So I see limitations that are real, and I see pushing of values (however subtley)
Back to Janice Brown: it may be that the rhetoric is what turns me off so strongly. But to say that there is a WAR, and that some group wants to "divorce America from it's religious roots", I just can't see it.
Even if there is a group that would want to do that (which I doubt very strongly, and see NO evidence of), that group certainly isn't big enough, or strong enough to do anything about it.
I would bet over 90% of congress (all States and Federal) are churchgoers. How could anyone "divorce America from it's religious roots"? So that's why I say she seemingly isn't grounded in reality.
Her "frame" seems to be that such could happen. It's not a stretch (for me) to see her becoming an activist judge working to
prevent something. Rather than a judge that rules on law.
The "quote" in question:
Quote:
Janice Rogers Brown told an audience Sunday that people of faith were embroiled in a "war" against secular humanists who threatened to divorce America from its religious roots, according to a newspaper account of the speech.
|