garys@bunkerb.UUCP (Gary Samuelson) (10/06/83)
Pamela Troy has written a scenario of "Life in a Judeo-Christian America." I find it to be an imaginative piece of futuristic fiction. If I were to write an article in the same style dealing with the present and future restriction of Christians' rights in a "secular humanist" America, I expect I would be accused of attacking a straw man, hate mongering, having irrational fears, and the like. On the basis of Pamela Troy's expressed fears, secular humanists will no doubt believe that they should attempt to suppress even further the rights of Christians to express their beliefs. Under present law, Christians do not have the same rights as secular humanists, atheists, agnostics, or even witches. Consider the following: In some towns, it is illegal for Christians to have regular Bible studies in their homes, without a permit. It violates zoning ordinances, and if people complain (which they have, in some cases), the Christians can be ordered to desist. It is illegal to pray in a public school. (This may be technically incorrect, but that is the way the general public perceives the law.) It is illegal to teach that the world was created by an intelligent creator in the public schools. But it is legal, and practically mandatory, to teach that the world originated as a result of random (unintelligent) processes. Neither statement can be scientifically verified or disproved, but one cannot be taught in public schools, and the other can. It is illegal to teach Christian moral values in public schools. But it is legal to teach anti-Christian moral values. And if you are going to claim that the school don't, or shouldn't, teach any moral values, I submit that it is not possible to avoid teaching some set of values. I graduated from a privately operated, religiously affiliated college. At that college, it is illegal to hold Bible classes in certain buildings, because those buildings were constructed in part with money from federal grants. Well, you say, the supplier of funds can attach whatever stipulations he, she, or it desires. Fine, I don't want any state run university which was partially funded by my money, either in the form of tax dollars or donations, to teach such-and-such. What's the difference? In the job market, Christians are discriminated against if they won't "play the game," which means lie, cheat, and steal like everybody else. In politics, Christians are discriminated against in that if they advocate laws which conform to their values, they are accused of "forcing their beliefs on others." Yet if non-Christians advocate laws which conform to their values, that's "making use of the legislative process." Isn't using my tax money to pay for abortions forcing the beliefs of pro-abortionists on me? Don't I have a say in what my children are going to be taught in the public schools? Don't I have a say in what my tax money is spent on? No, I don't, because if I did, that would violate the separation of church and state. As a final, if rather ludicrous, example, consider that it is socially unacceptable to quote the Bible in a discussion group called "net.religion." If you believe the Bible, that is. If you don't believe it, you can, of course, quote it as much as you like for the purpose of ridicule. Now, as for what life will be like if the secular humanists gain all the power they want, no doubt the first thing they will do is put all Christians in mental institutions, since they are obviously irrational and a threat to society. Gary Samuelson
ariels@orca.UUCP (Ariel Shattan) (10/07/83)
I will keep my comments brief >In the job market, Christians are discriminated against if they won't >"play the game," which means lie, cheat, and steal like everybody >else. Are Christians the only ones who don't lie, cheat, and steal? You mean that there are no Christians who lie, cheat, and steal? I find both of these assumptions very, VERY hard to believe! There is much more I could say about this "irrational" article, but I haven't the time or energy. -- Ariel Shattan