Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!floyd!vax135!ariel!houti!hogpc!houxm!hocda!spanky!burl!duke!unc!tim From: tim@unc.UUCP Newsgroups: net.politics,net.religion Subject: Re: The Bible and the Constitution Message-ID: <5527@unc.UUCP> Date: Fri, 8-Jul-83 23:15:11 EDT Article-I.D.: unc.5527 Posted: Fri Jul 8 23:15:11 1983 Date-Received: Sat, 9-Jul-83 19:28:27 EDT References: cbscd5.248 Lines: 159 [Submitted on behalf of Pamela Troy] Atheists ... adhere to no external standard for the judgement of their conduct. Therefore, in matters of public interest, there is no assurance that their actions will be in the best interests of others and no standard to judge whether their conduct is right or wrong. So atheists are untrustworthy! I can't wait until this is adopted as public policy. Tell me, Mr. Dubuq, how will this be put into practice? In a court of law, will a Christian's word be automatically taken over an atheist's? Or maybe atheists should be barred from running for public office. After all, there is no assurance that their actions will be in the best interests of others in such matters. If I sound angry it's because I am. It happens that my father is an atheist. It also happens that he served a term as mayor for a fairly large city in the south, served, I might add, with competence and honesty, while the Southern Baptist who preceded him was convicted on several felony charges. It seems that this Christian, who swore on the Bible that he would execute his duties faithfully and honestly, stole a considerable amount of money from the city while he was in office. A man is not made good by the fact that he believes in a divine being. I resent your assumption that because my father does not believe in Hellfire, and does not live by a set of ancient rules, he is more likely to lie, cheat, and steal than a Christian. As a child, I was taught by this Godless secular humanist that lying, stealing, and cruelty are wrong, not because I'll be sent to Hell, but because these things make the world an uglier, more dangerous place. I was taught to be kind, not because I would be rewarded, but because caring for others makes the world a little better. I was also, by the way, taught that it is contemptible to assume someone is stupid or evil simply because of their religious views -- or lack of them. This type of intolerance is one of the lowest forms of bigotry, and responsible for a large portion of the suffering in our history. There have been those who have done heinous things in the name of Christianity, but the Bible exposes them for the hypocrites they are. As for Atheism, we would do well to remember that everything that Josef Stalin did in his purge was legal. The law of Russia was his own. In this paragraph you reveal a rather self-serving double standard, on which Tim has often commented to me in his dealings with born-again Christians. You ask us to separate bad Christians from good, acknowledging only the good ones as true Christians. Then, in the next sentence, you imply that because Josef Stalin called himself an atheist, his actions represent the natural consequences of atheism. In your reply to rabbit!jj you ask, "Who considers Stalin a hypocrite?", a question which reveals a remarkable naivete and ignorance. The answer is, thousands of Communists, who revile the man for his brutality. When Stalin is thrown up to them, they are very likely to say "There have been those who have done heinous things in the name of Communism, but the works of Marx expose them for the hypocrites they are." I have known many Communists who have insisted, "Stalin wasn't a real Communist", and their point is as valid as yours is about what constitutes real Christianity. As for the "atheism" of Communist countries, from what I have seen, it is not so much atheism as the worship of the state. Communism, as practiced in the Soviet Union, is a rigid creed which rivals Christianity in its dogmatism and aggression. Like many Christians, there are Soviet Communists who believe in world domination (which Christians call "world evangelization" when referring to their own plans) and who are convinced that they and they alone have cornered the market on truth and morality. There are, I know, dogmatic atheists, but most atheists ask only to be left alone. They object to being forced to support a religious doctrine with their taxes, and they do not like it when their children are targeted as infidels and bombarded with religious propaganda by well-meaning teachers and friends. When people start talking about the U.S.A. being a Judeo-Christian nation, many of us start wondering what, exactly, our place would be in such a country, and it frightens us. Recently I asked a born-again Christian with the Maranathas, who, like you, believe that this country was founded as, and should now be, a Judeo-Christian nation, what my place would be in their proposed world. It was impossible for me to get a straight answer out of him, so I'll ask you, Paul. (1) As a woman living with a male out of wedlock, would I be subject to criminal prosecution? (2) As a member of the Georgian Church of Wicca, a pagan group, would I be able to practice my religion without worrying about losing my job, my home, or my children? (3) If I were to be imprisoned for breaking a law, would my chances of parole be determined by whether or not I was a "good Christian girl"? Would I be forced to undergo Christian counseling? (4) Would I be permitted to run for public office, or teach in the public schools? (5) Would my children be forced to participate in Christian religious services, such as prayer to Jesus, in the public schools? How can you guarantee that school prayer is "voluntary" if a teacher tells my kid he'll go to Hell if he doesn't participate? Isn't it likely that the voluntarism will be a sham? If my child does not take part, how can you insure that he won't be targeted by a Christian teacher and subjected to pressure to convert? I am quite serious in wanting straight answers to these questions. What sort of country are you trying to make? Nothing I read in the Bible reassures me about the methods employed by Judeo-Christian proselytizers. The Bible, especially the Old Testament, contains many examples of abominable brutalities commited in Jehovah's name, with the approbation of this all-merciful God. I suggest you read Numbers, Chap. 3l, Vrs. l5-l9. The history of Moses is just the story of one massacre after another, with entire cities put "under ban", that is, killed, men, women, and children. That charming old song, "Joshua Fit the Battle of Jericho", is about a battle in which every living inhabitant of the city was butchered. Yet Moses and Joshua are not "exposed as hypocrites". On the contrary, they are still revered today as great religious leaders! Now about the "hypocrisy of certain Christians". The evidence suggests that witch-burners such as Torquemada and Judge Hathorne were quite sincere in their belief that what they were doing was in the best interests of the souls of the people they destroyed. If, as Christians believe, Hell is the worst fate which can befall a person, then nothing done to the body in this world can be as bad. The motive for the witch and heretic hysteria was not, as some have suggested, the seizure of the accused person's goods. Most of the people persecuted were too poor to make this worthwhile. The logic of the Inquisitors went something like this: It is our duty, as Christians, to prevent our brethren from going to Hell, by any means possible, since nothing is worse than eternal damnation. It is our duty to ensure that, once a heretic has converted, he does not relapse into error. In many cases, the only way to ensure this is to send the convert to Heaven as quickly as possible after conversion. Inquisitors are not inconsistent in their application of Christianity, and no hypocrisy is involved. All too often they are motivated by misguided altruism, and the assumption that true Christians, since they are guided by God, can do no wrong. What I am trying to say is that too many Christians seem to be guided by unsound assumptions about people of differing beliefs. As the child of unbelievers I have had to live with these assumptions, and I know how destructive they can be. Sincerity does not guarantee justice or even truth. It is a dangerous and irresponsible thing to assume that because someone does not worship the same god, they are more evil, untrustworthy, or even more unhappy than you are. It is this concept which has destroyed Ireland, Lebanon, Iran, and countless other civilizations throughout recorded history, and probably before. Pamela Troy __________________________________________ c/o The overworked keyboard of Tim Maroney duke!unc!tim (USENET) tim.unc@udel-relay (ARPA) The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill