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