church and state (UNCLASSIFIED)

[David A. Daniel]

>
> >Do you include keeping the govt from interfering with devout
Christian
> >Scientist parents who fail to treat their minor children from deadly
but
> >curable diseases?  Just asking (and mainly making the point that a
> >bright clear line that says "NO" isn't a simple solution).
>
> Stopping Christian Scientists from letting their children die is not a
> matter of church and state separation, it is a matter of the secular
laws of
> the land taking precedence over religious beliefs/laws. The laws of
the land
> also do not allow Muslims to stone their wives for adultery, or allow
Hindus
> to force widows to climb on the funeral pyre with their husband's
corpse.
> Etc.

>Allowing "secular laws of the land [to] tak[e] precedence over religious
>beliefs/laws" cannot be seen as anything but a breach of separation of
>church and state.   We as a nation have decided that certain secular
>laws are so important that devout sincere practitioners of a particular
>faith shouldn't be allowed to worship their God as they see fit.
>Regardless of whether you or I agree with those secular laws, as they
>are so interpreted and enforced, they breach the wall.

Being a devout Aztec I am very happy to hear such strong defense of
religious rights, as it hasn't rained much lately, the crops are in trouble,
and I have been looking forward to sacrificing a few children and half a
dozen virgins or so to see if I could get things moving. Now I have solid
philosophical grounds on which to base to my defense. If anyone would like
to come to my constitutionally protected throat-slashing and
heart-ripping-out ceremony, it'll be Friday night at 8 pm in my sacred Aztec
temple. Or, barring that, if you like, we could all just go over to some
Christian Scientists' house and watch their children die.
DAD

------------------------------------------------------------
The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org