Quick Links
Categories
Calendar
| Sun | Mon | Tue | Wed | Thu | Fri | Sat |
XML/RSS Feed
Other Heathen Blogs and Journals
Caryatid's LiveJournal
Boars Heart's LiveJournal
Orn Ransom's LiveJournal
Thorolf's LiveJournal
Falki's LiveJournal
MacRaven
Seledréam
Vanatru's LiveJournal
Expanding Inward
Boars Heart's LiveJournal
Orn Ransom's LiveJournal
Thorolf's LiveJournal
Falki's LiveJournal
MacRaven
Seledréam
Vanatru's LiveJournal
Expanding Inward
Links of Heathen Interest
Other (non-heathen) Blogs
Subscribe
 |
 |
Technorati
Blog Value
My blog is worth $1,693.62.
How much is your blog worth?
Statistics
Total entries in this blog:
Total entries in this category:
Published On: Apr 26, 2006 10:02 PM
Total entries in this category:
Published On: Apr 26, 2006 10:02 PM
Will the Wall Come Down This Year?
Fifteen years ago this month, in November of
1989, the Berlin Wall was finally knocked down, an outward symbol of the
collapse of the dual-Germany system adopted after World War II. This was almost
universally proclaimed as a good thing.
Nowadays, it looks like another wall, more venerable than the Berlin Wall, is endangered, and that's not necessarily such a good thing. Construction of this wall was begun in the 1776's, and the final stone of it was laid in 1802 by no less a person than Thomas Jefferson, who also helped begin the constuction. The final stone was a letter, that read, in part:
I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, thus building a wall of separation between church and state.
This was in response to a letter from the Danbury Baptist Association, asking why he refused to authorize national days of fasting and thanksgiving like previous presidents had done. Read the full letter here.
The origins of this wall, at least in America and at least in my opinion, go back to the Declaration of Independence -- the best-known part of it:
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
I can't imagine that the pursuit of happiness could possibly preclude the right to choose one's religion.
Of course one would be remiss to leave out the mortar of the wall -- Amendment One of the United States Constitution:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
There are chinks in the wall, and they are growing. I'm talking here of the president, but not in the way you may be thinking. I myself am alarmed not so much by his overly pious proclamations to his god, nor his claims that his god is on our side. These statements, while alarming, are only opinions, and hold no force of policy or law. They are divisive, but any statement of religion or lack of such a statement serves the same purpose. Statements of the president within his speeches are both protected by the rights of free speech and in no way establishing law, nor are they the acts of Congress (this is of course redundant, as only Congress has the right to make law).
Policies that ARE alarming, in my opinion, are those in which the president has allowed his own religiousness (not necessarily his religion) to influence his decisions. For example, the concept of "Faith-based initiatives" is particularly alarming. While not restricted to any specific religious group, it is nonetheless an establishment of religion; a way in which religion is religious thought is provided to those who may not wish to be forced to listen. An example would be prisons that require prisoners to sit through Christian chapel services.
"Faith-based initiatives" were established by an Executive Order, a practice by which the president can establish policies that have the force of law, without going through Congress. While the president was within his rights to proclaim the executive order, that neither makes it right, nor does it automatically ensure that it is constitutional. For more on executive orders, their history and how they can be challenged, read this article about them.
So why should this all matter? What point of view should American Asatruar take on all of this? Well, I can't speak for everybody, so this is really only the point of view of one American Asatruar. I don't like what I'm seeing. I see an alarming trend toward the US government becoming hopelessly intertwined with the christian churches, and in the long run, I think this is a bad thing for other religions.
Separation of church and state is a good thing for everyone, not just those in the minority. Granted, it's a good thing for Asatru because we have no hope of having any kind of legal recognition in the foreseeable future, but it's also a good thing for the majority. Government acknowledgment of a particular religious group increases marginalization and, as more and more religious-based legislation is added, increases fundamentalism. We all know to what that leads.
There are at least two organizations which take stands against government-recognized religion. the most obvious is the American Civil Liberties Union. The ACLU is a non-profit organization that protects the freedoms promised in the Bill of Rights through legal activities. You can find a third-party assessment of their activities at give.org, a program of the Better Business Bureau that assesses non-profit organizations. I strongly recommend reading up about any charity or non-profit at give.org before making any donations.
There is also Americans United for Separation of Church and State, an organization specifically targeting government/religious issues. AU is more of a watchdog group; they work through the media to educate the public, as well as bringing action through the court system. They are currently being assessed at give.org, and a report should be available soon; I can't recommend making donations to them until their status is resolved.
By supporting organizations that support things for which we stand, we, the heathen minority, can make our voices heard. This is especially important in helping to maintain the wall that was built between the federal government and the religions of America.
Most of you guys know I'm not lawyer. Everything in here is a layman's assessment of the situation, and shouldn't be construed as anything else. If you agree, disagree, or just don't care, let me know. This is about as political as I've been/plan to get in this blog.
Song of the Day: We're Not Gonna Take It by Twisted Sister, available through the iTunes Music Store. If you have iTunes installed on your computer, clicking on the links above will lead you right to the song.
Nowadays, it looks like another wall, more venerable than the Berlin Wall, is endangered, and that's not necessarily such a good thing. Construction of this wall was begun in the 1776's, and the final stone of it was laid in 1802 by no less a person than Thomas Jefferson, who also helped begin the constuction. The final stone was a letter, that read, in part:
I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, thus building a wall of separation between church and state.
This was in response to a letter from the Danbury Baptist Association, asking why he refused to authorize national days of fasting and thanksgiving like previous presidents had done. Read the full letter here.
The origins of this wall, at least in America and at least in my opinion, go back to the Declaration of Independence -- the best-known part of it:
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
I can't imagine that the pursuit of happiness could possibly preclude the right to choose one's religion.
Of course one would be remiss to leave out the mortar of the wall -- Amendment One of the United States Constitution:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
There are chinks in the wall, and they are growing. I'm talking here of the president, but not in the way you may be thinking. I myself am alarmed not so much by his overly pious proclamations to his god, nor his claims that his god is on our side. These statements, while alarming, are only opinions, and hold no force of policy or law. They are divisive, but any statement of religion or lack of such a statement serves the same purpose. Statements of the president within his speeches are both protected by the rights of free speech and in no way establishing law, nor are they the acts of Congress (this is of course redundant, as only Congress has the right to make law).
Policies that ARE alarming, in my opinion, are those in which the president has allowed his own religiousness (not necessarily his religion) to influence his decisions. For example, the concept of "Faith-based initiatives" is particularly alarming. While not restricted to any specific religious group, it is nonetheless an establishment of religion; a way in which religion is religious thought is provided to those who may not wish to be forced to listen. An example would be prisons that require prisoners to sit through Christian chapel services.
"Faith-based initiatives" were established by an Executive Order, a practice by which the president can establish policies that have the force of law, without going through Congress. While the president was within his rights to proclaim the executive order, that neither makes it right, nor does it automatically ensure that it is constitutional. For more on executive orders, their history and how they can be challenged, read this article about them.
So why should this all matter? What point of view should American Asatruar take on all of this? Well, I can't speak for everybody, so this is really only the point of view of one American Asatruar. I don't like what I'm seeing. I see an alarming trend toward the US government becoming hopelessly intertwined with the christian churches, and in the long run, I think this is a bad thing for other religions.
Separation of church and state is a good thing for everyone, not just those in the minority. Granted, it's a good thing for Asatru because we have no hope of having any kind of legal recognition in the foreseeable future, but it's also a good thing for the majority. Government acknowledgment of a particular religious group increases marginalization and, as more and more religious-based legislation is added, increases fundamentalism. We all know to what that leads.
There are at least two organizations which take stands against government-recognized religion. the most obvious is the American Civil Liberties Union. The ACLU is a non-profit organization that protects the freedoms promised in the Bill of Rights through legal activities. You can find a third-party assessment of their activities at give.org, a program of the Better Business Bureau that assesses non-profit organizations. I strongly recommend reading up about any charity or non-profit at give.org before making any donations.
There is also Americans United for Separation of Church and State, an organization specifically targeting government/religious issues. AU is more of a watchdog group; they work through the media to educate the public, as well as bringing action through the court system. They are currently being assessed at give.org, and a report should be available soon; I can't recommend making donations to them until their status is resolved.
By supporting organizations that support things for which we stand, we, the heathen minority, can make our voices heard. This is especially important in helping to maintain the wall that was built between the federal government and the religions of America.
Most of you guys know I'm not lawyer. Everything in here is a layman's assessment of the situation, and shouldn't be construed as anything else. If you agree, disagree, or just don't care, let me know. This is about as political as I've been/plan to get in this blog.
Song of the Day: We're Not Gonna Take It by Twisted Sister, available through the iTunes Music Store. If you have iTunes installed on your computer, clicking on the links above will lead you right to the song.
Posted: Sun - November 7, 2004 at 11:33 PM