Nathan Newman wrote:
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Doug Henwood" <dhenwood at panix.com>
>
> Wojtek Sokolowski wrote:
> >Why does that surprise you?
>
> -I would have thought that the support for the separation of church &
> -state was a bit stronger than 19%. But 77% is up there with the share
> -believing in angels and an afterlife, so I guess I shouldn't be
> -surprised.
>
> Without agreeing with Judge Moore, a lot of people feel comfortable with
> separation of church and state, as long as no particular church is getting
> favoritism, which is what honest history says the first amendment was about.
> Promoting the Ten Commandments doesn't even favor Christians against Jews or
> Muslims, since all respect Moses. Okay, the Buddhists and atheists aren't
> happy, which is why the federal court decision was right, but this is hardly
> incipient theocracy rearing its head to want tokens of faith around. They
> shouldn't get it by court doctrine but I don't see anything that terrible
> with folks wanting otherwise.
>
Twice today for the first time in weeks I checked the Trash folder before compacting it, and each time found an interesting post. I wouldn't have wanted to miss a chance to agree with Nathan, it happens so infrequently. But I think he is more or less right on this. In any case, as Marx & Engels both emphasized, you don't get rid of religion by direct attacks on it.
And I think someone on this list once noted that nations with a state church often have far more atheists or at least non-xtians than does the U.S.
One observation on the subject line. The judge may or may not be cretinous (I myself only use the word when quoting Marx), but the people who support him are not.
Ascribing bad politics et cetera to the personal defects (e.g. willful ignorance) of the people (of any nation) is sort of silly.
Carrol
> -- Nathan
>
> ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk