re how to pray, etc.

[thomas kyhn rovsing hjoernet]

On 02/04/03 19:57, "David Morris" <fqmorris at yahoo.com> wrote:

> 
> --- thomas kyhn rovsing hjoernet <tkrh at worldonline.dk> wrote:
>> 
>>>> 
>>>> No, 'no religion is supposed to have an inherent political advantage', but
> your 'supposed to', as far as I've understood, hasn't secured this ideal.
>> 
>> I think this is an indication:
>> 
>> 'It was in the period of the cold war with what President Truman always
> called ''godless Communism'' that ''under God'' was added to the Pledge of
> Allegiance. It was in World War II that ''God Bless America'' became the
> country's unofficial anthem. Of World War I, President Wilson said that it
> showed America marching to heights ''upon which there rests nothing but the
> pure light of the justice of God,'' reflecting the ''glimmer of light which
> came at Calvary, that first dawn which came with the Christian era.''' (Garry
> Wills: 'With God on His Side', New York Times, March 30, 2003)
> 
> So you think a politician saying "God is on our side" priviledges a religion?
> It only is a public display of a personal belief.  Should, in your opinion, a
> politician be forbidden to speak of his beliefs?  Again, if the public
> disagrees with the beliefs/actions of a politician thet can vote him out.

I think religion should be kept out of politics.

>> Bringing 'God' into the reasoning and the texts of the state gives a
> privilege to those who believe in this God. It must be assumed that a
> president
> when he addresses 'the people' addresses the whole people and not only those
> who share his religious views. In this perspective it is problematic to make
> use of religious referents that have no legitimacy outside of this religious
> view.
> 
> Never does all of the audience of a president's speach agree with him.  I
> suppose those that agree with him are "privileged" because they have a
> like-minded soul in the seat of power.  That's the way democracy works.  Do
> you
> suggest an alternative?  An individual politician's beliefs about God are no
> different than his economic beliefs:  they shape his views and actions.  This
> is not "problematic."  It is normal.  But a politicians references to God are
> not usually for any other purpose than show, not belief.

Democracy implies that everything is, potentially, up for discussion.
Religious notions of good and evil (for instance) are not up for discussion.

>>> A politician may be religious, and he is entitled to be so.  His agenda may
> spring from his own personal beliefs, and that is also legitimate.  If his
> agenda is out of sinc with the active majority then he will be out of a job
> very soon.
>> 
>> That's it, as long as a majority of voters is behind a politician he can
> introduce the religious (that of the majority) into the political. This way,
> the religion of the majority is privileged.  This is not to say that a
> politician isn't entitled to being religious.
> 
> Right.  That's the way it works.  A point of view is "privileged" by the fact
> that it is held by a person in the seat of power.  But this does not advantage
> a *religion*, just a point of view.
> 
>> One of the problems with religion in politics is that it is beyond discussion
> and critique, and, accordingly, beyond reasoning. If the realm of politics is
> to be kept democratic, open to discussion, it is a bad move to introduce the
> religious into it.
> 
> Introducing a religious POV does not stop discussion.

Backing up political views by reference to the religious stops discussion in
the sense that it cannot be argued with.

> BTW, this thread has drifted far from where it began, which was Doug's
> objection to soldiers practicing their religion on the battlefield, a truly
> idiotic POV, but standard for Doug's course.

With all respect, I think you are twisting the point here; that soldiers
practice their religion on the battlefield as they would have at home is not
problematic, but their being baptized on the battlefield points to the
situation they're in, fighting moslems, and so suggests a religious aspect
of this war.