The United States is NOT a Christian Nation

...and it was not founded as such.

The United States may have many people who call themselves Christians, but evidence abounds that very few practice Christianity.  I’ll get back to this.

Many who proclaim that the United States is a Christian Nation cite the Declaration of Independence.  But “Christian” or “Christianity” do not appear in it or the Constitution.  The closest to a religious statement in either is “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.”

But Thomas Jefferson, the drafter of the Declaration, was a hypocrite.  He held slaves and did not pass on their Creator-given inalienable rights of liberty.  Furthermore, what did “men” mean at that time?  People of male gender as in the Adam and Eve story.  Or people as in on the sixth day “God created man in his own image…male and female created he them.” - Genesis 1:27, King James Version.

The only “religious” word that appears in the original Constitution is “religious”, as in “but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.”  Given all the religious tests that have been required, “ever” was not a very long time.

It took over 170 years for a Catholic to be elected President.  And he felt compelled to be vetted by a group of Protestant ministers.  It took a bit less for a Jew to be appointed to the Supreme Court.  John McCain and Barack Obama had to be vetted by an Evangelical minister to prove their “Christianity”.  Shame on Obama, the Constitutional professor, for submitting to this religious test.

And this same Constitutional professor is sponsoring his own “Prayer Breakfasts”.  And shame on all the other politicians who do not have the political will to object to this religious test.

These prayer breakfasts also prove that these politicians are hypocrites.  “And when thou prayest, thou shall not be as the hypocrites are: for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and in the corners of the streets, that they may be seen of men.”  Matthew 6:5.

What does a Christian practice?

For starters the greatest commandment is to “Love the Lord thy God with all thy heart and soul.”
The second is “Like unto it, to love thy neighbor as thyself.”  And who was “thy neighbor”?  The hated Samaritan who helped a Jew beaten and robbed by the side of the road.

A variation of the second commandment is “Do unto other as you would have them do unto you.”  Would we like foreign troops stationed in our country?  One of the reasons of the American Revolution was the stationing of British Troops in many of the Colonial cities.  But we have bases in dozens of countries, sometimes welcomed by the populace, sometime hated by the populace.

Many congregations recite the “Lord’s Prayer”: “Forgive us our trespasses as we forgive those who trespass against us.”  The United States and many other countries have forgiven Germany and Japan for World War II, but has the U.S. gotten around to forgiving others that they have trespassed against?

U.S. mobsters practically ran Cuba and the U.S. supported the dictator Batista.  Is it any wonder that a Cuban leader arose to oust Batista?  And is it any wonder that leader wanted to reclaim the ill-gotten gains.  But there are many “Christians” in the U.S. that still don’t want to forgive the Cuban government.  Very strange that the U.S. had “good” relations with other Communist governments, including China.

The U.S. was implicit in the overthrow of Mohammad Mossaddegh of Iran and the support of the Shah with his brutal Savak.  Is it any wonder the Ayatollahs have little love for the U.S?  Who should be the first to “forgive those who trespass against us”?

“Blessed are the peacemakers” is part of the Beatitudes, but is U.S. peacekeeping around the world only making matters worse?  See above about the British troops keeping peace in the Colonies.  Are nuclear weapons peacemakers?  Oh, yes!  The Colt Peacemaker has the blessing of the Bible!

We definitely don’t have any “Christian” banks.  How many of them are going to forgive loans every seven years, even for loans to Christians?  Are “Christian” farmers not going to till the land every seven years?  Unless they are farming only for themselves and have saved a lot of food, they would go bust.

Now we have many people asserting that their “freedom of religion” allows them to refuse to associate with certain people or to not have to abide by certain laws.  There is a certain logic in this because “conscientious objectors” are allowed to avoid military service, but they have to do other public service instead.  So if the “Christians” at the top of a corporation object to paying health insurance for abortions, should they then be required to contribute to a fund for child care?

My take of the “freedom of religion” clause in the First Amendment is that we are free to believe what we want, whether it’s the Big Guy in the Sky, the Flying Spaghetti Monster, or a Golden Calf.  It isn’t anybody else’s business.  The writers of the Bill of Rights were only too aware of all the persecutions that had happened because somebody believed the “wrong” thing.  The “freedom of religion” clause guarantees that we are free to believe what we want.  In return we should let others believe what they want.

Also published in the Reader Weekly of Duluth, 2015-05-14 at http://duluthreader.com/articles/2015/05/13/5275_the_united_states_is_not_a_christian_nation

Are atheists their own worst enemy?

“This is why the more extreme atheist groups, with their penchant for mocking all believers, are so hazardous to secularism’s already failing health.”

Jacques Berlinerblau, “How to Be Secular: A Call to Arms for Religious Freedom”, p. 196, section “Understand the Value (and Etiquette) of Coalitions"

Criminals hiding behind religion

An obscure gang of hoodlums has made world headlines by kidnapping over 300 girls, often by raiding schools.  Boko Haram claims to be following Islam, but are they really?  Most Muslims condemn these actions as against their understanding of Islam as a religion of peace.  The violence perpetrated by Boko Haram is so perverse that even Al Quaeda has distanced itself from them.

“Boko Haram” loosely means “western education is sinful”.  Boko Haram, like many other groups with a rigid agenda, is full of contradictions.  First, if western education is sinful, why are they using weapons, trucks, cars, motorcycles, and now video cameras?  These are all products of western education.  Second, they use obscure passages of sacred texts and completely miss the larger message, that of all major religions, be kind to others.  Kidnapping and massacres are not being kind to others.

Boko Haram doesn’t want girls to be educated, but it conveniently ignores all the Muslim countries with a large percentage of educated women, even countries with a conservative Islam.

Benazir Bhutto was twice elected Prime Minister of Pakistan.

Afghanistan, where the Taliban keeps trying to overthrow the government because it is not “Islamic” enough, reserves 20 percent of the seats in Parliament for women.

Iran, with its hodgepodge of secular and religious rule, a few years ago had more women in its universities than men.  It also had a hodgepodge of rules varying from university to university including gender-specific restrictions.  Women can’t take computer science and men can’t take Persian/Arabic language!

Unfortunately, hate of others is not limited to Islam.

"Muslims killed my baby!  I want to kill Muslims!”  This was said by a character in the film “Ghandi” with Ben Kingsley.  How could each and every Muslim be responsible for these stupid killings?

Muslims were killed in Guwahati, Assam, India, in sectarian violence.  Sunnis kill Shia, Shia kill Sunnis.  Boko Haram blows up mosques because their leaders don’t follow its dictates.

Ahab and his Canaanite wife, Jezebel, killed the priests of Jehovah.  Then Elijah killed the priests of Ba’al.

Crusade after Crusade marched, with the blessings or incitements by Popes,  to the Holy Land to rescue it from Muslims.

Torquemada,  Grand Inquisitor of Spain, had many tortured to get them to recant heresy.  He was a “moderate”; he “moderated” the use of torture of previous inquisitions.

Jean Calvin brought charges of heresy against Michael Servetus; he suggested Servetus be beheaded.  The government of Geneva decided he should be burnt at the stake.

The Ku Klux Klan, with crosses on their robes, killed blacks for the slightest suspicion of unapproved conduct, and it killed whites who opposed their actions.

In Northern Ireland Catholics killed Protestants and Protestants killed Catholics.  And sometimes they killed their “own” because the latter wanted reconciliation and peace.

Qasim Rashid wrote “What Prophet Muhammad would say to Boko Haram”, Fox News, May 8, 2014.  It is a good exposition of the importance of learning in Islam.  He quotes Muhammad, “Seek knowledge even if you must travel to China” and “The search of knowledge is an obligation laid upon every Muslim.”  Rashid writes, “Fatimah was a Muslim, an African, a female, and literally changed world history through education. Her revolutionary University of al-Qarawiyyin [founded 859] is now the world’s oldest university.”

The comments were a predictable mix of bad taste and prejudice.  A reader “muhammad” summed it up with “I don’t see any difference between Boko Haram and many commenters in this forum.”  The response to his post proved his point.

The leader of Boko Haram, Abubakar Shekau, claims he communicates with God.  How many times have we heard a similar claim by those who hate others?

If God is so powerful, why does He use so many different intermediaries to make His will known?  Few of these intermediaries even agree on what God revealed to them.  Too many of these “intermediaries” have their own agendas.  If I were to believe all that God said directly to these “intermediaries”, I could only conclude that God was schizophrenic.  I doubt that, whatever God is.

I think it is more that certain people are telling God what He should believe and then forcing other people to believe as they do.

Elijah was in a power struggle with Ahab and Jezebel.  Supposedly he challenged the priest of Ba’al to a sacrifice contest.  Would Ba’al ignite the offering of his priests or would Jehovah ignite the offering of Elijah?  Poof!  Jehovah ignited Elijah’s water-soaked offering.  Then Elijah had the people chase down and kill the priests of Ba’al.  Why did Elijah do that?  Did Jehovah use up his bolts of lightning?  Wouldn’t He have an infinite supply of lightning to zap each and every one of these non-believers?

Fred Phelps of Westboro Baptist Church claimed that “God hates fags”.  Hm!  If God hates fags so much, shouldn’t He just boom it out for all to hear?

We can say one thing with certainty about those who claim to speak for God.  They are all fallible beings and probably misunderstood what God told them.

Post-modern times are not now

Ross Douthat wrote another interesting column, "The Promise and Peril of Pope Francis",  New York Times, 2013-10-06. It is about the juggling act that Pope Francis has to perform to attract more fallen-away Catholics and keep the faithful but conservative Catholics.

One commenter used the term "post-modern world".  "Excellent article. In terms of reclaiming the so called absent middle for Catholics, Jews and members of all faiths confronting a post-modern world the question needs to be asked: Does attendance at religious services really matter anymore? The vast numbers of adherents who identify only culturally to their religious tradition need to be reached in creative new ways and respected for their lack of participation in what are perceived to be archaic institutions."

How can we be living in "post-modern" times or a "post-modern world"?  These terms are often used to denote the here and now as coming after a time that was modern then.  But "post-modern" times, like tomorrow, never come.  We are always living in modern times.

Appropriate punishment for Islamic and other terrorists

Many terrorists of any ilk act in the name of an ideology, whether it be religious or political.  They think they are doing their cause a favor by killing as many people as possible who don't believe in their cause or just happen to be in the way as they kill their targets.

Many think these terrorists should be executed if caught, with or without a trial, fair or otherwise.  But this is just what some of them want – to be martyrs to their cause.  An example is former Major Nidal Hassan who has been sentenced to death for shooting and killing thirteen people at Fort Hood.  This probably won't happen and really shouldn't happen.

He probably won't be executed because the military hasn't executed any active military personnel for some time and the appeal process can take decades.  He shouldn't be executed because this is just what he claimed to want – to be a martyr to his cause.

I don't think terrorists should be subjected to forced watching of similar crimes like that in Stanley Kubrick's "Clockwork Orange".  I do think they should be subjected to repeated recitations of the non-violent portions of their beliefs.  For example,

“O People of the Book! [Jews, Christians, Muslims] Come to what is common between us and you: That we worship none but God, that we associate no partners with Him, that we erect not, from among ourselves, Lords other than Allah. If then they turn back, say: 'Bear witness that we are bowing to Allah’s will.'" From "The Qur'an and Tolerance of Christianity and Judaism", Islam Online.

The same kind of tolerance can be found in the Talmud and the Bible.

Narrow interpretations or even misinterpretations are found over and over again down through the centuries.  Catholics killed Protestants and Jews.  Protestants killed Catholics and Jews.  Jews killed the worshippers of Ba'al.  Christians killed Christians and Muslims in the Crusades.  Muslims killed Christians and Muslims in the Crusades.  Muslims seem to be killing more Muslims in these times than they are killing Christians.  All this despite the fact that the text they hold in common states unequivocally "Thou shalt not kill"!  It does not state "That shalt not kill any who believe as you do but thou mayest kill those who believe even slightly differently."

So, if terrorists are jailed and subjected to similar recitations, videos of their listening to these should be made widely available.  If the terrorists wish to make any statements recanting their previous beliefs, then these statements should be widely circulated.

I know this is wishful thinking and probably won't happen.  But those of us who believe that these three faiths (and others) have many tenets of generosity can avoid general statements of hate and counter those who do spew hate.

Muslims, Christians, Jews, Buddhists, and violence

"But we must ask a question only Muslims can answer: What is going on in your community that a critical number of your youth believes that every American military action in the Middle East is intolerable and justifies a violent response, and everything Muslim extremists do to other Muslims is ignorable and calls for mostly silence?"
- Thomas Friedman, "Judgment not included", New York Times, 2013-04-27

But violence against others is not a Muslim "franchise".  People of all kinds of religious persuasions have turned to violence to promote certain distorted ends.

Christians practiced violence.  The Roman Catholic Church burned people at the stake for supposedly not conforming to the prescribed beliefs.  Torquemada of Spain had many torture devices to get people to admit to being Jewish.  Hitler was never ex-communicated from the Catholic Church.  Catholic Irish who planted bombs were considered heroes by many.  Michael Servetus was "burnt at the stake as a heretic by order of the Protestant Geneva governing council."

Jews have been killing more Arabs than Arabs have been killing Jews: since 2000,  6617 Palestinians vs 1,097 Israelis (including 1,447 vs 129 children).  See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab%E2%80%93Israeli_conflict#Cost_of_conflict

Buddhists, supposedly a peaceful group, are attacking Muslims in Burma (Myanmar).  The recent riots of Buddhists against Muslims is only a part of centuries-long list of anti-Muslim events.

And all these perpetrators of violence seem to forget that a tenet of their religions is "to do unto others as you would have them do unto you."

A prime example of the stupidity of war

You won't get through this with dry eyes: "A Mideast Bond, Stitched of Pain and Healing", Ethan Bronner, New York Times, 2009-12-30.

An old troublemaker as a peacemaker

Muammar Qaddafi has written a very interesting op-ed piece in the New York Times, "The One-State Solution" for Israel and Palestine; he calls the proposed state Isratine.

He argues that there is already much co-operation between Jews and Palestinians with Arabs in politics in Israel and Israeli factories in Palestine.

Judge for yourself if he makes sense.