IMHO, the lack of belief constitutes, in itself, a belief, and therefore,
when an atheist demands the removal of "God" from a heretofore accepted
phrase, he is in fact demanding the government espouse, support and promote
his religion of non-religion. This, therefore, constitutes an
unconstitutional act, by his own definition, in that they are promoting a
belief of non-belief, which is his nonsecular religion, that of denying the
possible existence of God.
Personally, I like the general, non specific term "Under God", as it fails
to designate which God they refer to- it could be the God of Abraham, Allah,
Ra, Zeus, what have you, to name a few. Because, for every religion, they
have a God, and so, "Under God" could refer to any, all or none of the
above- just so long as you are happy with your own belief. Why not try to
convince those opposed to the phrase to accept it as "Under G.O.D." where
the acronym "G.O.D." means "Greater Organized Democracy"(Although this flies
in the face of the fact the US is a Republic, NOT a Democracy... However, I
digress...)
In my "Bill Clinton Style Teflon/fireproof Suit"
Scott
(Laughing inwardly at all those who take life too seriously)
/// triumphs@autox.team.net mailing list
/// To unsubscribe send a plain text message to majordomo@autox.team.net
/// with nothing in it but
///
/// unsubscribe triumphs
///
/// or try http://www.team.net/cgi-bin/majorcool
|