Current mood:	amused
Current music:	WZPL 99.5
Entry tags:	letters to the editor, separation of church and state

Religion and State
So, I *really* shook people up with my recent Letter to the Editor. Not only did I receive a phone call in support of my letter, but I also received a card in opposition to it (with no return address, naturally--not interested in real communication, just in proving his/her point). I didn't read more than the first line of the card, because even the first line was full of, at best, misunderstanding of the facts. At worst, it was deliberate twisting of the facts.

So, I was bored at work and decided to check out the editorial page of our local paper today when I found this gem of a letter concerning *my* letter! I shook people up enough to deserve character attacks! Wow. I've never checked up on any of my other letters online, but perhaps I ought to from now on. ~_~ I had no idea that my original letter--against religious hatred--would generate so much discussion. I've since sent a reply, which I hope gets printed.

The gist of my letter is that most of "Andy"'s letter is centered on a character attack, which is precisely the kind of thing I was arguing against in my original letter. I also pointed out that, while James Madison started out in opposition to a Bill of Rights, he quickly changed his mind and became the Father of the Bill of Rights--pushing not only to have the BoR attached to the Constitution, but actually embedded into the main text of the Constitution. He was very much for freedom of religion. And I included the statement from Justice Black from Everson v. Board of Education, which set the precedent, in 1947, for the use of the Establishment Clause--that all US government, Federal or State, must refrain from supporting one religion over another, giving aid to one religion over another, and forcing people to attend or not attend religious services of any kind. (That's a paraphrase--but it's on Wikipedia if you want to look it up and is in a semi-protected state. I'm sure it can be found elsewhere, too, I'm just too lazy to look it up at the moment.)

I'm actually kind of flattered that I stirred up so much controversy--I at least made people sit up and pay attention, even if not everyone agrees. :) Woot.

You know, I wonder how much controversy it would stir up if I, say, talked about what people think life would be like under a religious state, leading everyone along to believe I was talking about Islam and then revealing in the end that it was actually Christianity? There's a semi-famous sermon on a certain person who feels called to lead the church. This person has been in and out of jail, is subversive to the government, etc, etc--at the end of the sermon, the congregation is usually asked to vote on whether they would accept this person as pastor of the church. Most congregations vote against accepting this person--and then they find out that the speaker is talking about St. Paul, who founded the Church. That's the kind of thing I'm talking about.

Just call me a pot-stirrer.

Peace and love.