Posted 3 months, 15 days ago in 
Loading ...
I wonder if the two letter writers recently, Timothy King and Jean Bridgman, pay any attention to what the media reports as opposed to running everything through their own individual religious filters.
There was no big flap in city offices when an atheistic group very civilly suggested that the city might review their policy of invocations at the beginning of council meetings. They suggested that for the sake of common sense and common courtesy that a moment of silence might be more appropriate for a meeting that was meant for all citizens of all beliefs.
Additionally, they pointed out that there was law by precedent that restricted such invocations and that it appeared that the preponderance of Christian invocations of a particular type might be a reason for the city to ensure that they were not vulnerable to law suit. There were no threats of a suit or force of any kind.
Mr. King seems to think it has to do with “converting” people to atheism. He further suggests that some effort was used to force atheism on the council, and by extension, the public. The atheists were seeking neutrality, not preference.
Ms. Bridgman rants on about the Establishment Clause whereas the law is clear and only has to do with highly sectarian prayer as part of a government meeting meant for all people of all faiths. But the astonishing thing, to me, is her contention that, rather than being a personal thing, religion cannot exist behind closed doors, as suggested by scripture. Apparently, the Bible is not the word of God, after all. Is religion, after all, nothing but a cult that has to be practiced in the company of people of identical thoughts, out in the open, and during secular government meetings specifically meant for people of all creeds?
JOHN BORGEN
Grand Junction
5 Responses to “Atheists are seeking inclusion”
Posted August 20th, 2008 at 6:31 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
And, now, will come the usual assault and diatribe. John, what you said is very true. However, there are a lot of closed-minded folks (read…bigots)in Happy Valley. As usual, they will make themselves known on this and other threads.
Atheists are, in general, quite peaceful and tolerant of christians and others with deep religious beliefs. They just don’t want religion and government being mixed. Whenever that happens, they, religion and government, both lose. BTW, if this is, as some folks around here have stated, a christian nation then why have not all the Jews, Hindus, Pagans, and the other non-believers not been put on boats and sent packing?
IMHO
Posted August 20th, 2008 at 6:55 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Because Focus on the Family couldn’t find enough boats?
Posted August 21st, 2008 at 6:10 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Thank you for the clarification, John. BTW, I’m Timothy King. First, I apologize if the tone of my comments seemed to be divisive. It is NOT my intention to promote animosity between any groups, no matter what their beliefs. I’ve already got some religious folks mad at me, I sure don’t want to incite the atheists.
My point was basically an “interfaith” criticism for folks both of theism and atheism. I’ve watched Christian groups (like Focus on the Family) compel social conformity without really giving society a reasonable, logical, intellectually compelling argument that would WANT them to change. Their attempts, I think, caused more animosity than peace. That was my “religious filter” if you please.
Finally: dc, that was funny!
Posted August 21st, 2008 at 6:58 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
XSBC,
Thanx and I really like the quote at the end of your post.
Posted September 7th, 2008 at 11:50 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
Hi, When thing have been determined by a party to have gotten “off track”, such as a belief system that is behaving incoherently; it sets in motion the position that one has to set aside of it and stop firing up the engine and start the major project of trying to restore it with something that does work properly. Given that ‘extreme’ position; it is probably only too ‘normal’ for thing to fall into a chainsaw divisioning of many matters that cannot be presently address in that situation. In herently, though, to resolve matters the extreme positions need to be addressed in a more precise manner. Admittedly again, I believe that Jesus’ ‘Boss’s pray’ ends properly by noting that only God’s nature fulfills the ‘true’ definition of ‘kingdom’, ‘power’ and ‘glory’ the crux of its execution being via ‘eternity’s’ potentials. Theoriously, science says about the same thing without specifically touching on the ‘nature of a word’, God.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.