“I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it.”
– Thomas Jefferson
Discuss amongst yourselves. Please. And with others. Please discuss with everyone and let your voices be heard. In too many areas the freedom of the individual is being replaced with the comfort and complacency of the masses or the ease and profit of big business. Without the free and open discussion of these issues, our liberties die and their passing goes unnoticed.
Is the rejection of religion on all fronts a reaction to the recent rise in ultra-conservative groups, or is there something else going on? I have been talking to a lot of friends and co-workers recently who are rejecting candidates on both sides of the presidential race because of their religion. What struck me is that these rejections are not because of the specific religion these hopefuls have, such as Mormon or Baptist, but because they have strong religious convictions at all.
Now I could actually more understand rejecting a candidate for his specific religion than for the fact that they are religious at all. And as far as I have been able to ascertain, I don’t think any of the current mainstream presidential wannabes is planning on turning the oval office into a pulpit. But, I would readily welcome a candidate who is an intelligent religious person. I would find it heartening to elect a leader who has been through the questioning phase of any religious journey and come out with a better understanding of themselves and what they believe in.
Unfortunately I believe that many people are trying to take the separation of church and state a little too far. Instead of making sure that government makes no laws that would impede the freedom of religion, there is a current wave to instead have the government act in such a way that it takes away the freedom to have a religion. I firmly believe that to be truly open and free in our religion (or lack thereof for some), we must allow others to have theirs. If not, aren’t we just as bad and dogmatic as those who would force their religion upon us?
OK, again, the slow march will continue unless we stop it. What I am referring to here is H.R. 1955, the Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act.
Basically, as you can read about in the linked article, this Act is an attempt to stop violent radicals and terrorists by giving the government all sorts of powers over them. But, how do you know if people fit these categories without monitoring them? And in the end, what this really amounts to is the increased eating away of our civil liberites. Let’s face it, we are a nation of rebels and radicals.
If this Act has been in place, would there have been a Boston Tea Party? What would happen to men like John Brown, Paul Revere, and Patrick Henry? Is there any more a radical statement than “Give me liberty or give me death?”
I am very happy to see people like Dennis Kucinich voting against these things and talking about them. The problem is why aren’t more people talking about it? And why are our elected politicians voting in favor of these clearly unconstitutional movements?