Non-Christians Need Not Apply

Bert,
I am a Christian and feel my traditions under attack constantly from the secular left. But even I think that IF this is true it is wrong. I would like to see the actual forms these people say they were required to fill out. Do you know where I might find them? If there really are forms of this nature, then what they are doing is definately wrong and should be exposed. I am a constant victim of discrimination BECAUSE I am Christian, therefore I understand what discrimination feels like. I would not like to see it done to non-christians either.

Bert - It is a subject for great concern. Separation of Church and State was formost in the minds of the men who wrote our constitution. People now don't seem to see the danger lurking when well-meaning Christians want to bring religion into schools and government.
Some folks of my children's age were commenting that they were outraged that some people want to take 'under God' out of the Pledge of Allegiance. They were very surprised when I told them it had only been inserted during WWII to show our difference from the 'Godless Nazis.' In my schools we said it the original way that our forefathers wrote it.

Debbie,
If you would really like to follow up on this story, why don't you contact the writer. You can probably get her Email address from the web site.
Please tell me about the discrimination you have suffered because you are a Christian. I do not doubt that it occurs, and I would be interested to learn what form it takes.

Ruth,
Actually, the words "under God" were added much later than WWII. It was added in 1954, the year I was a senior in high school. I remember it well. We recited the pledge every day in class, and I refused to say those two words. I didn't make a big scene...I just remained silent.
I wrote a tongue-in-cheek piece about this last year.
Here is the link.

This is just another reason to distrust and dislike this administration. Ignorance, incompetence, intolerance, hate, pushing their war mongering agenda in the face of all facts and reason, total disregard for the constitution while wrapping themselves in the flag, giving to the rich and taking from the poor, creating more big government agencies that do NOTHING except give more jobs to Bush cronies, giving tax breaks to the most wealthy in this country while sending us into debt we may never get out of and of course the religious fanaticism they are apparently pushing on the rest of the country.

I was so wrong when I said "Oh well, how much harm can this guy do in four years?" when he got "selected" into office back in 2000. Apparently he has done more to destroy this country than the terrorists could have ever hoped to do.

for me as a jewish person i find this whole hanging on to Christian identity absoltuely absurd!

i can understand a minority person feeling a need to constantly defend his identity..but what is it with this
"i am a christian" business..
christianity is the major religion in the western world today , the only people as far as i can see that feel the need to declare their religion identity in such a way are looking to find what makes people different from eachother , what makes americans different rather the common basis of human values that were the ideas of the founding fathers..
thanks Bert for pointing out the growing wave of fanatics, whether they are moslem or christian, just as much of a threat to tolerance and equality in the US and all over!

I completely agree. When I got the first news that Salvation Army could discriminate based on professed religion and sexual preference I got shivers.

I do feel that christians are under attack, since they are - what? 85% of americans (such a minority), have held the presidency, what? 100% of the last 43 presidents, vice presidents.... 85% of America's Fortune 100 companies are run by them, and the current president is using my tax money to spread their faith....

ah-huh - really oppressed.

"But Bush wiped away this calibrated distinction by issuing a series of executive orders early in his presidency approving taxpayer financed religious discrimination."

This is the secret weapon this President has used to rewrite the constitution and undermine our Liberty. I don't understand why the ACLU hasn't latched onto this one and taken it to the Supreme Court. This form of discrimination is outlawed in the workplace and certainly should be outlawed in the non-profit, government dole environment. You don't find this discrimination at the American Red Cross because they don't receive government funds and therefore, don't qualify under the Presidential executive orders. Now how back-asswards is that?

Nancy,
As I understand it, the president has the power to do this kind of thing...allocate money without Congressional approval. I'm sure the ACLU and Americans United for Separation of Church and State would have challenged this if they could have. I'll research this and see if I can find out the legal basis for it.

Christians are under attack from the left? That's a joke, right?

You mean when people don't want huge taxpayer funded representations of the Ten Commandments on public property? When you probably don't have ANYTHING like that in your own, private, personal home?

The real radicals are the Christian right, who are trying to take a secular nation and force God down everyone's throat. Go to church, teach your kids, but LEAVE ME ALONE.

The only people Christian Conservatives feel "oppressed" by is the small minority of super-cool badasses like me. They all want to hang with me, but I'm way too busy being a super-cool badass, and that makes them all sad, so they cry oppression.

"They all want to hang with me,"

sans the "with" and one imagines you have it right Johnny. BTW, no vienna sausages at the wedding reception?

As usual, Bert, I agree and thank you for the topic. I worked with a group of people on the housing budget for my city and learned some depressing things regarding federal cuts to programs and money shifted to faith-based organizations. It isn't the way I believe this country is supposed to work.

There will be vienna sausages.

Bert, I certainly agree with your analysis of this situation. I definitely stand for separation of church and state in this situation. I respectfully say that most of the church denominations that belong to the National Council of churches, stand with you on this subject, so I ask that the many of us who are Christians of good faith do not appreciate being lumped into the Religious right groups, and we would rather not apply for monies from the government for faith based programs operated by our churches. Womens and homeless shelters, Kids Hope, AA, prison and nursing home programs, free space given to WIC, community meetings and choirs. We operate those from our own funds. They should be separated from the gov't. We don't want their money.

Carol,
As I have said many times before, it is the lunatic fringe of most religions that cause all the trouble. The vast majority of Christians...and Muslims...feel just as you do.
To them, religion and the practice of it is a private thing, the good works they do are not paid for by any government, nor do they seek any funds from government or influence over its policies as part of their religious agenda.
Thank you for your comment. It is a very important point that sometimes gets lost in the heat of the battle.

Bert,

Thank you for your article.

I've increasingly noticed strangers mentioning to me something about being a committed Christian. I'm baffled as to why they tell me this. A megachurch in my area recently opened a branch megachurch even closer to me. I've credited the growing popularity of this type of Christianity to tacit support by Bush and his faith-based initiatives. Thanks to the article, I realize the support is far more than I thought.

Verie,
And yet...read the early post in this thread by Debbie G. She feels that she has been persecuted because of her faith. I have asked her to explain that and give us some details, but so far she has not returned to the thread.
I would like to hear about persecution of Christians in this country. As a non-believer, I feel a lot of social pressure and disapproval directed at me. A huge majority of the people in this country say they are christians, and over a third say they are "born again." I am in a small minority...I cannot imagine how any believer could feel threatened...except by logic and reason. But as Ben Franklin told us over two hundred years ago:
"The way to see by faith is to shut the eye of reason."

Good, Bert!

Excellent article and discussion!
Namaste

The very first comment - and the very first sentiment stated within it - are what has inspired me to reply:

"I am a Christian and feel my traditions under attack constantly from the secular left."

I, for the life of me, do NOT know where this sentiment has come from. My understanding of the "secular left" (and one of the ways in which I am aligned with it) is that it favors the idea that religion and religious expression is a wholly PERSONAL thing and, as such, does not belong in PUBLIC spaces. Hence fighting for the removal of overtly religious icons or displays from PUBLIC spaces, etc.

As intended by the core principle of 'the separation of church and state'...

This in NO WAY represents an "attack" on ANYONE'S personal sytem of beliefs or traditions. Christians (and everyone else for that matter) remain FREE to practice whatever system of beliefs they want in PRIVATE.

Since when does a person's or group's insistence that THEY not be subjected to having YOUR beliefs foisted on THEM qualify as THEM persecuting YOU?

It's another one of the arguably brilliant ploys by the extreme fringe right-wing that holds the power in this country at the moment: They've somehow convinced the nation's Christian MAJORITY that they are being persecuted by people who simply want to be left alone to live their lives according to their OWN set of beliefs and values.

Donald,
That is why I asked Debbie to come back and tell us about the attacks on her or her religion. I think you are correct that the Religious Right Wing has adopted a strategy to portray themselves as persecuted, and as you say, it is a clever ruse. But there are people like Debbie who sincerely feel that their beliefs are threatened, and I would like to understand why they feel that way.
The one that really gets me is the pious pronouncements by Bush et al that the "institution of marriage is threatened" by same sex unions. Both of us have written long and frequently on this topic. Nobody has yet explained to me how the marriage of a devout Christian couple is threatened in any way by a married gay couple living next door. It is just...preposterous!
And yet, I have seen people nod sagely when Bush intones those words.

Bert, Debbie will never come back to tell us all how she has been attacked because it's all based some emotion, something that she "feels" but has no basis in reality.

Paranoia seems to be a major trait with the people who are running our country these days. One need to look no further than Dick Cheney for proof.

I guess you are right, Cynthia. I was hoping that Debbie would explain why good Christian folks feel so persecuted. Apparently they do, and it mystifies me.
I feel very threatened by the Religious Right. By their attempts to impose their religious beliefs on me,..their opposition to stem cell research, a woman's right to choose, same sex marriage, and their aggressive attempts to provide government funding for religious activities through "faith based" charities, display Christian religious symbols in government buildings...the list goes on and on.
I think I am the one who should feel threatened and persecuted. As a non-believer, I am in the minority. How can this huge Christian majority feel threatened?
Come on Christians! Come explain this to us. I promise that we will not ridicule you or insult you. We need to understand why you feel this way!

One of the GLARINGLY OBVIOUS tactics that our current governmental leaders use is to LOUDLY accuse their opponents of doing EVERYTHING that they are secretly attempting to do (often succeeding) behind the collective backs of the American people...

Bert,

Great article and comments. I also am horrified by the erosion of the church-state separation in the US, and feel very threatened by the political power of the Religious Right. I am not on the secular left, but rather on the secular right, a group so small we would probably qualify for the endangered species list.

You and Douglas have hit the nail on the head regarding Christians' feelings of persecution here in the US. What Christians seem to perceive as persecution is any opposition to their efforts to turn the US into a Christian nation (from the secular nation that our Founding Fathers intended).

I too am at a loss as to how same-sex marriage in any way threatens the institution of marriage. It is not as if gays are asking for a ban on opposite-sex marriages. The other thing that really gets on my nerves is the Christian fundamentalists calling themselves "pro-life" for opposing abortion rights and stem-cell research. It is bad enough that they consider the sacrifice of actual human beings (pregnant women) to potential humans (fetuses) to be "pro-life." That they would dare call themselves "pro-life" for opposing embryonic stem cell research is obscene. From what I have read, embryonic stem-cell research could potentially lead to cures for spinal cord injuries, Alzheimers, ALS, MS, diabetes, and many other illnesses. It also could allow organs to be grown for people needing transplants by using blastocysts and cells from the recipients' own bodies (which organs would not be rejected by the transplant recipient). Opposing research that could alleviate the suffering of millions of people would seem to me to show hatred for humanity and be anti-life.

Thanks so much for the Ben Franklin quote. I will add it to my collection of Founding Father quotes that show how secular most of them really were. I collect such quotes as ammunition to use whenever some idiot claims that the Founding Fathers were devout Christians or that they intended to create a Christian Nation (NOT!).

By the way, I believe that the Americans United for Separation of Church and State has filed lawsuits seeking to challenge Bush's "faith-based" initiatives, and that those lawsuits are currently pending.

Genie,
Thanks for an interesting and informative post. I certainly hope you are not a member of endangered species! The world needs more people who think like you.
I agree with you about the "pro-life" name. I would further say that "pro-choice" people are more pro-life than so-called "pro-lifers."
I wrote an article on the subject of religious quotes by the founders of our country.

Here is the link.
I am a member of Americans United for Separation of Church and State. I was not aware that there was litigation pending on the faith-based charity issue. I will ask the president of our local AU chapter who is also a close friend.

Very, very well said, Liz. Thanks for the post.

Liz,

Excellent comment. I especially liked what you said about same-sex marriage: "Most of us are born to love, to deny that to anyone and denigrate that love by discrimination is vile." It is hard to understand how anyone can disagree with that.

Bert,

Thanks for the link to your earlier Gather article titled "The Founding Fathers on Religion." I do have some of those quotes, but not all. The quote (whose last sentence you underlined) by Thomas Paine is one of my favorites.

I have some additional quotes for you that were not included in your prior article:

Article 11 of the Treaty of Tripoli, signed by President John Adams in 1797, states in pertinent part: "[T]he Government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion." You cannot get more explicit than that.

John Adams wrote in a letter to Charles Cushing (October 19, 1756): "Twenty times in the course of my late reading, have I been upon the point of breaking out, ''this would be the best of all possible worlds, if there were no religion in it.''"

Thomas Jefferson's interpretation of the First Amendment in a letter to the Danbury Baptist Association (January 1, 1802):

"Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between man and his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legislative powers of government reach actions only, and not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should ''make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,'' thus building a wall of separation between church and State."

In a letter (dtd Aug 10, 1787) which Jefferson wrote, while in Paris, to his nephew and ward, Peter Carr, a schoolboy at the time, Jefferson offers the following advice:

"Fix Reason firmly in her seat, and call to her tribunal every fact, every opinion. Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve the homage of reason than of blindfolded fear. ... Do not be frightened from this inquiry by any fear of its consequences. If it end in a belief that there is no God, you will find incitements to virtue in the comfort and pleasantness you feel in its exercise and in the love of others which it will procure for you."

I also have a couple of quotes about Washington and Franklin from people who knew them well:

After Washington's death, Dr. Abercrombie, a friend of his, replied to a Dr. Wilson, who had interrogated him about Washington's religion, "Sir, Washington was a Deist."

Dr. Priestley, an intimate friend of Ben Franklin, wrote of him: "It is much to be lamented that a man of Franklin's general good character and great influence should have been an unbeliever in Christianity, and also have done as much as he did to make others unbelievers." (Priestley's Autobiography)

There is also other evidence of how secular a nation the United States was at its founding. For example, many religious conservatives point to the "In God We Trust" motto on our money as support for their argument that the U.S. was founded on Christianity. In fact, the motto first appeared on U.S. currency in 1864 (on the two cent coin) - the impetus for this being the increased religious sentiment existing during the Civil War. Prior to this, U.S. currency was consistent with secular government. The first coins issued by the authority of the United States (the US mint had not yet been established) were the Fugio cents of 1787 and had the words "United States" and "We are One" on the face of the coin, and "Mind Your Business" on the back. The first coins issued in 1792 by the newly established US mint - the silver center cent, Birch cent, half disme, and disme - all had the motto "Liberty-Parent of Science and Industry." ["E Pluribus Unum" first appeared on official U.S. mint coins in 1798."]

Even after the 1860s, the "In God We Trust" motto did not appear on all US coins until the 20th Century, and it did not appear on paper currency until the 1950s (the same decade that Congress added the "under God" to the Pledge). Incidentally, the 1950s was also the decade during which Congress passed a resolution (in 1956) making "In God We Trust" the national motto. The original motto was "E Pluribus Unum."

Genie,
Thanks for those. I have added them to my collection. I knew about the Treaty of Tripoli statement, and should have included that in my article.
I did not know the historical background of "In God We Trust." Thanks for that!
Most historians now believe that Washington, Jefferson and possibly Franklin were Deists. The were all very cagey about it in their lifetimes, particulary Washington who evaded the question throughout his life.

I hope under god always remains there i share that opinion with many younge people still in school today its worded perfectly we are beneath/under god no matter what religion we are we whorship the same one and only god its our freedom of speech to what i hold dear about america our god fearing beautiful free country I wouldnt raise a fuss or debate it farther sorry no pun bert but i hope it always remains free to be there ..remain there for generations to come.

Bert,
Excellent article and I am a Christian and have no clue as to what Debbie meant. None at all. My beliefs go along with your article perfectly.
We volunteer (in a church) for our town's Food Pantry - we get no funding. At all. We rely on donations period. No state or government program helps us or anything else in our town, that I know of.
We also volunteer for our Human Services free clothing room-- also donations. No funding at all. And we're happy with that. People helping others is a great thing, and something the government isn't going to or need to interfere in. Thanks for the article, and no, I've never been persicuted due to my faith and I also agree with someone else that said something to the effect that everyone has their own religion and that we should keep ours out of their lives - true again.
I'm perfectly happy with nice people, I couldn't care less what their religion is. It's a subject that's actually never brought up either.
Thanks again.

Michelle,
If you come back to this thread, read Ruth MacGill's comment and my response and then follow the link to the article I wrote about the Pledge. And then think about it, seriously. Please.

Marilyn,
I suspect that most Christians share you views on this.
It's the few that don't, that feel they need to impose their faith on the rest of us that cause all the trouble.

My son's Boys' and Girls' Club membership card had some kind of aoth on the back, above where the child signed. One of the lines was something about "serving God," or something else we both found astounding- especially since they receive so much in the way of federal grants. I took a Sharpie marker, crossed out the offending line, and my son signed it. Then I waited for them to make something of it, but no one said a word.

aoth=oath

Hey Jackie wanna aoth?

Good for you, Jackie.

Perhaps if you possessed even just a wee bit of "faith" sir, you might not be so confused. The amount of this "massive" funding you speak of is less than 1% of the federal budget, and your wildly insane words on the subject are nothing more than emotional, inflammatory, and misleading.

Liz,
I could not have said that any better myself, so I won't. I agree with you completely.