More Religious Rumblings

I clicked on my local newspaper's website this morning to find that the town's fundamentalists are still restless about a variety of issues.

First of all, to my satisfaction, there was an editorial supporting the opening of the business mentioned in my post yesterday. The writer pointed out that there are any number of businesses already operating in town that some people might fight objectionable: liquor stores, cash advance stores, stores selling lottery tickets, nightclubs, stores selling cigarettes, and so on, and that this store is no different. This was followed up with a suggestion that people who object should vote with their feet and simply not patronize the business. There was also a blunt suggestion that those exercising themselves about this store might better expend their energies helping the poor, the elderly, and with other worthwhile community activities.

I then clicked on a story about a proposed total abolishment of the county's blue laws. Presently, most stores do not open until 1:30 on Sunday afternoons, and then close promptly again at six. The proposal would allow businesses to decide for themselves when and if to operate on Sundays.

Naturally, this has generated protests from fundamentalists. One pastor said, "The change might be good for our economy, but it’s not good for our community. Blue laws were made at a time when people had reverence for God. We don’t have that now."

Well, if the proliferation of fundamentalism in the last thirty years is any indicator, then there is apparently no lack of "reverence for God". Secondly, it's not a proper function of law to enforce religion; it's a clear violation of the separation of church and state. To have Sunday blue laws favors one religion over others -- I've never seen Saturday blue laws in honor Judaism, nor blue laws for the holy days of other religions.

Next, I moved on to the letters to the editor page, which contained several letters from fundamentalists.

One letter writer railed against the teaching of evolution in the schools, asserting that "evolution is scientifically impossible". He went on to say that "the known 'facts' of science, history and logic are consistent with the Biblical account of creation." Oh, really? The ignorance here is so staggering as to beggar the imagination.

I disagreed with the late Pope John Paul II about many things, but he once made a comment about evolution that made sense. He said that belief in evolution did not necessarily preclude a faith in God; that evolution was true, but that it was God who set it into motion. I'm not sure if this is so, but it makes more sense that the bogus science of "creationism".

Another letter writer took the newspaper to task for having a feature article on the front page about the life of a local atheist. The letter writer said, "It is deeply troubling when a supposedly responsible newspaper believes it reasonable to publish such error on the front page." As fundamentalists have no respect for the separation of church and state, they obviously have no respect for the freedom of the press, either, or that people from all walks of life exist in every community.

Another letter writer ranted, "What ever happened to government 'of the people, for the people, and by the people'? When we were a Christian nation, we had it, imperfect as it may have been. Now that we are becoming a godless socialist pagan nation, we have lost it."

"Christian Nation". Here we go again. The USA was not founded as a sectarian, Christian nation. The majority of our Founding Fathers were Deists and our constitution is a deliberately secular document. The Founding Fathers declined to declare an official "state religion", as they believed that mixing government with religion effectively diluted both. Government was to not establish, facilitate, nor hinder any particular religion. The freedom of religion was guaranteed to all religions as was the freedom from religion. Religious tests for holding office were abolished, as the question of one's religion or lack thereof was considered a wholly private matter which had no bearing on a person's fitness to hold office. Fundamentalists constantly betray a willful ignorance of the basic facts of the history of our nation's founding.

Some fundamentalists believe that they are "in the world, but not of it". In other words, they live separate lives, neither participating in, nor hindering larger society. I think it's high time they got back to it. They are assuredly free to live life as they see fit, but they need to leave the rest of us to do the same.