Yes and No...
Reader comment on item: Bibliography - My Writings on Not Trusting CAIR
in response to reader comment: Veritas addendum

Submitted by Pro-Israeli Democrat (United States), Sep 20, 2006 at 00:20

You are absolutely right. One of the reasons that Christianity has fared so well (and in my opinion one of the things that makes it such as great world religion) is its compatability with a free, secular, liberal society. Christians, by and large, have learned that faith and politics are best served as seperate entities. Now, is Christianity itself the foundation of freedom? Certainly it is a foundation (when we take compassion and goodwill into account). There is a great deal of compassion and goodwill to be found with the Bible.

Nevertheless, I believe that secular, enlightenment-era philosophy is the greatest foundation of freedom, at least in the Western sense. Judeo-Chrstian principles lie at America's roots. But they share those roots with the principles of the Enlightenment.The notion of a "Christian nation" can be dispelled. One of the main reasons we have church-state separation is, in fact, to enable us to retain our pluralistic nature. You should have a right to practice whatever faith you want to (or none at all, for that matter).

I am not a far-leftist or a socialist and, in fact, only opposed the Iraq war due to strategic reasons...Id rather have struck Iran instead. I am pro-Israeli, pro-2nd amendment and pro-privitization. However, I am also a social liberal: pro-woman, pro-choice (I am probably more pro-choice than many women, and proud of it), anti-intelligent design, pro-gay, pro Roe v. Wade, and pro-contraceptive. I know people of faith (from Buddhists to Baptists) who feel the same way.

I am critical of religious dogma, yet respect what people of faith (both liberals and conservatives) do and believe. What disturbs me about calls for a "Christian nation" is this: that is what Pat Buchanan (Mr. Jew-hater and Mr. Israel basher himself) has called for. A nation that uses theology as its sole basis for law would probably wind up looking something like Ayatollah Khomeini's "Islamic Paradise" or Muhammad Khatami's "Islamic Democracy."

I think that Katherine Harris' recent diatribe in Florida basically affirms this. It was both insulting to Jews like myself (since, if elected, we will apparently "legislate sin" like "gay marriage") and remarkably embarassing. She even said "God decides our rulers (not leaders, but rulers)"... so much for democracy. That is theocratic monarchism ala Saudi Arabia, and I was happy to see the Republicans distance themselves from theocratic monarchism. What will happen to non-Christians? The call for America to become a Christian nation is simply not feesible. There is enough diversity within Chrstianity alone to demonstrate this (with everything ranging from Evangelical Protestants to Armenians and Copts).

It also runs contrary to the versatility and adaptability of the Judeo-Christian tradition, which is so versitile percisely BECAUSE it can deal with life in a nation of secular laws. This means dealing with the realities of our time: abortion, stem-cell research, evolution, and science. Evolution is not, as Ann Coulter suggests, a "liberal" hoax, as we have known about evolution since BEFORE Darwin. And really, how could the liberals create such an elaborate scheme to "forge" dinosaur fossils or fix the geological timescale. One who believes such a thing is a conspiracy theorist of the worst order. Christians, who have long since accepted life in a secular society (which actually benefits them) should not be doing what Muslims are in trying to end the separation of God and State (unless one considers a head-chopping absolute monarchy a "free society").

---

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened for relevance, substance, and tone, and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome, but comments are rejected if scurrilous, off-topic, vulgar, ad hominem, or otherwise viewed as inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the Guidelines for Comments. For informational purposes, we identify countries from which comments are sent.