Ok, so GOP Rep. Todd Akin is a demagogue. He knew he was exaggerating when he said that "the heart of liberalism really is a hatred of God." Plenty of liberals are theists and many who are not are perfectly respectful of God (though there is a strain in Christopher Hitchens and the other New Atheists who really do have a hatred for God).
But when Akin corrected himself to say that liberals have "a hatred for public references for God", you have to wonder why anyone would take offense. For the past several weeks, I have been going around addressing liberal groups arguing that there is a place for God language in the public square. I have to tell you it is a tough sell.
When even Douglas Laycock, a quite moderate professor of law at Virginia, and probably the country's leading theorist about church and state, says that "in principle" the "under God" language in the Pledge of Allegiance is unconstitutional, but that current litigation to remove it is "many decades premature", he is not only affirming Akin's point, but is dooming liberalism to years and years of anti-God attacks.
This is frustrating to me because it is so unnecessary. First of all, many nonbelievers use God language and always have. Perhaps most famously John Dewey used the term God to refer to the power of the absolute in human affairs. And today, scientists such as Stuart Kauffman use the term to refer to the endless creativity in the universe. There is no reason to assume that every use of the word God is a theological claim.
Second, the use of the word God in the American political tradition has also reflected nontheological claims. The Declaration of Independence referred to the Creator to make the point that our rights are not gifts from men but are inherent. Lincoln used the word God to make a point about the consequences of the fundamental national injustice of slavery. Robert Bellah explained years ago that the primary use of God language in the public square is to rely on a morality beyond human invention.
Yes, the use of the word God in politics is always a claim about objective values. But it is not always or even usually a theological argument about whether God exists.
I already know that many liberals are unconvinced by arguments like these. They prefer to grouse about references to God in the public square. Even if they admit they don't have the votes today to eliminate the national motto or rewrite the Pledge of Allegiance, they hope one day that will change.
To such liberals, I say "good luck." You are condemning liberalism to minority status. You are closing your ears to a rich tradition of wisdom. You are unthinkingly embracing relativism. And you are handing a weapon to the Todd Akins of our age.
To put "In God We Trust" on money is obscene especially since every Bible scholar knows what Jesus thought of money. He said, "Give unto Caesar what is Caesar's and unto god what is god's". To give unto Caesar that which is god's should seem equally profane if you are christian.
Religious people don't make sense. Take off religious overtones on human money!
I hate ignorance and fear. I hate that so many Americans are afraid of "sinning" only because they will be punished instead of not "sinning" just because it is the right thing to do whether you are rewarded for righteous living or not.
I went to Bible College and was married to a licensed preacher. Don't tell me that I don't know what religion in America is about.
What I hate is when people try to dictate their policy based on what they think God "wants" for us or "demands" of us. I can't imagine they would like it very much if I entered into public office and started proposing laws based on what Jack Bauer or Santa Claus tell me in my dreams.
And I'm still waiting for a "rich tradition of wisdom" that exceeds non-religious philosophy. The half-truths and distorted truths of religions are anything but wisdom.
There was already a number of nations already here which believed NOT in the christian god, which made them soul less heathens giving your judeo-christian's an excuse to murder them and take their lands; and when they opposed they were killed some more as were their food source. Oh yeah, they had been here 20,000 years and not destroyed the environment.
Seems like your judeo-christian laws and beliefs are geared at only greed and destruction of the environment. Might be time to rethink those superstitions and failed beliefs. Your kids will pay the price with a planet that may be gone in 2050, the result of christian dogma.
Government has no business promoting belief in God through statements like "One Nation under God" and "In God we trust". One's religious beliefs are private. If you don't pray in my classroom, I won't think in your church.