Dizzy Rants Against Theocracy

(graphic courtesy of blogagainsttheocracy.blogspot.com)

(Cross-posted for your pleasure at DizzyDayz)

I've been reading up on a lot of blogs over the last few days as other's "blog against theocracy", this weekend.

I have no idea how to spin my own post out of this (which explains why it has taken me until just this minute to put my keyboard and brain to work on this topic). Far better bloggers than myself have done a bang up job of explaining what is at stake.

But, like any good protest, the more voices that enter the discussion (or debate) the louder the uproar to be heard by those just passing by...maybe they will stop and see just what the heck is going on.

When I think about theocracy and how religion has affected the laws in this country, a number of issues come to my mind. Although many of the issues are no longer laws that affect me, personally, in the past, they would have.

Being a black woman, the laws that supported slavery would have affected me and my children. These laws were justified by Christians and their Bible. The Old Testament prophets and their followers had slaves, so therefore, slavery must not have been all bad. A lot of Americans had to die to fight before the law was changed and black people were freed of their bonds. Sadly, a lot of people who call themselves Christians still justify the poor treatment of black people, during our modern age, by using the Bible.

Being a black woman married to a white man, the laws that supported anti-miscegenation would have precluded me from marrying the man that I love, much like laws against gay marriage, including the Defense of Marriage Act, that exist today. The old miscegenation laws meant that any marriage between a white person and a black person was illegal and therefore did not have to be recognized in those states that had such laws, much like the anti-gay marriage laws/anti-civil union laws that exist today. No one has ever been able to come up with a compelling argument for why this was/is, except to say that "it's an abomination in the eyes of God" and thus should be illegal. Of course, they still used racial/bigoted excuses, as well (yes, even today) that mixed babies are not as healthy or as smart as pure-blooded white babies. Or that mixing the races thins the blood-lines of Caucasians. But, the strongest argument against "mixing the races" has always been biblical. The bible says that races and religions shouldn't mix and that's all they need to justify the law. (Of course, cavorting with the races and leaving little mixed babies for slavewomen and freedwomen to raise without benefit of the "real" father was just fine...so long as nobody knew "who's your daddy?, i.e., Thomas Jefferson, Strom Thurmond, et. al. It's right up there with "it's o.k. to bash on gay people, so long as nobody knows you're gay, i.e., Mark Foley, et. al.).

Remember alcohol prohibition (the 18th Amendment to the Constitution)? Yeah, some Christian organizations tried to justify it by using the bible, even going so far as to alter the parts of the bible that spoke of alcohol consumption in positive terms!

As I mentioned, previously, the bible is used today to justify discrimination against gay people. The arguments used by those who are anti-gay marriage/civil union all trace back to biblical arguments (not able to procreate, an abomination against God). Very few Christians can come up with one "common sense" (as in, EVERYONE, including atheists, understands "why") for the reason why homosexuals cannot have the right to marry. Of course, as a Libertarian, I am aware that there are more secular, yet political reasons, to be against the enforcement of any law that is either for or against gay marriage, but, as I have mentioned before, the strongest arguments against allowing homosexuals to marry (or have any legal rights as a couple/family) usually come from bible-thumping bigots.

I'll bet you didn't know that several state constitutions actually do prohibit atheists from serving in government. This affects me a great deal since I am an atheist.

I could go on forever about the laws that try to keep women from getting abortions.

Despite the First Amendment:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.,

laws throughout the history of the United States have had a theocratic bent.

There are a lot of Christians (particularly those who follow along behind Dobson, Falwell and Robertson) who claim that their religious beliefs are under attack. Yet, the evidence, encased in current laws show that is not the case. Our money is graced with the statement "In God We Trust", where the collective "we" is all citizens of the United States, but obviously, the coin of the realm does not speak for me. Our children (and some adults) are forced to say the Pledge of Allegiance and/or put their hand over their heart in a silent pledge to the flag when the "colors are presented" in public places, including schools and at sporting (and even military) events. Of course, there are some "Christian" religions (including Jehovah's Witnesses) who have a problem with this swearing allegiance to anything other than God. What about being sworn in, in a court of law? The Christian bible is the book of choice in courtrooms across the country, with very little exception. But, Jehovah's Witnesses, who do consider themselves Christians do not like swearing on a stack of bibles. As far as an atheist like me, how on earth can I swear an oath upon something I do not believe in as sacred? I may as well swear upon a stack of "Playboy's".

While I am speaking of other religions that consider themselves "Christian" it is fair to ask ourselves that if we are a "Christian Nation" which "Christian Faith" are our laws supposed to be following? Just like the vast number of churches that consider themselves "Christian", every one of them would prefer that the "religious-based" laws of this country would reflect their particular faith. All we need do is look at Iraq and see that a "Muslim is not just a Muslim"...when you insist on making the laws after your own faith, somebody is definitely going to take umbrage to those laws.

There are so many other topics I could cover on the issue of theocracy, but I think that I have ranted enough for one day. All I know for sure is that I do not want my children growing up in a world where religion, as law, takes up their daily lives including issues of their personal health, personal love lives, and even the religion that they choose to adhere to in the future.