Clinton Speaks about Bush-

[sleepyjeff]

Originally Posted by wendybeth

Many of the early settlers of this country also experienced life in a country that was taken over by religious zealots for a period of time. They knew what it was like to have one ruling religion, and I see that 'little line' as a protection against such a type of government. Tell me, would either of you be so eager to have religion play a larger role in government if that religion was Islam?

I see your point. I guess to me I have always read it "freedom of religon" not "freedom from religon"....although to some I suppose there is no difference. One of those shoe things I suppose

[flippyshark]

Originally Posted by sleepyjeff

I see your point. I guess to me I have always read it "freedom of religon" not "freedom from religon"....although to some I suppose there is no difference. One of those shoe things I suppose

Yes Sleepyjeff! Keep nudging your thoughts in this direction. Because Freedom OF Religion and Freedom FROM Religion are MUTUALLY INCLUSIVE, in fact they are pretty much the exact same thing and they are both necessary! We must be certain that both are guaranteed.

I've never understood those who separate the two, and who, on occasion, tell me that my freedom FROM religion is not included. Really? I thought that personal beliefs were supposed to come from one's deepest moral, intellectual and spiritual convictions. You just can't mandate that one way or the other. In my case, earnest inquiry has led me to conclude that there aren't any gods or skyhooks, and I treasure my right not to participate in the celebration of same. (And no, I don't accept that atheism is a religion. To say it is makes the word religion pretty much meaningless. Though, if it IS a religion, I guess it's protected, eh?)

I couldn't be happier that such a mind-boggling array of churches and sects flourish in this country, and I'm not in the least bothered when politicians allow their own faiths to guide their decisions. I am free to disagree when necessary. As long as they leave the establishment clause alone. That is sacred sacred sacred!

[sleepyjeff]

Originally Posted by flippyshark

Yes Sleepyjeff! Keep nudging your thoughts in this direction. Because Freedom OF Religion and Freedom FROM Religion are MUTUALLY INCLUSIVE, in fact they are pretty much the exact same thing and they are both necessary! We must be certain that both are guaranteed.

Wow....at first I was saying who dredged up this old thread....but then I realized who

So long as we agree that "both" includes "of" I guess I can kinda agree with your thoughts here.