Reader comments
LDS told to ready for secularism fight
100 comments | Read story
- Page:
- < Previous
- 1
- 2
Anonymous | 2:20 p.m. Dec. 12, 2007
Give me a break, Lynn Tilton!
Instead of preaching "they are out to get us" nonsense, why not just for once take a look and see what the organization just might be doing that is wrong?
And yes, I know, I know, "this is what you are told would happen in the last days."
Instead of preaching "they are out to get us" nonsense, why not just for once take a look and see what the organization just might be doing that is wrong?
And yes, I know, I know, "this is what you are told would happen in the last days."
Ronald | 2:35 p.m. Dec. 12, 2007
To me, this debate using loaded terms such as secularists and conservatives and
moralists and amoralists misses the mark, whereas discussing detailed social
studies proving the effects of moral and immoral behavior;the effects of
removing one's concept of God or lack of responsibility to God contrasted
against the scientific study of the social effects of believing one is
accountable to God;and the effects of enlightened knowledge for the improvement
of mankind, seems, to me, to be the more important issue, because, to me, this
implies one is helping and persuading more than one is attacking and debating
and contending. Surely if there is a God and his influence in one's
personal life can be tangibly felt through the light of Christ and the
whisperings of the comforting and peaceful Holy Ghost, that is a beautiful and
wonderful thing; however, we do a disservice to the pursuit of truth if we try
to position the honest in heart pursuing both spiritual and secular knowledge of
truth as it really is,was,and will be, as improper a thing to use one's
brain. As someone one said, "God either stands revealed or remains forever
unknown," but surely no one can debate against good research.
Comments continue below
Anonymous | 2:42 p.m. Dec. 12, 2007
All this "debate" (if you want to call it that) means is that Rush
Limbaugh has a huge audience of fools here in Utah.
A definition of Secularism | 2:55 p.m. Dec. 12, 2007
According to the dictionary, "secularism" is: indifference to or
rejection or exclusion of religion and religious considerations.
In modern context, secularism is the rejection of religion in favor of the human body of knowledge. It is adherence to reason over faith.
Secularism is, by definition, amoral. Amoral does not mean evil. It means without morals. Since there is no common moral standard, each secularist can define his/her own moral code or none at all (just roll with the punches).
One secularist may reject smoking and another may accept it. One may reject homosexuality and another accept it. One may reject philanthropy and another accept it. The same is true for hunting, alcohol consumption, pre-marital sex, industrialization, homosexuality, war, etc. Since there is no common morality, secularists are amoral by definition.
That being said, many secularists are great people. Mormons would consider them to be moral as measured against the LDS moral code as would evangelicals, Jews, Muslims, etc as measured against each of their moral codes.
Bottom line: Religionists need to quit viewing Secularists as evil and Secularists need to quit pretending they have a moral code. Each Secularist calls his own shots.
In modern context, secularism is the rejection of religion in favor of the human body of knowledge. It is adherence to reason over faith.
Secularism is, by definition, amoral. Amoral does not mean evil. It means without morals. Since there is no common moral standard, each secularist can define his/her own moral code or none at all (just roll with the punches).
One secularist may reject smoking and another may accept it. One may reject homosexuality and another accept it. One may reject philanthropy and another accept it. The same is true for hunting, alcohol consumption, pre-marital sex, industrialization, homosexuality, war, etc. Since there is no common morality, secularists are amoral by definition.
That being said, many secularists are great people. Mormons would consider them to be moral as measured against the LDS moral code as would evangelicals, Jews, Muslims, etc as measured against each of their moral codes.
Bottom line: Religionists need to quit viewing Secularists as evil and Secularists need to quit pretending they have a moral code. Each Secularist calls his own shots.
Joy | 3:06 p.m. Dec. 12, 2007
To the Iroquois law student: I do not doubt that your people have many good
principles to teach about governing. Luckily, we have the list of books that
Jefferson and Madison read since they kept such good journals. We've read
and studied many of them and can see that these great men sifted out basic
principles of freedom that, I assume, your people also have practiced. Some say
that the Constitution was written for the eighteenth century agrarian society
and needs to be changed for modern challenges. Those men did not design
political truths only for their time, but actually discovered the under-girding
principles of freedom that will work for any moral people, as John Adams stated.
I have a great deal of respect for many Native American peoples and in fact,
love to study their traditions and beliefs.
Anonymous | 3:13 p.m. Dec. 12, 2007
None of this is going to get Romney into the White House. So focus on yourselves
and how you can be better human beings.
Oh, by the way, after reading thousands of "there is no global warming" statements on these blogs, Mitt Romney on this afternoon's debate admitted global warming was real and that we better do something about it.
Oh, by the way, after reading thousands of "there is no global warming" statements on these blogs, Mitt Romney on this afternoon's debate admitted global warming was real and that we better do something about it.
Reality | 3:13 p.m. Dec. 12, 2007
BYU needs to do a better job of selecting guest lecturers. To try to rally the
studtent body to defeat secularism is extrem. It sounds like the days of
Orderville, Utah and the Mormon experiment with the law of concecration.
Anonymous | 3:29 p.m. Dec. 12, 2007
Why read all the book? I admit it! I would never fit in to Mormon culture. I
don't feel like a victim enough to be successful. I would get deeply
depressed thinking the world is out to get me.
I live in a nation were people can freely find me disagreeable. I wouldn't change that. I come from a family that entered Utah in 1847. We took great pride in having different ideas. I learned to not measure my beliefs by the yard stick used by others.
Thank you for printing these commits. I'm a native Utah that sees I could never fit in to LDS culture in Utah. I don't have the meanness. Name calling and back bitting seem sophomoric to me. I'm glad there is a place in America where people with these characteristics fit in.
I live in a nation were people can freely find me disagreeable. I wouldn't change that. I come from a family that entered Utah in 1847. We took great pride in having different ideas. I learned to not measure my beliefs by the yard stick used by others.
Thank you for printing these commits. I'm a native Utah that sees I could never fit in to LDS culture in Utah. I don't have the meanness. Name calling and back bitting seem sophomoric to me. I'm glad there is a place in America where people with these characteristics fit in.
Disgusting | 3:34 p.m. Dec. 12, 2007
This kind of hateful input is the reason this country is so divided. I may not
approve of your lifestyle and you may not approve of mine, but at least you
don't see me rallying people to "fight" against it. This is
America, and you have the right to your religion just as I have the right to not
have a religion. And that doesn't make me immoral. I don't do bad
things because they are bad, not because I am afraid of being spanked by an
invisible master.
Anonymous | 3:56 p.m. Dec. 12, 2007
Home run Anonymous 3:29!
If I were to run into you somewhere,
I'd buy you a drink or three.
My wife (a former Mormon) and I left that area a few years ago and except for the relatives we left behind don't care if we ever go back to that god-forsaken place again.
If I were to run into you somewhere,
I'd buy you a drink or three.
My wife (a former Mormon) and I left that area a few years ago and except for the relatives we left behind don't care if we ever go back to that god-forsaken place again.
To Disgusting: | 4:14 p.m. Dec. 12, 2007
Have you considered that you are part of the problem when you make a
condescending statement like your last post?
Like you, I am not "afraid of being spanked by an invisible master." What an arrogant thing to say.
Just like you, I regularly decide the kind of person I want to be. You probably have your sources and references that provide you guidance whether it be parents, teachers, celebrities, great pieces of literature, or whatever. For me, one source of guidance is my religion.
You aren't helping the dialog when you presume to be better or somehow more altruistic than are religious adherents.
Like you, I am not "afraid of being spanked by an invisible master." What an arrogant thing to say.
Just like you, I regularly decide the kind of person I want to be. You probably have your sources and references that provide you guidance whether it be parents, teachers, celebrities, great pieces of literature, or whatever. For me, one source of guidance is my religion.
You aren't helping the dialog when you presume to be better or somehow more altruistic than are religious adherents.
Mark in AZ | 4:16 p.m. Dec. 12, 2007
Truth is truth. Mormons and other enlightened churches, groups, and persons are
in the same corner! Too bad the corner is shrinking!
Anonymous | 4:21 p.m. Dec. 12, 2007
Fascism has definitely made an entry into America.
Do a google search on the 14 points of Fascism and see what I mean.
Here is point #8
Religion and Government are Intertwined: Governments in fascist nations tend to use the most common religion in the nation as a tool to manipulate public opinion. Religious rhetoric and terminology is common from government leaders, even when the major tenets of the religion are diametrically opposed to the government's policies or actions.
Do a google search on the 14 points of Fascism and see what I mean.
Here is point #8
Religion and Government are Intertwined: Governments in fascist nations tend to use the most common religion in the nation as a tool to manipulate public opinion. Religious rhetoric and terminology is common from government leaders, even when the major tenets of the religion are diametrically opposed to the government's policies or actions.
Anonymous | 4:34 p.m. Dec. 12, 2007
I wonder if Randall really believes in Darwin. If he does he will acknowledge
that in Darwin's last edition of his landmark book on the origin of species
he admits that the gene pool is not large enough for his origional ideas to
work. He states that there must be something else at work. What, maybe a
higher power?
Randy | 4:38 p.m. Dec. 12, 2007
Let's all become Muslims, they make most Christians look like secularists.
Kevin | 4:46 p.m. Dec. 12, 2007
Just prove your god exists, and have it pay us a visit, and then everything will
be settled. Until then, please be quiet.
Curious | 4:51 p.m. Dec. 12, 2007
to anonymous 3:56pm
If you are so happy to have left the area, why are you reading this newspaper which reports news of this community and contributing to the threads?
If you are so happy to have left the area, why are you reading this newspaper which reports news of this community and contributing to the threads?
Anonymous | 4:51 p.m. Dec. 12, 2007
I got a good laugh out of Anonymous 3:29 's comment. He is a textbood
example of a hypocrite. He reminds me of the Mormon missionary I once ran into
who told me that he was extremely successful because he was so humble.
Anonymous | 5:40 p.m. Dec. 12, 2007
Dear Curious -
I happened to have relatives and other loved ones that I worry about who are still behind the Zion Curtain.
I don't believe in giving up when there are so many poor souls that need help.
Its just another one of my character flaws I guess.
I happened to have relatives and other loved ones that I worry about who are still behind the Zion Curtain.
I don't believe in giving up when there are so many poor souls that need help.
Its just another one of my character flaws I guess.
Anonymous | 5:45 p.m. Dec. 12, 2007
On more than one occasion, Buddhists from Tibet were in Salt Lake City. Their
insight and intuition told them there was a darkness here. They tried their best
to do what they could, but in Buddhist terms, the individual must take the
inward journey to cleanse their way of thinking. It's an internal vs.
external thing.
I am sorry to say, the Buddhist monks had wasted their time.
I am sorry to say, the Buddhist monks had wasted their time.
smiling in awe | 5:57 p.m. Dec. 12, 2007
anon 5:40pm
You need to read about it instead of talking to them? I am sad to hear that you believe your relatives' and friends to be "poor souls". You sound like a caring person.
You need to read about it instead of talking to them? I am sad to hear that you believe your relatives' and friends to be "poor souls". You sound like a caring person.
Anonymous | 5:59 p.m. Dec. 12, 2007
While I consider myself to be spiritually inclined, I can easily recognize that
the Lockean notion that so-called secularists are inherently amoral is flawed.
Religions have long been major sources of moral ideas, but they are not the only
sources. One's own conscience can be a source of moral behavior just as
easily as a code someone writes down and preaches to others. Moreover, most
people who claim to be "moral" on the basis of a specific code are
merely fooling themselves -- just look at how many people who claim to be
Christians go apopleptic over pulling the feeding tube out of a permanently
vegetated nursing home patient but are fully supportive of bombing other
people's children. To be sure, examples like this confirm the fact that
most (if not all) religious people are actually at least as morally flexible as
the so-called secularists they deride as immoral or amoral. Small wonder that
religion has lost so much of its credibility -- too many of its practitioners
behave hypocritically while passing judgment on others who do not share the same
beliefs. It's truly sad.
Anonymous | 6:05 p.m. Dec. 12, 2007
The saddest part of all is how LDS people treat their own kind. If their
brothers and sisters cannot come up with tithing money - the poor souls cannot
enter the temple.
Claire | 6:25 p.m. Dec. 12, 2007
Obedience to the law of tithing can be as humble a sum as a poor widow's
mite. That is why we have personal and private meetings with our Leaders so
that our worthiness to enter into the temple may be judged according to our own
merits NOT according to how that humble sum compares to that of the richest
among us.
RonRook | 7:52 p.m. Dec. 12, 2007
It's amazing how things don't change. Way up here in the panhandle of
Idaho, we have several so-called Christian churches who actively spend time in
their classes ripping on what few Mormons happen to live here. And yet, the
Mormons haven't(as a matter of policy) spent any air ripping on the
secularists. Yes, we have our little problems just like everyone else. The
difference is(at least here in snowy north Idaho) we aren't the main
culture and therefore don't dictate the rules. We like our mostly
non-mormon neighbors and are actively involved in civic to-dos. We don't
make excuses for how we believe and we respect the responsible beliefs of
others. I lived in Utah and was a policeman for 15 years in the Salt Lake
valley. I can proudly say I am a recovering (active)Utah Mormon. I neither
care or am in any form concerned by what a few critics will say about my faith.
We do the best we can in a world that is happy to criticize me and find
minuscule faults with my beliefs. So what if Romney is found wanting. Show me a
candidate who isn't?
Anonymous | 8:03 p.m. Dec. 12, 2007
Some need the security of a group.
Some do not.
Some do not.
Former Student | 8:37 p.m. Dec. 12, 2007
Dr. Daniel Robinson is one of the most humane, kind, erudite and broad-thinking
men I have ever had the blessing of learning from. What a marvelous intellect,
and a wonderfully decent human being. God bless you, Dr. Robinson.
LC | 9:05 p.m. Dec. 12, 2007
Ditto, Former Student.
True. True. True. Mr. Robinson's statements have not only made my day, they've made my year. Amen. Life is still simple and beautiful when we live simple and true principles. What a glorious discovery simple truth is to those who have never seen or lived it. Truth is timeless.
True. True. True. Mr. Robinson's statements have not only made my day, they've made my year. Amen. Life is still simple and beautiful when we live simple and true principles. What a glorious discovery simple truth is to those who have never seen or lived it. Truth is timeless.
To LC | 9:36 p.m. Dec. 12, 2007
You are correct. In general the simple minded do live simpler lives because in
part they are less consious of time and much like our loved pets they percieve
life more in space than in time; and if they are well trained they learn to obey
and to enjoy a timeless and happy life without giving it a thought.
Lynn Tilton | 9:52 p.m. Dec. 12, 2007
Anyone who contributes comments regarding a news-breaking story should be bold
enough to use his real name. We must not hide behind secrecy. If we dare not
tell others at least our name perhaps it is better we remain silent.
Simply Blind | 10:02 p.m. Dec. 12, 2007
To LC,
Please do not equate simplicity with truth. There can be no guarantee that truth is simple, and certainly not all simple ideas are true. Forgetting that fact may be the most blinding thing about the LDS faith.
Please do not equate simplicity with truth. There can be no guarantee that truth is simple, and certainly not all simple ideas are true. Forgetting that fact may be the most blinding thing about the LDS faith.
To: To LC | 10:20 p.m. Dec. 12, 2007
What was that all about? Simple people live simple lives? Actually no--life is
better enjoyed by living simply. That coming from someone like me(55 years old
with a BS and MBA and an increasingly growing business) The hard knocks of life
teaches us that it's better for our health and overall well-being to live
as uncomplicated as practical. A simpler life allows us the time to actually
think, instead of always reacting. Time spent in reflection, contemplation and
meditation increases one's intellect and understanding. Some of the most
illuminating epiphanies have come to me because I've made time to think.
Let's not be insulting to others. I also enjoyed Mr. Robinson's words
and found great value in what he said.
Ano-name-ity and Freedom | 10:25 p.m. Dec. 12, 2007
Thanks for your opinion, Lynn Tilton (if that is your real name), but a person
would have to be a fool to use their real name if they have anything to say that
might go against the predominant religion. You could lose your job at the Church
universities or other "Mormon companies" in the valley, and be
ostracized by your neighbors, or in some cases people's spouses have left
them when their true feelings about the LDS church have become public.
No, best to use this forum for what it was intended: the FREE expression and exchange of ideas.
No, best to use this forum for what it was intended: the FREE expression and exchange of ideas.
To: Ano | 11:05 p.m. Dec. 12, 2007
Come on....give it a rest. Here we go, that Mormon conspiracy thing again. Did
you know the same idea is alive and well with the Jews in Boston and the
Catholics in everywhere else. And it isn't true over there either. Who
cares if someone disagrees with the church? Nobody. Except for the
universities tho--if they pay your salary, you need to toe the line. If you
can't do that- then you don't have to work there. It's the same
at nearly every religious school in the country. Ooooh! watch out for the
Mormon mafia. Or else! Come on...give me a break
Woody | 12:39 a.m. Dec. 13, 2007
The problem with Secularists is not that they don't care about religion.
It's when they care so much about religion that they feel the need to
attack it and limit other people's freedom to practise it. What Robinson is
asking is that we prepare ourselves better to counter the arguments of
Secularism and to be more aware of the threat that it poses.
In addition to Agressive Secularism we need to be aware of two other threats to our society from non-Secular sources:
1. Immoral Religionists whose hypocrisy, once exposed, undermines faith in the weak and trust in the unconverted. E.g. child abusing clergy, greedy & immoral telemarketervangelists, greedy & lying Creation Science publishers
2. Adherents of Immoral Religions who sincerely believe that God permits them to do evil. E.g. Sharia-believing Muslims, amoral Scientologists & extreme Calvinists who think their 'saved by grace' 'get out of hell free' card means they can do no wrong, preaching hate & fear, picketing temples & funerals, burning churches & maintaining racial segregation (yeah I'm looking at you, SBC!).
In addition to Agressive Secularism we need to be aware of two other threats to our society from non-Secular sources:
1. Immoral Religionists whose hypocrisy, once exposed, undermines faith in the weak and trust in the unconverted. E.g. child abusing clergy, greedy & immoral telemarketervangelists, greedy & lying Creation Science publishers
2. Adherents of Immoral Religions who sincerely believe that God permits them to do evil. E.g. Sharia-believing Muslims, amoral Scientologists & extreme Calvinists who think their 'saved by grace' 'get out of hell free' card means they can do no wrong, preaching hate & fear, picketing temples & funerals, burning churches & maintaining racial segregation (yeah I'm looking at you, SBC!).
Danbar | 5:31 a.m. Dec. 13, 2007
Randall, In Darwin you trust - In Darwin you will fail! Flesh is weak, in the
spirit you will find strength. That is the message here.
joy | 7:21 a.m. Dec. 13, 2007
i do appreciate you way of thinking and will share with you great kowledge such
as my forefathers of the iroquois shared with the founding fathers..contary to
the prevailing beliefs that natives did not write their history down this could
be farther from the truth. Great recorders existed amongst these way before the
comming of the white man..people such as the mohawk, seneca, onandaga, all the
way through to the cherokee were so successful that they had no need of the new
english language or the trading system that it offered. One must bear in mind
that the people who made up this people along with the land was vast. what is
now present day ny well into canada..all was recorded therefor one will find
many LDS amongst these people dueto their great ability at record keeping such
as in the bom.It is in such poor stories such as Pocohantas which never happened
that the so called conquerors distort the current perceptions. John Smith,
hopefully no relation to Joesph, was a broken down merchant who fabricated a lie
which i cringe everytime that story is told to children. Two histories, one for
natives,one for new comers still exist libraries.
john gilmore | 9:00 a.m. Dec. 13, 2007
the man says
"You must be informed. Adversaries of everything you stand for are often informed, often passionate."
i would submit that the more informed one becomes the less religious and the more secular that person becomes. it is therefore more difficult to find an informed and religious person than it is to find an informed and secular person.
I'm not quite pulling this out of my yknow: among the members of the National Academy of Sciences, comprised of the most elite scientists in the US, 93 percent reject the idea of a personal God as posited by popular religions.
"You must be informed. Adversaries of everything you stand for are often informed, often passionate."
i would submit that the more informed one becomes the less religious and the more secular that person becomes. it is therefore more difficult to find an informed and religious person than it is to find an informed and secular person.
I'm not quite pulling this out of my yknow: among the members of the National Academy of Sciences, comprised of the most elite scientists in the US, 93 percent reject the idea of a personal God as posited by popular religions.
Provo Libertarian | 9:25 a.m. Dec. 13, 2007
As a secular humanist and ex-LDS, I find Romney's speech proclaiming
"freedom frequires religion" offensive and does not even compare to
JFK's 1960 speech that Kennedy emphasizes secularism when he becomes
president, with no religion as his deciding factor on issues. And I find this
article disheartening. Would America need a theocracy? Founding Fathers were
mostly Deists; they opposed the theocratic or autocratic idea of managing the
nation. I for one will never vote for Romney, and I intent to vote for Ron Paul
at the Utah GOP primary February 5th. Mitt Romney, like Rudy, is a RINO and do
not represent the genuine principles of turning America around to be on the
right track to prosperity while eliminating tax waste and abuse and end the
unjust wars. It's politics as usual with empty promises and more disastrous
policies as determined by the ruling oligarch elite.
Dennis | 11:01 a.m. Dec. 13, 2007
I was actually at Dr. Robinson's lecture. Let me clarify a few things for
many of you who have so much to say based on a poorly spun newspaper article.
First, Robinson is hardly the zeal-without-knowledge Christian conservative that some, based on a few out of context quotes, are painting him out to be. He is an intellectual historian who -- I am not exaggerating -- probably has a better grasp on intellectual history than all but maybe 5 people in the world at most.
Second, his speech was hardly the social conservative go-get-them speech that the article makes it out to be. It was a highly sophisticated, intellectual speech regarding the relationship of reason and faith. The Des News just picked out the most politically charged statements.
Third, let me suggest one thing to those who play the "secularism never hurt anyone and it is the religious people who are to blame for everything bad in the world" card. You simply do not understand. There are many (non-religious) books that could help you from renowned scholars. I recommend Heidegger, Levinas, Dreyfuss, or anything from members of the Society of Philosophical and Theoretical Psychology (of which Robinson is a member).
First, Robinson is hardly the zeal-without-knowledge Christian conservative that some, based on a few out of context quotes, are painting him out to be. He is an intellectual historian who -- I am not exaggerating -- probably has a better grasp on intellectual history than all but maybe 5 people in the world at most.
Second, his speech was hardly the social conservative go-get-them speech that the article makes it out to be. It was a highly sophisticated, intellectual speech regarding the relationship of reason and faith. The Des News just picked out the most politically charged statements.
Third, let me suggest one thing to those who play the "secularism never hurt anyone and it is the religious people who are to blame for everything bad in the world" card. You simply do not understand. There are many (non-religious) books that could help you from renowned scholars. I recommend Heidegger, Levinas, Dreyfuss, or anything from members of the Society of Philosophical and Theoretical Psychology (of which Robinson is a member).
Great Secularists and Christians | 1:49 p.m. Dec. 13, 2007
Great secularists have changed the world in remarkably good ways. Many calling
themselvs Christians have brought great evil to the world. Great Christians can
lead others to God. Great secularists cannot. A great Christian who can
communicate with all people because he possesses the knowledge of God and the
knowledge of the world has the greatest power do good in the world.
Anonymous | 2:28 p.m. Dec. 13, 2007
The sooner people learn to mind their own business (especially in religious
affairs) everyone will be better off.
Vox O'Reason | 4:02 p.m. Dec. 13, 2007
I sincerely hope your interpretation of Dr. Robinson's lecture is spot on,
Dennis, because nothing in this life causes more trouble than religious people
getting paranoid because someone told them their faith/beliefs are under attack
from Group X. I'd also like to clear up a few things for a certain few
people: (1) Gay people are not trying to destroy the traditional family -- they
really just want to be left alone and afforded the same rights and liberties as
anyone else. Is that really asking too much? (2) Hollywood liberals are not out
to destroy our cultural fabric -- they're simply doing whatever makes the
most money, an agenda that should make any conservative proud. And (3) If you
want the so-called nuclear family back, I suggest you lobby corporate America to
start paying people well enough again so that one parent can actually stay home
with the kids without risking bankruptcy and destitution. (Good luck with that
one!)
To Vox | 3:25 p.m. Dec. 14, 2007
Seems to me that gay people are not really trying to be left alone but ARE
trying to change the world by using popular media to make homosexuality appear
desirable and "normal." They are recruiting, trying to strengthen
their position in society by influencing children to choose their lifestyle.
This I will fight against. And I hope they don't succeed in harming my
children.
Ben | 4:08 p.m. Dec. 14, 2007
Its pretty sad that all of these "secularists" are so defensive over
one group of people's attempt to grow in knowledge. What are they all
afraid of?
Andy | 9:44 a.m. Dec. 18, 2007
I would like to respond to "To Vox." At the last meeting of All Gay
People International the sub-committee on recruitment of adults did vote to
increase our efforts at making more heterosexuals into homosexuals. We will not
be happy until we take over the world. We did not talk about "influencing
children." Those kind of people are called pedophiles and are a completely
different kind of people, most of whom are heterosexuals.
And, on a more serious note, to those who want the U.S. to be a religious, if not Christian, nation. How do we defend the rights of atheists, who are usually in the minority, to be recognized as good citizens in no less way than religious folk? I am always impressed with the fact that this great nation does not require a religious standard in order to be considered a good citizen. As a religious person I want to make sure this never changes because I want always to be free to practice my religion even if the majority of this nation becomes atheist.
And, on a more serious note, to those who want the U.S. to be a religious, if not Christian, nation. How do we defend the rights of atheists, who are usually in the minority, to be recognized as good citizens in no less way than religious folk? I am always impressed with the fact that this great nation does not require a religious standard in order to be considered a good citizen. As a religious person I want to make sure this never changes because I want always to be free to practice my religion even if the majority of this nation becomes atheist.
Anonymous | 11:12 a.m. Sept. 18, 2009
It seems to me the ultimate secularists were Stalin and Mao. Their idea was to
do away with God and pretty much enslave as many as possible. I believe the
figure of deaths attributed to the pair amount to over 50 million people. Throw
in the secularist Hitler and I’m thinking these kinds of folks give a bad
name to those under the banner of secularism.
Religionists have done their share also but nothing compares to our extremist friends the secularists. It also seems to me that when liberal groups do courageous things like establish voting rights for the victims of racism they too are following Judeo/ Christian principles, even if they do not directly espouse them. To the shame of the religious right they did not lead but followed in securing rights for their fellow man.
We all need to do better. Including me. How about you?
Religionists have done their share also but nothing compares to our extremist friends the secularists. It also seems to me that when liberal groups do courageous things like establish voting rights for the victims of racism they too are following Judeo/ Christian principles, even if they do not directly espouse them. To the shame of the religious right they did not lead but followed in securing rights for their fellow man.
We all need to do better. Including me. How about you?
Anonymous | 11:32 a.m. Sept. 18, 2009
re: California Man | 7:17 a.m. Dec. 12, 2007
//The secularists of Hollywood even in commercials and cartoons consistently portray men as stupid and childish and women as intelligent and super individuals who can have a high paying career and family and juggle it all swimmingly.//
I don't disagree with how Cali Man says Hollywood depicts men at all.
However, the Zion version is not much better. A man who works 8 hrs/ day to support a wife and say 4 kids then has to deal with traffic and then the home life yada yada yada
Well. you can see why Utah has some of the secular issues (drugs, etc...) that they do.
//The secularists of Hollywood even in commercials and cartoons consistently portray men as stupid and childish and women as intelligent and super individuals who can have a high paying career and family and juggle it all swimmingly.//
I don't disagree with how Cali Man says Hollywood depicts men at all.
However, the Zion version is not much better. A man who works 8 hrs/ day to support a wife and say 4 kids then has to deal with traffic and then the home life yada yada yada
Well. you can see why Utah has some of the secular issues (drugs, etc...) that they do.
Anonymous | 11:38 a.m. Sept. 18, 2009
re: Dane | 2:09 p.m. Dec. 12, 2007
>>The Dark Ages were a time of securlarism much like we see in many groups modern day society.
>>The Dark Ages were a time of securlarism much like we see in many groups modern day society.
- Page:
- < Previous
- 1
- 2
Add your comment
Comments are monitored. Any comments found to be abusive, offensive, off-topic, misrepresentative, more than 200 words or containing URLs will not be posted.
Words Remaining
E-mail address: For internal use only. We may want to contact you to publish your comment (not your e-mail address) in the newspaper or for a separate story idea.
Dan Robinson
- SUU museum to honor local artists 6:38 p.m.
- Sub. teacher charged with sex abuse 6:33 p.m.
- Doctor calls Mitchell 'naive,' 'inept' 6:16 p.m.
- Photos: Warming soles 6:10 p.m.
- Eagles, Reid agree to extension 5:52 p.m.
- Ashanti's mom gets lewd messages 5:49 p.m.
- Corbin Bleu to join 'In the Heights' 5:48 p.m.
- Hollywood breaks revenue record 5:47 p.m.
- 'Biggest Loser' sheds 239 pounds 5:46 p.m.
- Strong heading to Louisville 5:42 p.m.
- Hot Rod behind mic for Lakers
- Cougars use depth to beat ASU
- Max Hall wants to look ahead
- Non-BCS schools not given fair shot
- Panel passes BCS playoff bill
- Snow brings big chill
- Doctor calls Mitchell 'naive,' 'inept'
- Palin signs books, chats with fans
- Small plane crashes near Lehi
- Jazz go up against 'the best'
- Y. profs: Beck not all-knowing
291 - Letters: Global warming a lie228
- TCU to play Boise in Fiesta Bowl206
- BYU football: Bronco weighs in on Hall178
- Cougars going back to Vegas150
- Utah/BYU rivalry can be more civil145
- Andersen apologizes for Jordan hoax135
- George lost in rivalry hatefest121
- Max Hall wants to look ahead112
- Ed Smart 'appalled' at testimony100
Love him or hate him, Utah Sen. Orrin Hatch knows how to get attention.
My wife Lisa and I would prefer never to argue. But that's not going to...
For the latest news in the health care debate and how it affects you...
Latest comments
The guy who takes over a half time is much better than Locke. Locke just...
What a bunch of pseudo-intellectual hogwash, it was all pure ad homoninen...
The idea that the top BCS schools maintain a monetary advantage over...
For the love of Pete!!! Why did the D-News publish this article?!
Jimmer did force some bad shots in the first half but after he calmed down he...
I've been spending a lot of time looking at both sides of the debate of...
BCS Bowls are so much fun to be in. They are so prestigous. We know because...
You got it right, Doug. TCU vs. Boise State doesn't allow the non-BCS teams...
You are reading too much anti-LDS rhetoric where things are so narrowly...
There should be a limit on the number of church per square mile. Perhaps...
Advertisements
The task is to encourage those who refuse to do this on their own to become more valiant in caring for members of their own denomination. Whatever the denomination, many suffer with poverty, addiction, destruction of family units, failure to keep the Ten Commandments, etc.
Athiests also should focus on helping those who agree with them rather than engaging in bickering. No matter the belif, when bickering becomes the focus everyone loses.