“Atheistic Fundamentalism”?
D.A. Ridgely on Dec 23rd 2007
One suspects he’s not entirely clear on the concepts, perhaps because Great Britain doesn’t have a written constitution with phrases like “separation of church and state” in it. (Oh, wait a minute — that phrase isn’t in our Constitution either, is it?) But it’s at least refreshing to hear an Anglican archbishop from somewhere other than Africa or Asia trying to defend Christianity these days.
(Hat tip to memeorandum.)
Filed in The Belfry
Atheists at the Gates!…
Islamic fundamentalists fly planes into buildings. Christian fundamentalists blow up abortion clinics. But most frightening of all is the atheistic variant……
Oh, common, the constitution doesn’t say
“Innocent until proven guilty”, “Freedom of expression”, “Right to travel”, “Right to privacy”, “Right to vote”, “Separation Of Powers”, “checks and balances” etc. either but that doesn’t mean the constitution doesn’t support those concepts. They are phrases utilized to summarize or represent concepts in the constitution even though those phrases aren’t actually in the text.
In this particular case, I’m rather less interested in the somewhat silly manner and choice of words with which the good archbishop expressed his dismay than the, trust me, highly unusual occurrence of an Anglican archbishop actually sticking up for the ‘product’ he is supposedly in the business of supporting. It is, I hasten to add, largely irrelevant to that point whether one approves of the business or thinks the archbishop’s perspective, argument or phrasing are poor.
Yes, the U.S. Constitution certainly does admit of those interpretations, though I would argue some of them more properly than others. The far more interesting question, however, is whether there are any fixed limits whatever to what the U.S. Constitution can be read to support or permit.
You won’t be surprised to hear, in my view the establishment clause is one of the most unpopular clauses of the first amendment for the wrong reasons. The reason it is unpopular is that most people don’t respect non-Christian compatable metaphysical beliefs and consider it to be wrong to give such beliefs equal civic standing with Christian compatable monotheism. As long as EC enforcement ends where establishment of Christian compatable monotheism begins it is acceptable to the majority of Americans. It is certainly not the case that the EC principle ends where Christian compatable monotheism begins in the text of the constitution, nor is it the case that so limiting EC enforcement to favor majority religious belief is fairer or more just.
Explicit Atheist:
Most people, Americans being no exception, are shaky at best when it comes to tolerating differences of any sort. It’s the human condition. I have no doubt the Bill of Rights would not pass a popular vote intact. In fact, it’s difficult to say off hand which parts might survive.
BTW, I think a good case can be made for the notion that it is precisely because we do not have an established religion that religion is so much more pervasive in American society than in Western Europe where established churches are to varying degrees the norm.
Of course, you are right about tolerating differences, it requires a self-confidence about other, minority beliefs or the sophistication to not define oneself primarily by one’s religious beliefs. Many people don’t understand minority beliefs that conflict with their beliefs and define themselves largely by their religious beliefs. Even when the Bill of Rights was drafted, it was controversial, the establishment clause underwent multiple revisions that made it more vague prior to its final form, and the BoR was probably so universally approved at least in part because it couldn’t be enforced on the states.
Establishment of religions takes many forms and occurs in many different contexts, so I think any generalizations like this are probably oversimplifications. Nevertheless, it is my view that while established churches may tend to make religion less popular, government establishment of a more generic Christian compatable monotheism may tend to make religion more popular. So I do think establishment of Christian compatable monotheism could be having an impact here no less than establishment of churches could be having an impact in the opposite direction in some of Europe.