Theocracy, Pluralism and Religious Neutrality

BarbWire published a column by a nobody named Michael Ware raging against the decision by a Florida school to do away with literature distribution from outside groups because, by allowing Christian groups in they had to allow others, including atheists and satanists, in as well. He takes the standard Christian Reconstructionist position.

What has to be understood is that this kind of foolishness is the end results of a pluralistic society. Those who believe anything will eventually lose their freedom to express that belief. Pluralism is a lie that is to lead to the silencing of religion. The reasoning is simple.

If we want absolute religious freedom, then everything, which can be claimed as a religion, has to be allowed. But this is not what these people want. Pluralists do not want to expose their children to every religion. In order to stop religious pluralism, the atheist has only to bring out the provocative material: Those things we do not want our children exposed to. When that happens, the pluralist caves.

This gives the atheist what he wants, the void of religion. However, he does not realize that the worship of man is a religion. Humanism is the worst religion of all. It leads to the death of the object worshiped in the name of that object’s elevation. It is the rejection of man for the idea of man. The idea of “what he can be,” leads to the murder of those who do not fit that mold.

Until we recognize that the idea of pluralism is empty and unattainable, we will continue to be silenced by such tactics. We have to hold to the truth once again. Not every idea is valid. Because it is absurd to demand that all ideas or beliefs are equal, it leads to the absurd. Only truth from Scripture is valid and can save us from such absurdity.

For the Christian theocrat, they simply can’t imagine a society in which the government stays neutral on matters of religion. Public schools that stay out of religious matters and leave those up to each individual and each family is inconceivable to them because what they seek is government coercion to impose their religious beliefs on everyone else. This statement echoes almost exactly the one made by Gary North, the leading Christian Reconstructionist in the country:

So let us be blunt about it: we must use the doctrine of religious liberty to gain independence for Christian schools until we train up a generation of people who know that there is no religious neutrality, no neutral law, no neutral education, and no neutral civil government. Then they will get busy constructing a Bible-based social, political, and religious order which finally denies the religious liberty of the enemies of God. Murder, abortion, and pornography will be illegal. God’s law will be enforced.

At least they’re not hiding it.

POPULAR AT PATHEOS Nonreligious
What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • karmacat

    I suspect these people feel less doubt about their religion if everyone around them believes the same thing.

  • tvoyumat

    @ karmacat

    Agreed. If they were happy and content in their faiths, they wouldn’t be such shrill, braying asses about it. They know that they have no real argument, no real answers, no real anything to offer, so they shout, scream, and threaten.

  • my2cents

    I think for Christians it’s inconceivable that I and many atheist think Christianity is equally as absurd as satanism or any other religion for that matter. So for me if you’re going to allow Christian literature you have to allow all other supernatural literature or none. Those are the choices, all or none and because they are so offended this school chose none. Now he’s reframing it to make Christians out to be victims when in reality this is one example of them being treated like everyone else for a change.

  • dingojack

    “… the atheist has only to bring out the provocative material: Those things we do not want our children exposed to… ”

    And so, Mr Ware, what exactly were you ‘protecting your children’ from?

    Dingo

  • Michael Heath

    Check-out the comment section to the article that Ed links to in his blog post: http://barbwire.com/2015/01/22/0630-florida-school-district-discovers-religious-pluralism-not-possible/#.

    John Pieret, who frequently comments here, and some others are devastating both Michael Ware’s argument and the handful who agree with Mr. Ware.

  • Sastra

    Humanism is the worst religion of all. It leads to the death of the object worshiped in the name of that object’s elevation. It is the rejection of man for the idea of man. The idea of “what he can be,” leads to the murder of those who do not fit that mold.

    The religious don’t seem capable of conceiving of any system which is not aimed at a Utopian perfection. This guy’s a Christian Reconstructionist, but there have been recent criticisms of gnu atheism coming from the Spiritual Left which essentially say the same thing. If humanists aim at more and more improvement then we must have some glittering, unachievable Noble Ideal at the end, a vision of perfection for which we will invariably kill off the weak and unfit. There’s no other possibility, because atheists can get passionate and eloquent about the superiority of their views. That means dogma and violence.

    It’s like talking about a “war on poverty” or a campaign against illiteracy and constantly running into people who insist you’re trying to kill the poor and round up people who don’t like to read and put them in death camps — because obvious connection.

  • theguy

    @6

    Fundie dumbasses like to pretend that humanism is somehow responsible for eugenics or Naziism. To be fair, could you find a self-described humanist who supports that? Possibly. You could also find self-described humanists who adamantly oppose eugenics and killing the poor.

    I imagine you’ll find (per capita) more humanists than American Christians who support disability insurance and a social safety net for all.

  • John Pieret

    Michael:

    Thanks for noticing. The interesting thing about BarbedWire is, perhaps because of the attention it is paid to by RWW, that the comments section is often heavily against or, at least, equally divided among those who favor or oppose the original (usually rabidly) religious right authors. It is actually an opportunity to dent the usual echo chamber on such sites. It’s worth the effort.

  • Sastra

    theguy #7 wrote:

    To be fair, could you find a self-described humanist who supports that? Possibly.

    The significant factor in humanism isn’t that humanists can’t hold wrong or appalling views, but that humanism entails that there’s constant debate on controversial issues. Anyone who genuinely held a view that eugenics is scientifically valid is in deep trouble if they sit down at the discussion table and look at enough peer-review literature for long enough. The Nazis and other such Utopian projects didn’t come out of a desire to reason and reason together: they sprung from Romantic rejections of the cold and insufficiently intuitive values of the Enlightenment.

  • U Frood

    God’s law will be enforced? By the government? Is that what they want? Isn’t the government supposedly incompetent and they want to place the government in charge of interpreting the Bible so it can enforce God’s law?

  • dingojack

    “… it was done by arrogance, it was done by dogma, it was done by ignorance. When people believe they have absolute knowledge, with no test in reality, this is how they behave.This what men do when they aspire to the knowledge of gods.” – Jacob Bronowski.

    Dingo

  • bushrat

    I do love when these idiots unintentional say true things.

    Pluralism is a lie that is to lead to the silencing of religion. The reasoning is simple.

    Yes, the simple reason is that your religion is false bullshit created to control the lower class, and keep kings and priests in power. It should be silent, because it’s stupidity should embarrass you, yet you keep talking.

    Not every idea is valid. Because it is absurd to demand that all ideas or beliefs are equal, it leads to the absurd.

    Truer words, unfortunately he seems to think his particular brand of bullshit smells sweeter than other peoples bullshit. The absurdity of a Christian Reconstructionist criticizing other peoples ideas as invalid is lost on this dolt.

  • U Frood

    Waiting for the next birther controversy when Canadian born Ted Cruz runs for president, should get just as much attention as the Panama-born John McCain.

  • U Frood

    oops, wrong thread