Secularism.

[Zguy28]

I disagree.

Take the example of pre-game ceremonies before a high school football game. Not having a Christian prayer is not anti-religion, it's recognising in a diverse society that such matters are best kept private to avoid favoring one religion or belief system over another.

E pluribus unum.

That's fine, but I think you are wrong.

http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/secularism

Secularism: indifference to or rejection or exclusion of religion and religious considerations

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/secularism

3 results for: secularism

Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1)

–noun

1. secular spirit or tendency, esp. a system of political or social philosophy that rejects all forms of religious faith and worship.

2. the view that public education and other matters of civil policy should be conducted without the introduction of a religious element.

American Heritage Dictionary

n.

1. Religious skepticism or indifference.

2. The view that religious considerations should be excluded from civil affairs or public education.

WordNet

noun

a doctrine that rejects religion and religious considerations

WordNet® 3.0, © 2006 by Princeton University.

[Baculus]

A five syllable word, Baculus? Five syllables?

I don't know that ES can handle that. Over in the tailgate, half the rats are fleeing the ship with 4-2 record. We've got twice as many victories as losses and their abandoning the season. That's not even fairweather... I don't know what that is.

And you expect people to deal with a concept that takes five syllables to pronounce? You got to be kidding me.

Hehe. That is why we have the Tailgate mafia: Gotta keep out those riffraff!

[Baculus]

That's fine, but I think you are wrong.

http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/secularism

Secularism: indifference to or rejection or exclusion of religion and religious considerations

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/secularism

3 results for: secularism

Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1)

–noun

1. secular spirit or tendency, esp. a system of political or social philosophy that rejects all forms of religious faith and worship.

2. the view that public education and other matters of civil policy should be conducted without the introduction of a religious element.

American Heritage Dictionary

n.

1. Religious skepticism or indifference.

2. The view that religious considerations should be excluded from civil affairs or public education.

WordNet

noun

a doctrine that rejects religion and religious considerations

WordNet® 3.0, © 2006 by Princeton University.

In practical terms, secularism is used in reference to exclusion of religion from government and related state departments, e.g. "The view that religious considerations should be excluded from civil affairs or public education." And this still relates to "Separation of Church and State."

This still says nothing about one's private worship.

[Zguy28]

Many secularists are atheists or agnostic: That may be true. But most Western societies are considered to be secularist societies, and we have yet to see a large anti-religious expunging that you saw in the Soviet Union or China. I think part of the problem has to do with people's sensitivities and what's perceived as an attack on religion, or religion encroaching into the public life.

You have to remember, again, that secularism includes the separation of Church and State: That does not mean the separation of the citizens from the Church.

A person in a secular society can easily have faith and go to church: Just don't expect to have your religious party or church running the government.

You asked about secularism. Secularism is atheistic and or agnostic. It excludes religion. I never said it was an attack on the church, which isn't secular. :2cents:

[Zguy28]

This still says nothing about one's private worship.

Exactly right.

But what do you do when your faith is what drives you and is integral in your thought process? And also is based on publicly sharing it?

Or, what if your faith isn't in organized religion but in a philosophy of man?

[alexey]

I disagree. I believe secularism by its very nature is atheistic or at the least agnostic.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atheism

Are you talking about atheism as affirmation of nonexistance of gods or atheism as absense of belief in dieties?

It seems secularism would have much more in common with the "absense of belief" one rather than the "affirmation of nonexsistance" one.

[Baculus]

Exactly right.

But what do you do when your faith is what drives you and is integral in your thought process? And also is based on publicly sharing it?

Or, what if your faith isn't in organized religion but in a philosophy of man?

In a secular system, you can still go out and express your Freedom of Expression and share it with the public.

In reference to your first and last statement, I am not sure how I am supposed to answer that question, nor am I unsure if the direction of the questions. I am not sure how they relate to the secularism, since your can still practice your faith, whether it is organized religion, or whatever you may hold in your heart.

[Baculus]

You asked about secularism. Secularism is atheistic and or agnostic. It excludes religion. I never said it was an attack on the church, which isn't secular. :2cents:

Keep in mind that some folks who support secularism are believers of one faith or another. I agree that secularism is atheistic to a degree, but, again, you can have the practical application of secularism without an atheistic society.

[Tulane Skins Fan]

If someone wants to tell me which religion the Constitution says this country follows, I would love to hear it. Until then, you can't tell me that this country is supposed to be a theocracy in any sense, because you can't tell me which religion we are, as a country.

The fact is, this is an atheist GOVERNMENT. And, that government has decided that INDIVIDUALS should be able to follow whatever religion they wish to, without fear of doig so.

[Zguy28]

If someone wants to tell me which religion the Constitution says this country follows, I would love to hear it. Until then, you can't tell me that this country is supposed to be a theocracy in any sense, because you can't tell me which religion we are, as a country.

The fact is, this is an atheist GOVERNMENT. And, that government has decided that INDIVIDUALS should be able to follow whatever religion they wish to, without fear of doig so.

I don't think anybody in this thread is disagreeing with you. So far.

[Zguy28]

Keep in mind that some folks who support secularism are believers of one faith or another.

Of course.

I'm speaking of the idea of secularism itself.

[The_cavalierman]

Our founding fathers were smart enough to take the lessons learned from religion dominated governments in Europe.

The founding fathers decided that in order to have a functional government that would fit a society that welcomed people of all faiths or none that the government needed to be free of religion.

Religion is a personal thing that people practice at home, in church or in their everyday interactions with others. That is the only way so many people of so many different faiths or no faith can peacefully co-exsist.

The founding fathers knew what they were doing when they built a secular government while providing religious freedom.

[Predicto]

The fact is, this is an atheist GOVERNMENT. And, that government has decided that INDIVIDUALS should be able to follow whatever religion they wish to, without fear of doig so.

Actually, I would say that it is an agnostic government. An athiest affirmatively denies the existence of God.

[ACW]

Secularism is fine. Forced secularism is as bad as forced religion. And for the record, I'm a quite secular, somewhat-practicing, reform Jew.

Baculus, what were the comments that started this thread?

[Baculus]

Chuck wrote the following:

"Though Giuliani might be savvy enough to lead people, Fred Thompson wise enough to wade through the tides of politics, McCain tough enough to fight terrorism and Romney business-minded enough to grow our economy, I believe the only one who has all of the characteristics to lead America forward into the future is ex-Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee,” Norris wrote on the conservative Web site World Net Daily.

Mike is also a respected and fearless leader, and he does not cower to the cries of any majority or minority,” Norris added. “He doesn't abandon his values for what's expedient. Like our Founding Fathers, he's not afraid to stand up for a Creator and against secularist beliefs."

http://wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=58255

[Zguy28]

Like our Founding Fathers, he's not afraid to stand up for a Creator and against secularist beliefs."

http://wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=58255

TO be honest, minus the Founding Fathers reference, I don't think what he said is much different than what Destino said. I'm sure Des is cringing right now.

Move towards the light Destino...:laugh:

Seriously, a lot of evangelicals like Huckabee just because he's not afraid to come out and say his faith drives him. Plus he used to be a baptist minister. :2cents:

[twa]

Actually, I would say that it is an agnostic government. An athiest affirmatively denies the existence of God.

Thanks, glad someone else addressed that.

agnostic is much closer to what this government was set up to be.