Note: The letter below is from JC Dufresne of Cibolo in Guadalupe County, near Schertz. Mr. Dufresne is a close watcher of the State Board of Education and board member Ken Mercer. The Board has stirred quite a lot of public interest lately with its proposed controversial changes to our public schools' history textbooks and curriculum – changes like replacing Thomas Jefferson in the history books with Newt Gingrich and Ronald Reagan. Mr. Mercer, a San Antonio conservative, has been a driving force behind some of the changes. He is the District 5 rep on the SBOE, which includes Hays County. The District 5 seat is up for election in November. Mercer's challenger is Rebecca Bell-Metereau of Hays County, a Texas State University professor.
It may be that Mercer is in for a tough challenge and that the Christian Right has reached the point of overstaying its welcome. An ally of Mercer's on the board who "had the blessing of Christian conservatives" lost his bid for re-election in the March 2nd primary. Also, local yocal former state rep and public speaker Rick Green (Dripping Springs) lost his bid big time in last week's run-off election for the Texas Supreme Court. Green was backed heavily by social and religious conservatives.
Meanwhile, the Tea Partiers aren't exactly storming the ramparts in every region of the state. See this interesting local analysis from the San Angelo Standard-Times. Angelo State University, coincidentally, is Rick Green's alma mater.
Send your comments and news tips to roundup.editor@gmail.com, to Mr. Dufresne at jcdufresne@satx.rr.com, or click on the "comments" button at the bottom of the story
To the editor:
Ken Mercer and the other extremist members of the State Board of Education claim that the United States was established as a Christian nation and seek to bring down the wall of separation between church and state. This extremist cabal seems to have forgotten their history lessons regarding one of the primary reasons that many European colonists came to America. We all learned that the Pilgrims came here seeking to escape religious persecution.
The Founding Fathers were not so far removed from the European religious wars between Catholics and Protestant sects all over Europe that they could fail to understand the value of separating religion and the state. In the years 1553 to 1660 there was religiously inspired violence or war between Christian sects somewhere in Europe each year almost without exception.
Mary I, Queen of England (1553-1558), restored Catholicism and in the process had almost 300 religious dissenters burned at the stake in the Marian Persecutions.
In France between 1562 and 1598, there were eight civil wars and other outbreaks of violence that were clearly motivated by religious differences.
The Thirty Years' War (1618-1648), began in Bohemia when Ferdinand II became the king in 1617 over Protestant fears he would recatholicize it.
The English Civil War (1640-1660) involved various Protestant denominations and Catholics and included the beheading of Charles I in 1649.
Ken Mercer doesn’t understand that separation of Church and State protects his freedom of religion and our children’s, but our founders did.
--
JC Dufresne
141 Lindy Hills
Cibolo, TX 78108
210-566-3367
10 comments:
The statement, “We all learned that the Pilgrims came here seeking to escape religious persecution.” is not correct. Re-read your history. The Pilgrims were religious separatists that first left England for Leiden, near Amsterdam. They lived there for 12 years where they enjoyed full religious freedoms. They left Leiden only because of economic conditions there and the promise of land in the New World. They of course brought their religion with them.
After the experience of the New Haven Colony which was a complete fascist theocracy, many New England residents swore to never let that happen again. Consequently, the founders of our great nation were steadfast against religion being a part of government. They allowed for the freedom of and the freedom from religion in the first Amendment.
Many who came to the new world were criminals who volunteered for the journey as more honest people didn't want to ride for months on a wooden sail ship, ridden with rats and disease and being uncomfortable all those months.
I apologize in advance for my next statement being crude, but as long as the majority of the voters are a$$holes who vote for these sort of Education Board Members, you will get a$$holes getting elected. Normal people need to get out there and vote for normals.
It’s always amusing to hear the assertion that this nation was founded by people seeking religious freedom. That is correct to the point that the Puritans were seeking religious freedom for themselves, but not for anyone else. The Puritans were every bit as rigid and ruthless as any religious zealots of today. For example, consider Anne Hutchison, a woman who was persecuted because of her divergence from the Puritan orthodoxy. “Hutchinson preached that one could achieve salvation through a direct intuition from God. Puritan leaders argued salvation could be achieved only by obeying the laws of the church and government. To Hutchinson, the church’s view was a corruption of the true spirit of the Puritan movement and would produce a colony of hypocrites, pious only on the outside…” Both Hutchison and Roger Williams left the Massachusetts Bay Colony in search of the freedom of belief that the Puritan sect had forbidden.
Theocracy didn’t work then and it doesn’t work now. True religious freedom in this country has meant that one is free to hold any religious belief, conservative, liberal or none at all. There are those in this land who seem willing to return to the days of reflex religious orthodoxy. Those who appear to prefer to have an established state religion perhaps should look to Iran where an election was determined, not by the voters, but by the one vote that counted: that of the Grand Ayatollah.
The Puritans were seeking freedom to believe and worship their way. It should be remembered that belief in the right to religious freedom has been a steadily evolving concept over the life of our country. We should never allow it to be perverted or abandoned. It is worth fighting for.
eddiemae, I agree with most of what you said, but (and there’s always a ‘but’) a better example of Theocracy in America is the New Haven Colony. My wife is descended from Theopolis Eaton a co-founder of the colony in 1638, which later became Connecticut. Because of that, I have studied that particular Puritan community and recommend anyone having doubts about a religion running a government, do the same. The puritans were dictatorial, inflexible and evil. James Michener’s historical novel, “Hawaii” gave the best example of the Calvinists religion destroying a people and their culture. More recently, the Blue Nose Baptists of east Texas retarded that region’s culture for most of the twentieth century. Sadly, it seems that they are still among us. They are the hypocritical nuts that know what’s best for all of us. I believe,\ that religion is the crutch of the morally challenged.
The constitution did not specifically provide for the separation of Church and State as many liberals claim but I believe it should have. It might have been best if it didn’t mention religion at all. Our remedy is the ballot box and calling out the evildoers at every turn. Since both the liberal and Christian extremes have been most vocal about the school book controversy, it is doubtful that we will ever reach a fair and sensible conclusion to this debate. The solution is somewhere in the middle. Let’s pray for it ;)
Father J - Where I come from we always called them "hardshell" and/or "foot washing" Baptists. You're right about their lamentable history in East Texas...the heart of darkness" which wert and art and evermore shalt be. I'm prayin'!!
Father John - you said "The constitution did not specifically provide for the separation of Church and State as many liberals claim but I believe it should have. It might have been best if it didn’t mention religion at all." Most lawyers and constitutional scholars will disagree with you on that assertion. It is generally accepted that Article VI clause three: "no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States." means precisely that there is separation of church and state.
"As to religion, I hold it to be the indispensable duty of government to protect all conscientious protesters thereof, and I know of no other business government has to do therewith." - Thomas Paine, Father of the American Revolution
"And I have no doubt that every new example will succeed, as every past one has done, in showing that religion and Government will both exist in greater purity, the less they are mixed together." - James Madison, a US Founding Father
"The purpose of separation of church and state is to keep forever from these shores the ceaseless strife that has soaked the soil of Europe with blood for centuries." - James Madison
"Religion flourishes in greater purity, without than with the aid of Government." - James Madison
"It does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods or no God." - Thomas Jefferson, principal author of the Declaration of Independence
I like to share these quotes with people who say that the Founding Fathers intended the US to be a Christian nation.
Many also say the US "was founded upon Christian (or biblical) principles." My question to them is... exactly what principles--exclusive to Christianity or the Bible--are these?
Ashley Caldwell
Austin
Religion has no place in secular governing. Sorry, that's just the way it is and how it should remain.
We had the Church rule during the Spanish Inquisition and during the Holy Roman Empire. Those governments didn't turn out so well for the majority of the people, dit they?
It's easy to find religious groups that did come to the US as colonists for religious freedom. Penn (Quakers in Pennsylvannia), and Lord Baltimore (Maryland) spring to mind. It's interesting that they did practice religious freedom as well seek it. In any case, they and the Puritans were not founders of the US. Specifically, our founding fathers are the leaders of the country who lived in the revolutionary times are. I don't see that they founded anything on Christian values, though, unless counting certain people as 3/5 of a human being simply because of their condition of servitude which was largely based on skin color.
If the religious government proponents believe the US government is ordained by a Christian God, then they must allow for the Taliban to run nations of hate and repression, as that is their God's will. We cannot be a nation of religious hypocrites.
And so what if most of the US founding fathers had intellectual disdain for religion in general, let alone their influence in government. We are dealing with right wing revisionist historical interpretation here.
Only in a failing state like we now see our nation headed would we be even having this discussion. Sad, but obviously necessary.
Post a Comment