It is claimed that, to have a Christian prayer in a state institution, is exclusionary of other religious and risks offending them. So, they reason, we should adopt a neutral position of no prayer.
In fact they would have all forms of religion totally wiped from all state institutions.
On the surface this seems like a reasonable proposition. To have the State clinically scrubbed of all vestiges of religion seems like a reasonable diplomatic solution.
But the fact is that such a solution is not neutral at all. Rather than it being a position of neutrality, it is actually a staunchly anti-religious and dogmatically atheistic position.
In a country where the vast majority of people are religious, does it really makes sense to force it’s elected body to adhere to a religiously sterile and atheistically biased position? Surely not.
In a country where the vast majority of it’s population identifies itself as Christian and only a very small minority with atheism, does it really make sense to force our government to adopt a vastly marginalized position?
If a country is still vastly Christian, then it is entirely appropriate to have Christian prayer. It is a beautiful tradition that appeals to most people. So if it ain’t broke, then what’s there to fix?
Islam, Judaism and numerous other religious cultures have brought untold riches to our society, we all experience them to a certain degree, and most of us enjoy the fruits of these extremely aesthetic cultural riches.
It will be a sad day if religion is scrubbed from society in the impossible ploy to please everyone. Who seriously wants to live in the secularist’s sterile world, devoid of the rich religious traditions that our Western society was founded upon?
Surely there is a far better solution to accommodating our religiously pluralistic society in our State institutions than adopting the position of one of the smallest minorities!
No comments:
Post a Comment