Extinction?
I read Bill’s “Letter to the Editor” in Saturday’s paper, which was prompted by an earlier letter on “the rotting corpse of Christianity”, and wondered what it was about.
Bill seems to have a burr under his saddle about the growing influence of Secular Humanism in today’s schools. So first, What is this evil in today’s schools? Turns out, according to Wikipedia, the fundamental concept of Secular Humanism is that ideology — be it religious or political — must be thoroughly examined by each individual and not simply accepted or rejected on faith. Isn’t this what school is supposed to be all about?
Second, How many people believe in Secular Humanism? In a survey done in 2008, 15 percent of Americans identified themselves as having no stated religious preference while 76 percent stated they identified themselves as Christian; by 2012 it was noted that nearly one in five Americans (20 percent) are nonbelievers while traditional Christian churches are dwindling in numbers.
Why the change? There are many reasons at work in America but two of the most interesting are 1: September 11, 2001, which caused many to question the role of ancient, revelation-based religion in modern society; the troubling religious mindset not just of the Islamic terrorists but also of the Christian American political and military leaders, particularly General William G. Boykin saying that America was a “Christian nation,” “I knew our God was bigger than his God”, and “I knew that my God was a real God and his was an idol.” 2: The work of attorney Jay Sekulow, a right-leaning leader of an organization founded by Pat Robertson as the religious right’s answer to the ACLU.
In 1990 Sekulow successfully argued before the Supreme Court that a school district could not prohibit the formation of a Christian club. At first glance, this would seem like a clear victory for religious conservatives who wish to use public schools to create a culture of Christianity within those schools. What the Christian Right probably never envisioned is that this decision opened the doors not just for Christian groups in public schools, but for other groups as well. If Christian views cannot be censored than neither can the views of Hindus, Muslims, Jews or Atheists. Children at a young age can now learn that their classmates and others in the community are proud nonbelievers, with admirable values, who reject ancient texts and supernatural explanations of the world.
Greg Blinn, Kelseyville
Drone
Last week there was much ado concerning a very efficient and successful drone attack in Waziristan. It accomplished its mission very nicely, some fourteen senior Talibani and other terrorists were eliminated. Then came the news that two western prisoners, an American and an Italian were being held captive in the same refuge and that they, too, had been killed. All sorts of outrage that civilians had been killed followed. Sad and unfortunate, but why all the fuss? The objective was accomplished and we all know that accidents happen. Whether one calls it “collateral damage” or “friendly fire” really doesn’t matter, any successful offensive operation usually has casualties and, to me, a 14 to 2 ratio is pretty good. If a school or refugee center was mistakenly hit, I would be as upset as anyone else, but this was not the case.
A following question has merit: Why was the mission ordered? I thought the US was out of the Afghan offensive action and into the “training” mode with minimal forces. Instead we seem still to be “at war” doing things that probably cost us more politically and socially than financially. Am I glad there are 14 fewer terrorists? Yes. Am I sorry 2 captives were killed? Yes. Do I think the mission should have authorized at this point in our middle eastern adventures? No! Too many other higher priorities.
Guff Worth, Lakeport
“Essential” work
The partitivist (my term, meaning hair splitter) makes every concept an organization of many interdependent parts, each discrete from all the others, but each allegedly essential to the function of the whole. Each of the many discretely functional parts consists of several discretely functional parts, each of whose function allegedly must be separately explained in order to make sense of the whole. The entire production is coated finally with the modest concession that a really thorough and complete explanation of the least functional unit would fill a ponderous volume in small print, this to explain what might have been explained in one paragraph or simply taken for granted. All this gives the impression that those working with or teaching these concepts have lots of essential work to do.
Dean Sparks, Lucerne
