Ronald Reagan
Quotes
by David M.
Fitzpatrick
Last updated
Sunday, 26 February 2006
 Let me start by saying
that, all religious things considered, I liked Ronald Reagan as a President.
Like any President, he had his ups and downs, strong points and weak points,
rights and wrongs; but he stood up for what he believed in and he didn't
take crap from anyone. He didn't take crap from Moammar Khadaffy
in the Middle East and he didn't take crap from air traffic controllers
illegally striking in the States. We could debate all day on Reagan's good
points and bad, but let's move on.
But the one thing about Ronald Reagan that
ruins it for me: he was religious, and he felt those of us who were not
should take a back seat to those who were. Now, since there likely won't ever be an Atheist President, I've
always been willing to put up with Presidents if they had other qualities
that were at least positive. Reagan had good points, but in the end he was the father of modern Republican conservativism, nearly
single-handedly responsible for bringing hordes of religious conservatives
to the polls and making the lives of non-religious sorts miserable.
On 12 June 2004, I received an
emailed newsletter from American Atheists. Ed Kagan, State Director for the
Kentucky division of American Atheists, provided the following list of
religious quotes made by Reagan while he was in office. I think I'd pretty
much heard them all before, but to see all of these
together in one long, scrolling document was disheartening; reading it was
even worse. Reagan was far more a die-hard
meatball than I had truly
comprehended. My opinion of him as a religious zealot has only been
strengthened, and it is that religious zealotry that forever blackens his
reputation. (Obviously, the religious folks will disagree entirely with me.)
Below I've reproduced Ed's collection,
along with my usual argumentative commentary. By all means, if you have any
other Reagan religious quotes, send them along.
"Prayer has sustained
our people in crisis, strengthened us in times of challenge, and guided us
through our daily lives since the first settlers came to this continent. Our
forbearers came not for gold, but mainly in search of God and the freedom to
worship in their own way. We've been a free people living under the law,
with faith in our Maker and in our future. I've said before that the most
sublime picture in American history is of George Washington on his knees in
the snow at Valley Forge. That image personifies a people who know that it's
not enough to depend on our own courage and goodness; we must also seek help
from God, our Father and Preserver."
—Ronald Reagan,
at a White House Ceremony in Observance of National Day of Prayer, 6 May
1982
First settlers. Clever how Reagan
didn't consider that the first settlers who came to this continent were at
least 9,000 years before. Native Americans were migrating for survival
reasons, not looking for the Xian
God or the freedom to worship their own way. I guess the Native Americans
don't count in the grand American scheme of things.
Using prayer. Because a lot of
wishful thinkers have used prayer for hundreds of years doesn't mean it
should be shoved down our throats. And while the Pilgrims did come seeking
the freedom to worship in their own way, not everyone came to America for
that reason. Many came simply to start new lives; some came to gain land;
others came to be free from other types of oppression. Some came to seek
their fortunes.
"We've been a free people ... with faith
in our Maker." Reagan clearly asserts that only those who believe in a
Maker are the people who matter in the United States.
George Washington: What Reagan
didn't know (or didn't mention) was that Washington was a Deist: he believed
that an all-powerful deity created the universe, but then stood back and
watched it all happen... that this God didn't intervene in our affairs.
Washington also believed in religious pluralism, the doctrine that different
religions can co-exist without one enjoying benefits the others don't enjoy
(or that different denominations in the same religion can coexist equally).
Reagan used Washington as some holy symbol of American Xianity, while in
fact Washington was not a model for that at all. (Why not? Xianity has God
meddling in our affairs all the time, for one. Praying to God is sort of
anti-Deist, since Deists believe that God isn't getting involved no matter
how hard we pray.)
Separation of state and church?
Reagan ends this bit by proclaiming that "we must also seek help from God,
our Father and Preserver." Now this was said by a sitting President, at the
White House, in observance of the so-called National Day of Prayer. Reagan
believed in separation of state and church, yet he proclaimed on behalf of
all Americans that WE MUST also seek help from OUR Father." He did this in
the White House. He did this sanctioning a National Day of Prayer.
What kind of President was he? The
kind who saw that true Americans must be Xians and must agree that there is
a God... and there is nothing separating state and church with this
statement.
"Yet today we're told that
to protect that First Amendment, we must suppress prayer and expel God from
our children's classrooms. In one case, a court has ruled against the right
of children to say grace in the cafeteria before they had lunch. A group of
children who sought, on their own initiative and with their parents'
approval, to begin the school day with a one-minute prayer meditation...
have been forbidden to do so. And some students who wanted to join in prayer
or religious study on school property, even outside of regular class hours,
have been banned from doing so."
Tax dollars should never support
religion. Children are free to say grace or pray or whatever religious
stuff they want to do. However, public schools can't make such prayer an
official function. They can't establish "moments of silence" that will place
non-believers in uncomfortable positions. Public schools are prohibited from
providing places for things like Bible study. Why does this make sense?
Because our tax dollars pay for those public schools... as an Atheist, I
don't want my tax dollars supporting ANYTHING religious short of teaching a
class on Biblical Mythology... any more than the average Xian would want his
tax dollars financing Atheist meetings and anti-Xianity rallies.
"A few people have even
objected to prayers being said in the Congress. That's just plain wrong. The
Constitution was never meant to prevent people from praying; its declared
purpose was to protect their freedom to pray."
Freedom OF and FROM religion.
Freedom OF religion MUST include freedom FROM religion; that's the logic
behind no school-sanctioned prayer and Bible study. The same is true of
Congress! Should our government officially sponsor Congressional prayers? If
the Senators and Representatives feel the need to bow their heads and beg
this and that of some Invisible Man in the Sky, that's their business; but
such a tribal ritual shouldn't be officially supported or required by the
government! That would be the polar opposite of separation of state and
church!
"The time has come for this
Congress to give a majority of American families what they want for their
children—the firm assurance that children can hold voluntary prayers in
their schools just as the Congress, itself, begins each of its daily
sessions with an opening prayer."
Wrong. Wrong. Wrong. Wrong. Wrong.
It's fundamentally WRONG. Just because Congress does it doesn't make it
right. Congress hasn't done a whole lot right, EVER... why trust them now?
In fact, I say it's time to stop Congress from beginning its daily sessions
with an opening prayer at all!
And, again, children CAN hold voluntary
prayers in school. It's just that the school cannot promote or support it.
If they want to pray, they can pray. Just keep it to themselves.
"With this in mind, last May
I proposed to the Congress a measure that declares once and for all that
nothing in the Constitution prohibits prayer in public schools or
institutions. It also states that no person shall be required by government
to participate in prayer who does not want to. So, everyone's
rights—believers and nonbelievers alike—are protected by our voluntary
prayer measure."
—Ronald Reagan, Radio Address to the Nation on
Prayer, 18
September 1982
Once and for all, huh? Well, part of
a democracy is doing what the majority of the people want. But when the
issue is one of Constitutionality, it isn't open to referendum, folks.
Besides, voluntary prayer in schools is allowed, just as it SHOULD be.
But sanctioning a prayer time in school and
saying "But you don't have to participate if you don't want to" is unfair to
those who don't want to. Children who choose not to will be noticeably set
apart from their young meatball friends (and kids being cruel can make that
a difficult situation). Calling it "a moment of silence" is simply a way
around all of that... the end result is the same. If they want to pray, they
can find time to pray. It doesn't HAVE to be official or staged or
spotlighted!
Think about it. Even though Xianity is full
of so many denominations that Atheist numbers are greater than all
denominations except the Roman Catholics, the Xians have this idea that
there are more Xians than non-Xians, so the majority won't be offended. So
let's say 20 out of 25 kids in a classroom are Xians and the other 5 are
non-Xians. The school holds a moment of silence to give those who wish to
pray the time to do so. 20 kids bow their heads. Now, you know those 20 will
notice the 5 who don't. This moment of silence becomes a way for the Xians
to weed out the non-Xians. Kids are cruel; the majority always sticks
together. Should the non-Xians be persecuted in school?
The only solution is the obvious and legal
one: don't support prayer in public schools. Period. No organized moments of
silence. If they want to pray, let them pray. I think was a mythical figure
named Jesus Christ who commanded people to keep their prayers to themselves
anyway.
"I know that we share
a belief that all people, no matter where they live, have the right to
freedom of religion. This is not a right that governments have to give or to
take away. It's our right from birth, because we're all children of God."
—Ronald Reagan, at the
Annual Convention of the Anti-Defamation League of B'nai B'rith, 10 June
1983
Not a right governments give or take
away. Agreed, but to ensure nobody is persecuted for any religious or
non-religious beliefs, our government has strengthened our rights of freedom
of and from religion. It's time the government upheld its Constitutional
responsibility and stayed the hell out of religion for good... and ensure
that religionists stay the hell out of everyone else's lives for good.
We are NOT all children of God. Once
again, a sitting President is speaking for all Americans and proclaiming us
all children of his fictional God. This is not separation of state and
church. This is government endorsement of religion, pure and simple.
Exclusively Judeo-Christian? And
note how he implies, while speaking to this Jewish service organization,
that we aren't just underlings beneath Some Higher Power: we're ALL children
of GOD. How perfectly Judeo-Christian of the President. So much for our
Muslim citizens... and Native Americans... and all the other religions, not
to mention agnostics, Atheists, and so on. The USA is apparently just a
Jews- and Christians-only club.
"We are a nation under God.
I've always believed that this blessed land was set apart in a special way,
that some divine plan placed this continent here between the oceans to be
found by people from every the Earth who had a special love for freedom and
the courage to uproot themselves, leave homeland and friends, to come to a
strange land. And coming here they created something new in all the history
of mankind—a land where man is not beholden to government, government is
beholden to man."
No, we are not one nation under God.
That was sneaked in to the Pledge of
Allegiance later, approved illegally by Congress. At least he
followed with "I've always believed" in the next line. Small plus
there.
Some divine plan placed this land
between the oceans? Huh?! So God set this land here, just waiting for us to
populate it and be special and just and wondrous? Evidently God couldn't
wait for us to conquer our Native American friends. One wonders why evil
Atheists are even allowed in at all, then. Since the Constitution doesn't
exclude non-believers, why didn't God ensure we stay out... since he placed
the whole damn continent here just waiting for us?!
(Reagan obviously didn't buy the whole
science thing... or else he'd have understood things like plate tectonics
and continental drift... and that the Earth has been around longer than six
thousand years.)
"George Washington believed
that religion, morality, and brotherhood were the pillars of society. He
said you couldn't have morality without religion. And yet today we're told
that to protect the First Amendment, we must expel God, the source of all
knowledge, from our children's classrooms. Well, pardon me, but the First
Amendment was not written to protect the American people from religion; the
first amendment was written to protect the American people from government
tyranny."
Religion is not necessary for morality.
You can't have morality without
religion, huh? So what he was saying was in order to be a moral person, you
had to believe in God. If you disbelieved in God, you were immoral (having
poor morals) or amoral (having no morals). I don't believe in God, so
therefore I must be immoral or amoral. I consider myself a very moral, good,
decent person. I don't lie or cheat or kill or most of the terrible things
God says not to do. (Okay, so I don't honor him and honor the Sabbath and
all that jazz... but we're all sinners!). In fact, I know a lot of Atheists
who are far more moral, virtuous, and decent than most of the Xians I know.
So where does Reagan, or Washington, or anyone else, get off with this
high-and-mighty proclamation that non-believers are immoral or amoral?
That's just pompous and arrogant.
One more time... freedom OF and FROM
religion. Reagan makes a key blunder in his huffy statement proclaiming
the First Amendment was not written to protect the American people from
religion. Yes, it was to protect from government tyranny, but "freedom OF
religion" MUST, by its very definition, include freedom FROM religion. You
cannot have one without the other.
Government tyranny. When the
government supports, promotes, or otherwise establishes a religion, it is in
violation of the Constitution. Since we are supposed to protected from our
government regarding religion, any religious support by the government is
nothing short of tyranny.
"Indeed, there is nothing in
the Constitution at all about public education and prayer. There is,
however, something very pertinent in the act that gave birth to our public
school system—a national act, if you will. It called for public education to
see that our children—and quoting from that act—'learned about religion and
morality.'"
Nothing in the Constitution
about public education and prayer. Nice sideways logic. There was
nothing in the Constitution about eating jelly beans, either, but Reagan did
a lot of that and nobody stopped him. In the Constitution, however, there is
something about the government not being involved in religion in any way.
And something about freedom of religion. Maybe Reagan missed those things.
Learning about religion and
morality. The fact that a government act says children should learn
about religion and morality is only one more example of how the government
has worked to establish a state religion, despite the Constitution expressly
forbidding this ever happening. Reagan's point serves his beliefs and his
religion, nothing more. It works well to rally those who agree with him.
Those who understand that equal rights for ALL means equal right for ALL see
it only for the silliness that it truly is.
"Well, the time has
come for Congress to give a majority of American families what they want for
their children—a
constitutional amendment making it unequivocally clear that children can
hold [prayer] in their schools."
—Ronald Reagan,
at a Spirit of America Rally in Atlanta,Georgia, 26
January 1984
Well, that one never happened. It's always
time to heave a deep sigh when a conservative Republican starts screaming
about Constitutional amendments to support a state religion. Of course, he
was in Georgia, and they like to hear big religious words like those down
there.
"More and more Americans
believe that loving God in their hearts is the ultimate value. Last year,
not only were Year of the Bible activities held in every State of the Union,
but more than 25 States and 500 cities issued their own Year of the Bible
proclamations. One schoolteacher, Mary Gibson in New York, raised $4,000 to
buy Bibles for working people in downtown Manhattan."
And many Americans believe that
loving God in their hearts is nothing short of a silly tribal ritual done by
weak-minded people who don't have the intellectual capacity to think beyond
such foolishness. But we aren't trying to make any Constitutional amendments
forcing the religious folks to see it our way.
As for the statistics of the states
and cities issuing Bible Proclamations: what the hell does that have to do
with anything? Because a bunch of self-serving conservative religious
meatballs are in charge of making the majority of the population get all
warm and fuzzy because they think they all believe the same myths does NOT
mean we should say, "Wow, those numbers are big... we should just give in
and let the government shove their state religion up our asses!"
If every single person in the United States
was proven to be Xians, we STILL cannot make Xianity an official state
religion. We STILL cannot allow school-promoted prayer. We STILL cannot
allow Congress to establish that religion. We STILL cannot prevent others
from deciding to practice other religions or no religion. Why, if all
Americans were proven to be good Xians? Because somebody might change his
mind. Somebody not Xian might come into the country and become a citizen.
Someone might be born and grow up to think differently. It doesn't matter
how great the Xian numbers are now; we MUST protect the IDEA of freedom of
and from religion... we MUST protect the futures and the lives of everyone.
We MUST uphold the Constitution and protect every single last person... even
those who aren't even here yet.
"Nineteen eighty-three was
the year more of us read the Good Book. Can we make a resolution here
today?—that 1984 will be the year we put its great truths into action?"
Which great truths are those? The
ones where we don't lie or steal or screw everyone's wives? Or the ones
where God approves of things like raping, pillaging, saving virgins for
ourselves, and so on? The blanket belief by most Xians (who rarely have read
much of their own damn Bible beyond the 5% they tend to teach in Sunday
school) that the Bible is some perfect tome with pearls of wisdom and
examples of perfection in everyday life found on every page in every chapter
and verse is nothing short of insane. But that's another rant!
No examples, lemming-like crowd. Anyway,
when someone speaking to a large group of religious people (such as the
National Religious Broadcasters, as in this example) lets loose with blind
statements about putting the Bible's great truths into action, what do you
get? A room full of excited people all crying "Amen!" and suchlike.
Reagan didn't offer any examples of what truths he was referring to, and we
can be reasonably sure the crowd didn't know them any better than he did;
but he told them what they liked hearing, and all of them (including Reagan)
likely just assumed they all knew what he meant. Whatever.
"My experience in this office I hold has
only deepened a belief I've held for many years: Within the covers of that
single book are all the answers to all the problems that face us today if
we'd only read and believe."
Oh, boy. At least there's my point:
if they'd only read and believe. They believe, all right; but most Xians
have no idea in what they are believing... because they never read their own
Bible. Personally, I think there are too many big words for them to
understand; and, face it, the Bible is an incredibly boring read. But,
unlike most of the Xians I've dealt with, I've actually read the thing cover
to cover twice... and much of the rest multiple times over (know thine
enemy, after all). Most Xians don't even know in what Testament they can
locate the various books! (No kidding, I have a friend who is a
fire-and-brimstone-crying type who could not even find the book of
Genesis. How can such an Xian not be able to find the very first book of the
Bible? Yeesh.)
"Let's begin at the beginning. God is the center
of our lives; the human family stands at the center of society; and our
greatest hope for the future is in the faces of our children. Seven thousand
Poles recently came to the christening of Maria Victoria Walesa, daughter of
Danuta and Lech Walesa, to express their belief that solidarity of the
family remains the foundation of freedom."
Huh? I wonder if I'm missing
something in the middle of that, because Reagan appears to go from building
up some kind of analogy about something... just when he sounds like he might
be making a point about our children being the greatest hope for the future,
he suddenly starts yammering on about 7,000 Poles and Lech Walesa's
daughter. Did I miss something? I think the whole thing is an attempt to say
that since the family is at the center of society, and since God is the
center of our lives, and since we have children, that society is all about
God. Or something. I have no clue. It is truly amazing how a man who was an
actor had the ability to act his way through anything. He said absolutely
nothing in that passage but I bet the religious broadcasters at the
convention all thought they knew exactly what he didn't mean. Yeah.
"God's most blessed
gift to His family is the gift of life. He sent us the Prince of Peace as a
babe in a manger. I've said that we must be cautious in claiming God is on
our side. I think the real question we must answer is, are we on His side?"
—Ronald Reagan,
at the Annual Convention of the National Religious Broadcasters, 30 January
1984
There's that Prince of Peace bit again.
Where does he get the idea that Jesus was the Prince of Peace? This was
the guy who said:
- "Suppose ye that I am come to give
peace on earth? I [Jesus] tell you, Nay; but rather division: For from
henceforth there shall be five in one house divided, three against two,
and two against three." (Luke 12:51-2)
- "Think not that I [Jesus] have come to
send peace on earth: I come not to send peace, but a sword." (Matthew
10:34)
- "...for all they that take the sword
shall perish with the sword." (Matthew 26:52)
- "...and he that hath no sword, let him
sell his garment, and buy one." (Luke 22:36)
Not only was Jesus not about peace, but he
even made it abundantly clear that he wasn't on several occasions. The
"Prince of Peace" moniker is something people came up with to make Xianity
look like something grand and wonderful. Reagan, like most Xians, didn't
even know his own religion, and spouted contradictory Xian rhetoric that
rallied other Xians.
On god's side? I'm not on God's
side. I couldn't care if anyone thought he was on mine. And I'm an American.
"I know one thing I'm
sure most of us agree on: God, source of all knowledge, should never have
been expelled from our children's [schools]. The great majority of our
people support voluntary prayer in schools."
—Ronald Reagan,
at the National Convention of Religious Broadcasters, 30 January 1984
Of course "we all" agreed on it...
"we all" included Reagan and the attendees at the National Convention of
Religious Broadcasters! Sure they agreed!
So much for omniscience. And isn't
it funny how God, source of all knowledge, that all-powerful Creator-guy,
was expelled AT ALL? Isn't he GOD? Couldn't he have PREVENTED THAT?
Voluntary prayer: this doesn't
include officially-sanctioned prayer times, moments of silence, and so
forth. If they want to pray, let them pray. But keep their prayers to
themselves.
"Let us pledge to conduct
ourselves with generosity, tolerance, and openness toward all. We must
respect the rights and views of every ... we're unshakably committed to
democratic values. Our Maker would have it no less. So, please use your
pulpits to denounce racism, anti-Semitism, and all ethnic or religious
intolerance as evils, and let us make it clear that our values must not
restrict, but liberate the human spirit in thought and in deed."
—Ronald Reagan,
at the Annual Convention of
the National Association of Evangelicals in Columbus, Ohio, 6 March 1984
Was he SERIOUS?!
He's telling a bunch of EVANGELISTS that their
values must NOT RESTRICT?! Oh, that's RICH! An organized bunch of holy
rollers led by a President who would shove a state religion on us if they
had the chance... and he says they shouldn't let their values restrict?
That's hilarious! Religion has been restricting this country since its
beginning... religion has been restricting mankind since the dawn of time...
since the first religions were created.
"I believe that faith and
religion play a critical role in the political life of our nation—and always
has—and that the church—and by that I mean all churches, all
denominations—has had a strong influence on the state. And this has worked
to our benefit as a nation."
Well, they certainly have had an influence,
all right. (Nice save for Reagan with the "by that I mean all churches, all
denominations" bit... just in case he might have offended anyone. I guess
that excludes all synagogues, mosques, and non-Judeo-Christian
"denominations?")
"Those who created our
country—the Founding Fathers and Mothers—understood that there is a divine
order which transcends the human order. They saw the state, in fact, as a
form of moral order and felt that the bedrock of moral order is religion."
Another nice save by Reagan! Before is was
fashionable to be Politically Correct, he added in "and Mothers" to "the
Founding Fathers."
And, once again, morality is considered to
be impossible without religion.
"I believe that George
Washington knew the City of Man cannot survive without the City of God, that
the Visible City will perish without the Invisible City."
Um, yeah. Invisible cities and all that.
Maybe the Alzheimer's was kicking in at this point, because it sure seems
Reagan had no idea what he was talking about. Presumably the Visible City is
America and the Invisible City is Heaven... and without that Xian support,
the nation is doomed.
"Religion played not only a
strong role in our national life; it played a positive role. The
abolitionist movement was at heart a moral and religious movement; so was
the modern civil rights struggle. And throughout this time, the state was
tolerant of religious belief, expression, and practice. Society, too, was
tolerant."
Like the men who brought slaves to America,
who were undoubtedly righteous Xians?
"But in the 1960's this
began to change. We began to make great steps toward secularizing our nation
and removing religion from its honored place."
It's too bad he saw that as a bad thing.
They all see that as a bad thing. The honor given religion should be given
only by those who choose to do so... not by "our nation." "Our nation" is
comprised of many people of many beliefs, and we don't all believe the way
the religious folks do... not the way Reagan did, and not the way the
Founding Parents did. Those Founders recognized the fact that not everyone
would see it all their way... which is why the government is supposed to SAY
THE HECK OUT OF RELIGION!
"In 1962 the Supreme Court
in the New York prayer case banned the compulsory saying of prayers. In 1963
the Court banned the reading of the Bible in our public schools. From that
point on, the courts pushed the meaning of the ruling ever outward, so that
now our children are not allowed voluntary prayer. We even had to pass a
law—we passed a special law in the Congress just a few weeks ago to allow
student prayer groups the same access to schoolrooms after classes that a
already enjoy with no opposition."
Again, nobody is stopping schoolchildren
from praying. They can pray all they want. Reagan either didn't
understand things properly or, um, didn't recall them properly at this
point.
The law in question is unjust and
illegal. The Constitution prohibits Congress from making any law that
establishes religion. Passing "a special law in the Congress ... to allow
student prayer groups" sounds like Congress making a law to establish
religion to me.
"The 1962 decision opened the way to a
flood of similar suits. Once religion had been made vulnerable, a series of
assaults were made in one court after another, on one issue after another.
Cases were started to argue against tax-exempt status for churches. Suits
were brought to abolish the words 'under God' from the Pledge of Allegiance
and to remove 'In God We Trust' from public documents and from our currency."
As well they should be abolished.
Congress illegally added the words "under God" to the words of the original
Pledge of Allegiance (despite the fact Congress is prohibited from
establishing any religion, which this clearly attempts to do), and illegally
added "In God We Trust" to our money (despite the fact we already had a
national motto and despite the fact that it also clearly establishes a state
religion).
Reagan seems shocked at these things.
Are they honestly not that obvious? The religious zealots claim that
Atheists don't see these things because we don't want to see them. We
maintain they're simply matters of logic and reason. In fact, I know many
Xians who see this logic, purely and simply. What's up with the zealots?
Could it be that THEY are the ones who see only what they want to see?
"Today there are those who
are fighting to make sure voluntary prayer is not returned to the
classrooms. And the frustrating thing for the great majority of Americans
who support and understand the special importance of religion in the
national life—the frustrating thing attacking religion claim they are doing
it in the name of tolerance, freedom, and open-mindedness. Question: Isn't
the real truth that they are intolerant of religion? They refuse to tolerate
its importance in our lives."
"The great majority" is often used
to attempt to somehow justify why wrong things are being done or pursued.
Perhaps the reason that such things are the ways they are is because,
despite "the great majority," people realize what is RIGHT and what is
WRONG... and what is WRONG is government and taxpayer establishment or
support of any religion.
Intolerance. Reagan claims that
those who oppose religion are intolerant of religion... that they refuse to
tolerate its importance in our lives. Again, he assumes OUR LIVES includes
only the Xians. As well, he assumes we are intolerant of his religion. We
are not intolerant of any religion. We are intolerant of the government
shoving religion up our tailpipes. We are intolerant of our tax dollars
supporting prayer and Bible studies in public schools. We are intolerant of
having to recognize the Xian God on our money and in the Pledge of
Allegiance. We are intolerant of the government ignoring the Constitution
and trying to stop non-believers from asserting the same right the believers
have. We are intolerant of Congress passing laws to support and establish
religion despite the fact that, of all bodies of individuals in our nation,
Congress should be the first to understand what it legally can and cannot
do... and the Constitution clearly says they cannot do the things they have
done.
Those are the things about which we are
intolerant. Would an Xian approve of it if the government established laws
saying that, in their own churches, members of a congregation were REQUIRED
to listen to Atheists talking to them about their beliefs? Would they
appreciate the Pledge saying "one nation, under no gods..."? Would they like
it if their money said "In No Gods Do We Trust"?
"If all the children of our
country studied together all of the many religions in our country, wouldn't
they learn greater tolerance of other's beliefs? If children prayed
together, would they not understand what they have in common, and would this
not, indeed, bring them closer, and is this not to be desired? So, I submit
to you that those who claim to be fighting for tolerance on this issue may
not be tolerant at all."
That only includes those who pray and have
religions! Once again, what about those who don't? The only intolerance here
is Ronald Reagan and his ilk refusing to accept Atheists and the like as
members of this nation. If we don't believe in an Invisible Man in the Sky,
and if we don't engage in rituals befitting uncivilized wild-man tribes,
then we don't count?
Who's intolerant? The religious zealots. If
we don't do it THEIR way, they won't be happy. They want us all to think the
way they think, do the things they say we should do, live the brainwashed
lives they believe we should live. If we don't, they complain. They whine.
They bitch. They scream "Intolerance!" when they are the intolerant ones.
They cry "This country was founded on religion!" when it wasn't. They yell
"Most of us believe in God so shut up!" even when nobody believes in the
same damn god in this country anyway.
Intolerant? That's the Xians, all right.
"When John Kennedy was
running for President in 1960, he said that his church would not dictate his
Presidency any more than he would speak church. Just so, and proper. But
John Kennedy was speaking ... in which the role of religion—and by that I
mean the role of all churches—was secure. Abortion was not a political
issue. Prayer was not a political issue. The right of church schools to
operate was not a political issue. And it was broadly acknowledged that
religious leaders had a right and a duty to speak out on the issues of the
day ... politician who spoke to or of them with a lack of respect would not
long survive in the political arena. It was acknowledged then that religion
held a special place, occupied a special territory in the hearts of the
citizenry. The climate has changed greatly since then. And since it has, it
logically follows needs defenders against those who care only for the
interests of the state."
So JFK was right in 1960, but
now that there are more serious issues, it's time to bring the church into
government? And, come on... religion needs no defenders against those who
care only for the interests of the state. The state needs defense from those
who care only for the interests of their own religions.
"There are, these days, many questions on
which religious leaders are obliged to offer their moral and theological
guidance, and such guidance is a good and necessary thing. To know how a
church and its members feel on a public issue expands the parameters of
debate. It does not narrow the debate; it expands it."
He just wasn't getting this separation of
state and church thing.
It is NOT IMPORTANT how a church feels on a
public issue. It IS important to know how its members feel on such issues,
but only in the context of heading for the polls. They're no different than
non-religious citizens and should NOT be granted some sort of special
consideration. That would be government support of religion; anyone can
see that! Except those who go out of their ways to NOT see it.
"The truth is, politics
and morality are inseparable. And as morality's foundation is religion,
religion and politics are necessarily related. We need religion as a guide.
We need it because we are imperfect, and our government needs the church,
because only those humble enough to admit they're sinners can bring to
democracy the tolerance it requires in order to survive."
Politics and morality are inseparable? Need
we laugh long and hard at this one, or just move on?
I love the linear, self-fulfilling false
logic here. Reagan claims that SINCE religion and morality are
inseparable, AND religion is the foundation of morality, THEN religion and
politics are necessarily related. Holy mind-job, Batman! Using Reagan's
logic, we could argue that SINCE religion and IMMORALITY are inseparable
(because they are, folks; who could honestly dispute that?), AND Satan is
the foundation of immorality (as the Xians believe), THEN Satan and politics
are necessarily related.
HELLO!! This sort of reasoning is
typical of Xians: they make statements that in whatever way possible fit
whatever they're trying to get everyone to believe.
Religion as a guide. And, folks, I
don't need religion as a guide because I am imperfect. I'm imperfect, and I
accept it, and I move on... WITHOUT religion. I have serious reservations
about major world leaders admitting that they can't function without
religion and the church! If their only crutch is their religion, we ought to
be questioning their ability to LEAD.
Astrology? People went nuts when
they discovered Nancy Reagan was consulting an astrologer. That was hardly
the worst mystical crap that was going on in the White House. Ronald
Reagan's religious zealotry, one-track adherence to his religious propaganda,
and belief that only those who agreed with him mattered, was far more
frightening than someone reading a few Tarot cards.
"A state is nothing
more than a reflection of its citizens; the more decent the citizens, the
more decent the state. If you practice a religion, whether you're Catholic,
Protestant, Jewish, or guided by some other faith, then your private life
will be influenced by a sense of moral obligation, and so, too, will your
public life. One affects the other. The churches of America do not exist by
the grace of the state; the churches of America are not mere citizens of the
state. The churches of America exist apart; they have their own vantage
point,
their own authority. Religion is its own, its own claims."
"The more decent the citizens, the more
decent the state." So if we aren't religious, we aren't decent? And how
much more decent are the believers of one religion than another? Are
Catholics more decent than Jews? Are Baptists more decent than Methodists? I
suspect Reagan felt his particular denomination was the most decent bunch of
them all!
"If you practice a religion ... then
your private life will be influenced by a sense of moral obligation."
The clear insinuation here is that if you don't practice a religion, you
aren't moral. That old argument. Reagan often sounded like he was playing
back old tapes. Anyway, one more time: I don't practice a religion, but I am
a moral person. I don't need a religion to be good. I can be be good simply
because I want to... not because someone waving a Bible around told me I'd
better or I'll burn in Hell.
"We establish no
religion in this country, nor will we ever. We command no worship. We mandate
no belief. But we poison our society when we remove its theological
underpinnings. We court corruption when we leave it bereft of belief. All are
free to believe or not believe; all are free to practice a faith or not. But
those who believe must be free to speak of and act on their belief, to
apply moral teaching to public questions."
Reagan clearly doesn't understand
"establish no religion" when he says it. It seems he thinks that to
"establish" something, you have to actually say, "We want to establish THIS
religion as OFFICIAL!" But it goes beyond that. Simply supporting one
religion over another is establishment of religion.
Religion vs. Denomination. And is he
really talking about a RELIGION here? No. He's talking about a DENOMINATION
of his Xian religion, because time and again he has shown that he can't
understand why anyone wouldn't want to keep religion at his right hand. He
says it here when he claims that "we poison our society when we remove its
theological underpinnings."
Freedom OF and FROM... again...: And
in a nice example of supporting religion and opposing non-religious people:
"All are free to believe or not to believe ... but those who believe must be
free to speak and act on their belief." But those who don't believe
shouldn't be free from religious oppression, of government sponsorship of
religion, of all of the things he's saying to support religion? Once again,
freedom OF religion must also include freedom FROM religion.
"I submit to you that the tolerant
society is open to and encouraging of all religions. And this does not weaken
us; it strengthens us, it makes us strong. You know, if we look back through
history to all those great civilizations, those great nations that rose up to
even world dominance and then deteriorated, declined, and fell, we find they
all had one thing in common. One of the significant forerunners away from
their God or gods."
It doesn't make us strong. It makes
us children, believing in Santa Claus or the Easter Bunny. It makes us
mindless robots, marching mechanically because that's what we think we're
supposed to do.
As for fallen civilizations falling
because they moved away from their theology: I guess I'd like to see
examples of those, Ronnie. Show me one. Show me ANY. Show me any
civilization that fell for any reason other than being conquered or simply
undergoing natural changes common throughout history. At the same time, note
how many leaders of civilizations went to war because of religion... who
killed and destroyed because of religion... who oppressed people for not
believing in the SAME or the RIGHT religion... history is full of these.
Religion doesn't strengthen a nation; it
does, ultimately, weaken it. That's why it needs to be out of the
government... that's why separation of state and church is so vital. Leave
the myth-lovers to their myths, and let the government work for the people
in non-religious ways. It isn't difficult. Really.
"Without God, there is no virtue, because there's no
prompting of the conscience. Without God, we're mired in the material, that
flat world that tells us only what the senses perceive. Without God, there is
a coarsening of the society. And without God, democracy will not and cannot
long endure. If we ever forget that we're one nation under God, then we will
be a nation gone under."
—Ronald Reagan,
at an Ecumenical Prayer Breakfast in
Dallas, Texas, 23 August 1984
How sad to see that line: "Without
God, there is no virtue." ONE MORE TIME: I have no God. I am reasonably
virtuous. My conscience works. I am moral. I am good. I am just.
Coarsening of society? Refer to
above for the comments on what nations have done to oppress and control with
religion throughout history. Religion coarsens. Religion damages. Religion
destroys.
Without God, democracy cannot endure?
He couldn't be more wrong. Reagan seems to have thought "the majority of the
people are religious, so religion should be a key point in our nation,"
which is flawed. This isn't about a popular vote; this is about a basic
freedom that should never have to be fought for the way we fight for it.
The death of America as we know it?
And if this nation, as it is today, needs to go under to rid itself of the
vicious control of religion, then I say let it go under. The new nation that
rises from its ashes will surely be a better nation. The religious types
would likely cry that if that happened, Atheists would prevent religion from
happening. I doubt that. We really don't generally care whether meatballs
believe in their fairy tales or not. We just don't want it shoved down our
throats all the time.
"As Americans of different religions find
new meaningfulness in their beliefs, we do so together, returning together to
the bedrock values of family, hard work, and faith in the same loving and
almighty God. And as we welcome this rebirth of faith, we must even more
fervently attack ugly intolerance. We have no place for haters in
America."
Read: "America is only for people
who believe in God, and people who don't aren't nice people, and those
people want us to stop believing or go away... so let's get rid of the
non-believers at all costs." Yeah, that's pretty much it. We've been
fervently attacked for a long time.
"Well, let me speak plainly: The United States of America is and
must remain a nation of openness to people of all beliefs. Our very unity
has
been strengthened by this pluralism. That's how we began; this is ... always be.
The ideals of our country leave no room whatsoever for intolerance,
anti-Semitism, or bigotry of any kind—none.
The unique thing about America
is a wall in our Constitution separating church and state. It guarantees
there will never be a state religion in this land, but at the same time it
makes sure that every single American is free to choose and practice his or
her religious beliefs or to choose rights shall not be questioned or
violated by the state."
—Ronald Reagan, at the International Convention of B'nai B'rith,
6September 1984
What gall! He has the gall to talk
about the uniqueness of the wall between state and church in our
Constitution? The gall to talk about never having a state religion? What he
means is "We won't make Catholicism or Judaism or Protestantism official"
but he sure as heck wanted to promote the Judeo-Christian faith as strongly
as he could! "Don't worry, Jewish people, we won't oppress you... you can
stay here and we'll all love each other... so long as you believe in a
reasonable facsimile of God like I do, like most Americans do, you're all
right in my book."
"We in the United States, above all, must
remember that lesson, for we were founded as a nation of openness to people
of all beliefs. And so we must remain. Our very unity has been strengthened
by our pluralism. We establish no religion in this country, we command
no worship, we mandate no belief, nor will we ever. Church and state are, and
must remain, separate. All are free to believe or not believe, all are free
to practice a faith or not, and those who believe are free, and should be
free, to speak of and act on their belief."
Sounds good so far...
"At the same time that our
Constitution prohibits state establishment of religion, it protects the free
exercise of all religions. And walking this fine line requires government to
be strictly neutral. And government should not make it more difficult for
Christians, Jews, Muslims, or other believing people to practice their faith.
And that's why, when the Connecticut Supreme Court struck down a statute—and you may not have heard about this; it was a statute
protecting employees
who observed the Sabbath. Well, our administration is now urging the United
States Supreme Court to overturn the Connecticut Court decision. This is what
I mean by freedom of religion, and that's what we feel the Constitution
intends."
—Ronald Reagan, to
Members of the Congregation of Temple Hillel and
Jewish Community Leaders in Valley Stream, New York, 26 October 1984
...and then he blew it. So long as his
religion is supported by the government, the whole separation of state and
church thing is kinda forgotten. "What? Our believers aren't getting their
way? Make a LAW, then!!!"
"I believe that the most essential element
of our defense of freedom is our insistence on speaking out for the cause of
religious liberty. I would like to see this country rededicate itself
wholeheartedly to this cause. I join you in your desire that the Protestant
Churches of America, the Catholic Church, and the Jewish organizations
remember the members of their flock who are in prison or in jeopardy in
other countries. We are our brothers' keepers, all of us. And I hope
the message will go forth from this conference: To prisoners of
conscience throughout the world, take heart; you have not been forgotten.
We, your cause our cause, and we vow never to relent until you have regained
the freedom that is your birthright as a child of God."
—Ronald Reagan,
at a Conference on Religious Liberty, 16 April 1985
I hope there were no non-religious
prisoners around the world!
|
