Secularism a mere dream?

[ClubMed]

European Anti-Semitism and the Religious Right

What is not understood in Europe is the power of the Religious Right in Congress and how responsible it has become for Israel's policies, because it provides cover and money for everything that Sharon does. Europeans think it is the power of the Israeli Lobby which has morphed into a Sharon-Likud lobby, but Jews are immensely divided and very many are among the most critical about where Sharon's policies are leading. The RR is the real force making Bush cave in to Sharon at every meeting and afraid to make any demands for peace or show American resolve. The RR was also a main supporter of the attack on Iraq. Today its members are called "Christian Zionists."

[shahani]

So does this mean the RR is sponsoring terrorism by providing funds to Israel?

Or did I miss something?

[wallie_x]

So Christianity has evolved into Zionism?
(Yes of course, it's natural selection isn't it?)
Labeling something with a derogatory title is little less than the propaganda tactic of shallow fools.
However, just as myths usually have some basis in reality (or we couldn't identify with them) the term does have a semblance of what actually maybe taking place. I don't like the west's continually rubber-stamping Israeli nationalism, but I consider it the far lesser of two evils.
Even within Arab countries fundamentalist Islam has been put down by ruthless out and out deprivation or rights, even murder. Even those Arabs whom we might call moderate, can see the danger of its cancerous ideations to true civility and peaceful coexistence with others different than itself.

[shahani]

These views of course come from Israel's expansion of settlements, the brutal occupation, vicious reprisals and consequent disruption in the whole Muslim world, contribution to terrorism and so on.

Been saying this since 2001 here.

[RayH]

I personally do not support theocracies. It's hard to talk sense into anyone who wants to thump religious charters as the basis of existence.

Buddhists are the only ones who have never fought in the name of religion, although it was they who invented martial arts!

[ClubMed]

Well how close can religious groups get to political parties or governments before they cross the line of secularism?

[wallie_x]

ClubMed sez:

Well how close can religious groups get to political parties or governments before they cross the line of secularism?

Unfortunately, since neither has come to a consensus of just what constitutes a unified morality that applies to the whole of society, the line of demarcation will forever be blurred.

To complicate matters, many countries defined their ethics on Judeo-Christian ideologies. To secularists these ethics cross the line. The question then becomes where do we even begin; or do we concede that the two are like day and night and can never co-exist?

[ClubMed]

I agree. I have always argued that secularism exists only in books. In reality nations base their decisions not only on intelligence but on their beliefs too, religion makes up the societies of all nations on earth. Secularism serves only to attempt a separation in the legal sense, spiritually and on a mental level this separation does not exist and neither is it possible.

[wallie_x]

Also, we humans are moral beings. We constantly make decisions based on ethical principles, especially when dealing with each other socially.

The one consensus secularism seems unwavering in is its commitment to purge government from what it considers the evil influence of religion. However, at the same time they fail to see (or acknowledge) that most current forms of government were based on the ethics derived from religion.
Does this mean that in order to start from some sort of relgious purged secular orthodox purity that they need to start afresh and rewrite everything, including their ethics? What then is the source of their sanction to impose such authority? The state of course, but then the state becomes more like Stalin's USSR with absolute power over life and death in the hands of the few.
The secular equation opens up a whole sting of cans spilling over with worms.

Back to the point, I see no need to demonize certain aspects of the religious right because their idiocy is evident (and which actually gives Christianity a bad name). I don't believe they have near the political clout attributed to them in the link you posted.
But what truly amazes me is the clout the small Jewish factions have in this country due to its unusual political landscape. Any person running for office back in the north east needs their votes to get elected, so their say so in many matters of politics is grossly disproportionate to their actual numbers.

[ClubMed]

I tend to disagree in your last point, I believe there are a number of 'interest groups' or lobbies that have the required resources to make pressure, these are the religious right, the Jewish and the industry. Together their assets give them a huge amount of power to guide government on issues important to them.

The public, while able to match their power is fragmented and therefor weak, on top of that it is kept far away from the orbits of government.