Jan Ireland
Relativism, religion, and the First Amendment
By Jan Ireland
To launch the greatest experiment in freedom the world has ever known, America's Founding Fathers must have possessed freedom in their very DNA. But nature apparently passes along those freedom genes sparingly, since nothing like America has occurred before or since. It is not unexpected that freedom-hating forces, so rampant in the world, would do their best to chip away at America. Relativism, the idea that individuals decide according to their own personal judgments what is good or bad, is one of the greatest aggressors. A return to the public presence of religion, under the auspices of the First Amendment, may be needed to combat Relativism's erosive societal effects.
Relativism is perhaps the prettiest of all freedom-haters. It's a slow, insidious takeover. Its sinuous insertion into society can occupy decades. When rebuffed, it simply keeps trying, until for society it's easier not to fight.
Relativism plays to America's fairness. It purports to give equal weight to all systems of thought, all systems of belief. And it claims to empower the individual, by urging self-reliance. Who could argue with such a surface? Isn't that the reason America was founded, after all? Isn't that what the phrase in the Declaration of Independence says?
Actually, no. And here is where Relativism pulls its greatest bait and switch.
America was not founded to makes all things equal. America was founded to give freedom to all. The phrase in the Declaration that "all men are created equal" means just that. It does not say that they will then be equal in all ways at all times, throughout their lives, and in all their endeavors. That this idea virtually pervades American society today shows that semi-sages have misquoted and mangled our historical heritage for decades.
The surface arguments of Relativism pose another very real danger. Giving equal weight to all systems of belief or thinking, causes legitimate right thinking to be shunted aside. It's the "one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter" argument. That all societies, or even all within a society, don't agree on definitions does not mean the values themselves don't exist. And it is possible to determine which side in a fight is the terrorist, and which is the freedom fighter.
Relativism's favorite target is of course religion, since religion is its antithesis. Liberals whipping up a furor to expunge any vestige of God from the public square now are operating from the extreme of Relativism. The seemingly benign tenets of Relativism are actually an attempt to foist the liberals' beliefs, in effect their own "religion," onto society. This is why liberals constantly assert that there is a "separation of church and state" in the constitution, though the phrase does not appear there. It comes from a phrase in a letter Thomas Jefferson wrote, a full decade after the Bill of Rights were ratified. The greater trap for America, also, is that Relativism is so handily aided by political correctness.
Relativism often hides behind the "hate the sin, love the sinner" argument, and that argument has some validity. But the revolving door of offend/forgive/reoffend, a "get out of trouble free" card for everyone from pop singers to ex-presidents, has shown this argument's unsuitability to moral standard.
It is incongruous that we daily exhort society to heed medical advice, yet invite screaming banshees if we dare suggest that society seek spiritual advice. Just as advocating what works medically makes our society healthier, advocating what works spiritually could make our society happier. Some seem not to want integrity and ethical behavior to return to America.
The First Amendment says about religion, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;…" The murky minds of liberals and atheists have played the child's game of Twister with those words, so that they have become an unrecognizable screed. They construe them as a phony mandate to systematically remove every smidgen of the evidence of the Christian God.
Relativism is allowing them to do it.
The best defense is America's return to the public expression of religion. It is not prohibited by the Constitution. It does not exclude anyone. And a careful reading of our history shows that it is what the Founding Fathers had in mind.
© Jan Ireland
To launch the greatest experiment in freedom the world has ever known, America's Founding Fathers must have possessed freedom in their very DNA. But nature apparently passes along those freedom genes sparingly, since nothing like America has occurred before or since. It is not unexpected that freedom-hating forces, so rampant in the world, would do their best to chip away at America. Relativism, the idea that individuals decide according to their own personal judgments what is good or bad, is one of the greatest aggressors. A return to the public presence of religion, under the auspices of the First Amendment, may be needed to combat Relativism's erosive societal effects.
Relativism is perhaps the prettiest of all freedom-haters. It's a slow, insidious takeover. Its sinuous insertion into society can occupy decades. When rebuffed, it simply keeps trying, until for society it's easier not to fight.
Relativism plays to America's fairness. It purports to give equal weight to all systems of thought, all systems of belief. And it claims to empower the individual, by urging self-reliance. Who could argue with such a surface? Isn't that the reason America was founded, after all? Isn't that what the phrase in the Declaration of Independence says?
Actually, no. And here is where Relativism pulls its greatest bait and switch.
America was not founded to makes all things equal. America was founded to give freedom to all. The phrase in the Declaration that "all men are created equal" means just that. It does not say that they will then be equal in all ways at all times, throughout their lives, and in all their endeavors. That this idea virtually pervades American society today shows that semi-sages have misquoted and mangled our historical heritage for decades.
The surface arguments of Relativism pose another very real danger. Giving equal weight to all systems of belief or thinking, causes legitimate right thinking to be shunted aside. It's the "one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter" argument. That all societies, or even all within a society, don't agree on definitions does not mean the values themselves don't exist. And it is possible to determine which side in a fight is the terrorist, and which is the freedom fighter.
Relativism's favorite target is of course religion, since religion is its antithesis. Liberals whipping up a furor to expunge any vestige of God from the public square now are operating from the extreme of Relativism. The seemingly benign tenets of Relativism are actually an attempt to foist the liberals' beliefs, in effect their own "religion," onto society. This is why liberals constantly assert that there is a "separation of church and state" in the constitution, though the phrase does not appear there. It comes from a phrase in a letter Thomas Jefferson wrote, a full decade after the Bill of Rights were ratified. The greater trap for America, also, is that Relativism is so handily aided by political correctness.
Relativism often hides behind the "hate the sin, love the sinner" argument, and that argument has some validity. But the revolving door of offend/forgive/reoffend, a "get out of trouble free" card for everyone from pop singers to ex-presidents, has shown this argument's unsuitability to moral standard.
It is incongruous that we daily exhort society to heed medical advice, yet invite screaming banshees if we dare suggest that society seek spiritual advice. Just as advocating what works medically makes our society healthier, advocating what works spiritually could make our society happier. Some seem not to want integrity and ethical behavior to return to America.
The First Amendment says about religion, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;…" The murky minds of liberals and atheists have played the child's game of Twister with those words, so that they have become an unrecognizable screed. They construe them as a phony mandate to systematically remove every smidgen of the evidence of the Christian God.
Relativism is allowing them to do it.
The best defense is America's return to the public expression of religion. It is not prohibited by the Constitution. It does not exclude anyone. And a careful reading of our history shows that it is what the Founding Fathers had in mind.
© Jan Ireland
The views expressed by RenewAmerica columnists are their own and do not necessarily reflect the position of RenewAmerica or its affiliates.
(See RenewAmerica's publishing standards.)
