Subscription: $15 / year

Membership: $15/year

All correspondence to:

Editor: Duane Bates

All correspondence to:

P. O. Box 1744

Greenville, SC 29602

 

 

February, 2009

The Voice of Sanity

THE NEWSLETTER OF THE UPSTATE S.C. SECULAR HUMANISTS

                 Visit our web-site for current and back-issues at: www.uscsh.org

                                      e-mail:  secularhmnst@aol.com   

     

THE SOURCE OF JEFFERSON’S “ WALL OF SEPARATION”

 

Jefferson's Letter to the Danbury Baptists
           The Final Letter, as Sent

To messers. Nehemiah Dodge, Ephraim Robbins, & Stephen S. Nelson, a committee of the Danbury Baptist association in the state of Connecticut.

Gentlemen

The affectionate sentiments of esteem and approbation which you are so good as to express towards me, on behalf of the Danbury Baptist association, give me the highest satisfaction. my duties dictate a faithful and zealous pursuit of the interests of my constituents, & in proportion as they are persuaded of my fidelity to those duties, the discharge of them becomes more and more pleasing.

Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," thus building a wall of separation between Church & State. Adhering to this expression of the supreme will of the nation in behalf of the rights of conscience, I shall see with sincere satisfaction the progress of those sentiments which tend to restore to man all his natural rights, convinced he has no natural right in opposition to his social duties.

I reciprocate your kind prayers for the protection & blessing of the common father and creator of man, and tender you for yourselves & your religious association, assurances of my high respect & esteem.

Th Jefferson
Jan. 1. 1802.

This letter is the source of the famous “wall of separation” quotation that people on both sides of the argument cite when discussing the relationship of religion and government.  While we concentrate our discussion on that term, we tend to ignore what I think is an equally important part of the quote: “that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions”.

 

It appears, based on his general view of religion and government, that Jefferson meant for the readers to understand that the word “opinion” includes religious beliefs, but the use of that single word allows people to draw different conclusions about his intent.  If, however, you believe that your religious beliefs are not just an “opinion”, but also the absolute, factual, eternal truths that are an integral part of the government our Founding Fathers created, serious differences are sure to develop.

 

The current controversy about the SC “I Believe” license plates is a good example of the improper entanglement of religion and government that I believe Jefferson was trying to avoid.  Our state government allow groups of citizens who want their license plate to identify them as a member of a particular group or support of a given cause to band together and purchase a special plate for the sum of $4000, or 400 prepaid orders. I invite each reader to go the South Carolina Department of Motor Vehicles website (scdmv.com) and look at the 114 identity plates for sale by our government. (Select the Plate Gallery on the left)

 

Virtually every college and university in the state has a special plate that is used to raise scholarship funds and there are several that raise money for specific diseases, and causes.  They also include license plate mottos such as “Gone Fishing”, “First in Golf”, “Shag” and “Parrothead”.  The prices for these special plates range up to $75 plus the normal fee.  Many of the identity plates are trying to raise money for scholarships or other worthy causes cost about $70 plus the normal fee of $24.  The state keeps about $30 of the $70 and sends $40 to the college, university or other charity. The identity plate buyers in these cases are paying the State of South Carolina $30 to send $40 to their selected charity or cause. Does this make any financial sense to you? It certainly does not to me.

 

If you want to make a donation to your school, any identity plate cause or charity, why not make a donation directly and avoid the cost of $30 you are paying the state to write a check for you?  If you want to be identified as a graduate of your college or university, support a particular cause or activity, why not put a vanity plate for the front of your car, a nice bumper sticker or a special license plate frame like the car dealers do? Virtually all of the 114 identity plates in the gallery can and should be supplied by the private sector at, I would guess, a lower price and allow you to send more money to your selected cause.

 

This is the classic “nose of the camel under the tent” scenario.   A group asks the government to do something for them that they should be doing for themselves through the private sector and it grows out on control as others seek that same opportunity or advantage. Government is supposed to treat everyone equally, so once the privilege is established for one group, every other group can ask for the same treatment.  Identity plates for colleges, university and other special interest groups eventually grew into identity plates that display religious, socially or politically sensitive causes, and the battle is on with the government in the middle.  When the government took that first step to provide identity plates for special interest groups, the stage was set for the current divisive arguments.

 

What we need are an elected political leadership that recognizes the danger of mixing religion and government even though they may sincerely believe that their religion is the only “true” one and steadfastly refuse to allow any favoritism to any religious belief system, even their own. A true democratic government must remain rigidly neutral in relation to religious beliefs and refuse any attempts for requests for support, special treatment or recognition. Whenever we allow government and religion to be commingled, we invite serious problems and divisive arguments.

 

South Carolina is strongly religious and politically conservative and our elected representatives reflect the makeup of the majority of voters. But might, be it physical or political, does make right.  Because conservative and religious voters are an important political component of our state, and the fact the many legislators share their beliefs, our government has wrongly allowed this improper entanglement.  Once allowed, these special identity plates must be allowed for all organizations, causes or beliefs that are willing to meet the financial requirements.

 

The best solution is for the government is stop issuing all identity plates and turn that business back to the private sector with the following few exceptions: personalized standard plates (currently available) and plates issued to recognize military service of some type or to recognize a disability that provides some needed special parking privileges. 

 

I believe the humanist’s identity plate (In Reason We Trust) puts us in the same category as the Christians that requested the “I Believe” identity plates, and if I had been a member of the Charleston Humanists group I would have argued against the plan to have our own plate.  I fully support the legal suit that finally resulted in the ruling that the “I Believe” plates was unconstitutional if the State of SC allowed any favorable treatment for it, but we have an obligation to object to the improper entanglement of church and state without making the situation worse. 

 

 

      The Ten Commandments of Evangelical Capitalism

BY

                                              R. Georges Delamontagne*

 

I

I am PROFIT, thy Lord and God.  Thou shalt have no other gods before me.

 

II

Thou  shalt not make for thyself an idol, excepting paper and coin currency, precious metals and stones, oil, and stock options.

 

III

Thou shalt not make wrongful use of the name of the Lord, though the phrase “In Profit We Trust,” or similar sentiment, may be printed on thy currency.

IV

Remember the Sabbath, but keepeth thy retail establishments open.

 

V

Honor thy father, Greed, and thy mother, Selfishness.

 

VI

Thou shalt covet thy neighbor’s spouse, house, cars, swimming pools, and other possessions to a degree that is in direct proportion to how much thou feeleth unfairly deprived.

 

VII

  Thou shalt exploit the environment and labor in my name’s sake.

 

VIII

Thou  shalt protect, preserve, and promote increasing levels of income inequality.

 

IX

 Thou  shalt not redistribute wealth.

 

X

Thou shalt ignore the poor and disadvantaged.

 

 

 

 A Challenge to the Fairness Principle of Secular Humanism

 

 

In “The Principles of Fairness: Progressive Taxation” (Free Inquiry, October/November, 2006) Paul Kurtz presented the most convincing ethical argument I have ever read in opposition to current U.S government income and wealth tax policies, both of which are becoming increasingly regressive.  As a professional sociologist (now retired) I taught courses in social stratification and social inequality, and, while I have never wavered regarding my endorsement of and commitment to American Sociology’s identification with the “value-free” approach and methodology of positivistic science, I have simultaneously always felt a moral responsibility to share with my students my personal beliefs in the rightness of the ideals of fairness and equality of opportunity, which are so fundamental to the integrity and survival of our liberal democracy.

 

            These days, as Kurtz reminds us, “Those who would deny any principles of fairness believe that evangelical capitalism is the savior of society, almost ‘the hand of God,’ rewarding the devout and virtuous (italics added).”  I offer my Ten Commandments of Evangelical Capitalism as a complement to and extension of the ‘savior‘ and ‘hand of God’ metaphors. 

 

            Regressive taxation policies are among the many dysfunctional  concomitants and consequences of evangelical capitalism, and articulation and contemplation of its ten commandments, while intended as an exercise in humor noir, helps us better to understand current U.S. government inertia, inability, and lack of will in dealing with such contemporary issues as poverty; inequality of educational opportunity and other life chances; privatization of public utilities, services and programs; exporting of capital investments and outsourcing of jobs; demise of the working and middle classes; lack of universal health care; environmental degradation; infringement on civil and human rights; pursuit of national interests through cowboy diplomacy and pre-emptive wars; leadership by misinformation, misdirection and manipulation; encouragement of hyper-consumerism; reactions to natural disasters (e.g. Hurricane Katrina); and national security, among others.

 

            As secular humanists we have an ethical responsibility to advocate for progressive taxation of both income and wealth.  Our endorsement of “The Affirmations of Humanism: A Statement of Principles” also requires us to rail against and certainly disobey at every opportunity The Ten Commandments of Evangelical Capitalism.

 

*R. Georges Delamontagne is a nom de plume for a retired university administrator and professor of sociology whose interests include the political economy, social theory, social stratification, social inequality, demography, research methods and statistics.

 

This article appears on page 56 in the December 2008/January 2009 issue of Free Inquiry, published by the Council for Secular Humanism.  It is reproduced here by permission of the author.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

MARCH 2009 MEETING SCHEDULE

 

March Brunch: The March brunch will be held on Saturday, March 14th at 10:30AM at Denny’s Restaurant, 2521 Wade Hampton Blvd., Greenville.  Call Duane Bates at 423-0802 for directions and more information.

 

 

March MONTHLY MEETING:  The March monthly meeting will on Sunday, March 22nd, at 5 PM at the home of Elaine and Jo Norwood, 19 Oakleaf, Greenville, SC.  The Norwoods will provide the main course.  Call Jo or Elaine at 268-1889 to coordinate you contribution to the dinner.