Blog Against Theocracy

[Andrew Crystall]

On 20 Mar 2008 at 23:36, Dave Land wrote:

> Folks,
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> This weekend, some folks on the Interwebs will be conducting a "Blog
> Against Theocracy" event. It doesn't appear to have an official
> "sponsor", but "First Freedom First", a group that stands for
> church-state separation (good for both sides of that divide, I think
> we may all agree) seems to be strongly behind it.

No.

All an explicit Church-State divide does is mean that politicians 
cannot explicitly be called on their overtly religious policies, 
because there is this "divide" in place so they couldn't *possibly* 
be religious.

When people are elected by a religious electorate, on religious 
policies, a "divide" is make-believe and only serves to prevent 
rational and mature discussion of policy. In a reprisentative 
democracy, you will have people elected who are religious by 
religious people - if you don't like this, you should be looking for 
another political system.

Oh, and it gets in the way of "this is what some people believe" 
religious education in schools.

AndrewC