State bill proposes Christianity be Missouri’s official religion

[banyon]

State bill proposes Christianity be Missouri’s official religion

12:28 AM CST on Friday, March 3, 2006
By John Mills, News 4

Missouri legislators in Jefferson City considered a bill that would name Christianity the state's official "majority" religion.

House Concurrent Resolution 13 has is pending in the state legislature.

Many Missouri residents had not heard about the bill until Thursday.

Karen Aroesty of the Anti-defamation league, along with other watch-groups, began a letter writing and email campaign to stop the resolution.

The resolution would recognize "a Christian god," and it would not protect minority religions, but "protect the majority's right to express their religious beliefs.

The resolution also recognizes that, "a greater power exists," and only Christianity receives what the resolution calls, "justified recognition."

State representative David Sater of Cassville in southwestern Missouri, sponsored the resolution, but he has refused to talk about it on camera or over the phone.

KMOV also contacted Gov. Matt Blunt's office to see where he stands on the resolution, but he has yet to respond.


KMOV (http://www.kmov.com/topstories/stories/030206ccklrKmovreligionbill.7d361c3f.html)(I think you might have to register here to view)

http://blogs.knoxnews.com/knx/silence/archives/2006/03/missouri_to_get.shtml (knoxville paper's summary)

[banyon]

I guess everybody is for this huh?

[Baby Lee]

It's going no where. And so is the rep who proposed it.

[JBucc]

What's the official religon now?

[Reaper16]

What's the official religon now?
Zoroastrianism.

The runner-up was "Spanish." Many people misunderstood the question, aparantly.

[DanT]

In Hegel's Philosophy of Right, he says something about law being weaker than custom. Whenever someone tries to make a law out of something that had formerly been a custom, it doesn't strengthen the custom. Rather, it's a sign that the custom is being displaced.

Something like that, anyway. That was almost 20 years ago that I read that. I'm sure I'm botching it up somehow.

[patteeu]

I think the legislature has run out of important business or something. Send them home.

ROFL @ Reaper16

[patteeu]

In Hegel's Philosophy of Right, he says something about law being weaker than custom. Whenever someone tries to make a law out of something that had formerly been a custom, it doesn't strengthen the custom. Rather, it's a sign that the custom is being displaced.

Something like that, anyway. That was almost 20 years ago that I read that. I'm sure I'm botching it up somehow.

I thought Ben Franklin said that. ;)

[DanT]

In Hegel's Philosophy of Right, he says something about law being weaker than custom. Whenever someone tries to make a law out of something that had formerly been a custom, it doesn't strengthen the custom. Rather, it's a sign that the custom is being displaced.

Something like that, anyway. That was almost 20 years ago that I read that. I'm sure I'm botching it up somehow.

It looks like I got that exactly wrong :doh!:! Here's an excerpt from Section 211 of the Philosophy of Right:
http://socserv2.mcmaster.ca/~econ/ugcm/3ll3/hegel/right.pdf
...Only when what is right becomes law does it receive not merely
the form of universality, but its own truest character. It is to select only
one phase of law, if we consider it merely as a valid rule of conduct
imposed upon all. Preceding this feature is the internal and essential
element of law, namely, the recognition of the content in its definite
“universality. Even the rights of custom exist as thought and are known.
Animals have law in the form of instinct; man alone has law in the form
of custom. The difference between custom and law consists merely in
this, that customs are known in a subjective and accidental way, and
hence are in their actual form more indefinite than laws. In custom, the
universality of thought is more obscured, and the knowledge of right is
a partial and accidental possession of a few. The idea that customs rather
than laws should pass over into life is a deception, because the valid
laws of a nation, when written and collected, do not cease to be customs.
People speak nowadays, indeed, most of all of life and of things
passing over into life, when they are conversant with nothing but the
deadest material and the deadest thoughts. When customs come to be
collected and grouped, as takes place with every people which reaches a
certain grade of civilization, there is formed a statute-book.
It is somewhat different from a statute-book properly so-called. A collection is
formless, indefinite, and fragmentary, whereas a real statute-book apprehends
and expresses in terms of thought the principles of law in their
universality. England’s land-law or common law is, as is well known,
made up both of statutes, having the forms of laws, and of so-called
unwritten laws. However, this unwritten law is written with a vengeance,
and a knowledge of it is possible only by reading the many quartos
which it fills. The monstrous confusion which prevails in that country,
both in the administration of justice and in the subject-matter of the law,
is graphically portrayed by those who are acquainted with the facts.

[Adept Havelock]

Somebody in Jefferson City has way too much spare time. First the Dominos Pizza nutjob that wants to build his little "sin-free" Catholic enclave in FL (I guess they will build a wall between some of the preists and the little boys), and now this.

Oy.

[Pitt Gorilla]

There is no doubt in my mind that Blunt would sign this.

[Nightwish]

Is there any reason we need an "official" state religion? I suspect the distinction might be about as important as the "state bird."

[Sully]

For some reason, the people on the other side of the religion I share with them (though i suspect, deep down, it's in name only) have gotten such a huge inferiority complex. Their people are in the most powerful positions in the government. They control more media, and more money than they ever had before. But now they must, at every turn, insist on using the Marty-esque, "It's everyone in the world against us" mantra. Doesn't matter that this is A) Not at all true, and B) A pathetic way to go about things.
No real point, other than the fact that it makes me sad.
Now, you are all welcome to come along and tell me how I'm "Christian bashing."

[the Talking Can]

Is there any reason we need an "official" state religion? I suspect the distinction might be about as important as the "state bird."

not if you're a part of the America Taliban...

[Sully]

I'm gonna laugh the first time I see some car with a bumper sticker that reads, "Dr James Dobson is MY President" or, locally, "Jerry Johnston is MY President."

no... that's not true.
... I will probably cry, actually.

[jettio]

The you-know-what is really going to hit the fan when the bill proposing that Dexter McCleon be named the Official Cornerback of Missouri makes it out of committee.

[Reaper16]

The you-know-what is really going to hit the fan when the bill proposing that Dexter McCleon be named the Official Cornerback of Missouri makes it out of committee.
ROFL ROFL

[|Zach|]

What a terrible idea.

[Hydrae]

State representative David Sater of Cassville in southwestern Missouri, sponsored the resolution, but he has refused to talk about it on camera or over the phone.

Way support your own proposal. Twit!

[Bowser]

So much for seperation of church and state.





Quick! High five me!

[Reaper16]

*High-fives Bowser*

[gblowfish]

State Motto should be changed to:
"Jesus Loves Me , But He Can't Stand You."

Op-ed from yesterday's St. Louis Post-Dispatch:
http://tinyurl.com/mocyl