(No Title)
Well, the Program needs work, but I’m feeling good about it. So, it’s time for a blog.
After reading Remyn’s policy statement, I think I need to type my own. Not so much to proselytize, but more to clarify my own beliefs. The recent political debate going on just about everywhere has called some of these older beliefs to the carpet, and I think it’s time to restate and reform some of them. So, here goes the rough draft:
CORE PRINCIPLES
1. People, on the whole, should be left to their own means to do what they wish to do and accept the consequences. It is not the government’s job to instruct people as to how they should live their lives. And, if the government does get into this business, it is by default causing itself to accept the responsibility for people’s actions.
2. The government should only interfere with the public free will when the action is mutually agreed to be for the common good but is not in any faction’s localized good (or ability) to carry out on its own. Space exploration is a good example of a “government interference” that has yielded great common good while opposing the typical laws of microeconomics. However, many of these fields become commercially viable after a span of time and should be released to private interest for further (and typically more aggressive and effective) development. Protection of the environment is another one of these actions which would never be implemented without government interference.
3. The government’s primary functions are to provide for the common defense and protect the rights of the individual.
RELIGION, BACKGROUND AND COMMENTARY
The country was founded by many people who held deistic principles. It was not founded upon Christianity, but it was in part founded by Christians. Many founders were theists, some were invariably atheists. Our currency and Pledge both mention God. This offends many people in today’s society, many of whom are vocal with their dissent. Many less vocal citizens have undoubtedly been offended by these policies in earlier times.
The intent of the founding fathers was not to have God and state be separate; they were explicitly worried about a church, a single church, becoming part of the state. This modus operandi was an excellent protocol until the assumption that deism (and more specific faiths) prevailed on a highly-mainstream level began to lose validity. Now that deistic belief is not seen as much as a cultural prerequisite, the very idea of the “official” acknowledgement of God is at question.
The American system of laws reflects the spirit of the Ten Commandments. The Ten Commandments reflect the spirit of many other ethnic codes of law in history. Law in itself reflects the “divine” nature of the human spirit. For this, Christians should thank God, Jews should thank Jehovah, Muslims should thank Allah, and Atheists should thank Reason. No one group should be prohibited or looked down upon in thanking their Lawgiver.
RELIGION, THE CHRISTIAN DUTY AND PERSPECTIVE
Christians in America do not have any amount of duty to ensure that American society is Christian. Christians in America and all over the world do have the divinely-charged duty to ensure that as many people as possible are Christian. One can assume that larger numbers of individual believers would naturally bring about a stronger Christian influence in society. The only Christian duty to American society is to use the democratic, God-given power (as all power is) of their vote to the end that their wishes for themselves and the rest of society might be best served. In other words, they may vote for a Christian society but they need not impose one.
RELIGION, IN THE MAINSTREAM
Definition: appreciable religion
An ideology that draws enough of a distinction with other ideologies to necessitate a duty amongst its followers to convince others of their system’s validity.
Any appreciable religion is a religion of dissent. American followers of all appreciable religions should have expectations of their society consistent with the idea of a “protected dissenter.” The concept of protected dissent is established implicitly by the First Amendment.
The nature of majority rule in American society gives the lawmaking ability to the prominent ideology. Therefore, if deism is mainstream and its followers are active in government, Congress may pass laws that further the position of deists. The Bill of Rights only limits this lawmaking ability at the point that it impinges upon the right of the minority to dissent.
Any limiting function beyond this basic, Constitutional level must be self-imposed by the people. Deists, or any other group in prominence, may question, upon the basis of their personal moral system, the essential fairness of supporting a position that is in their own interest. This limiting function goes to basic human fairness, and without such self-checking the nation would unravel in special interests.
RELIGION, A CONCLUSION
The government is not forbidden from acknowledging God at the will of the majority, because an acknowledgement of God is not an explicit hindrance to the practice of a dissenting religion. It can be argued that Christianity holds the mainstream majority in cultural influence; in the scientific and academic communities, however, Christianity is an ideology of dissent. If the majority is ever to view their own acts, such as the public acknowledgement of God, as unfair against their own moral standards, they should initiate the effort to overrule the offending policy.
SOCIETAL STRUCTURE
All citizens of the United States hold equal standing under the law. The government should provide no aid to one group or person that exceeds or falls short of the aid given to another. The private sector may give aid as it pleases up to the point of a moral or legal limit to further equality (i.e., government-impoosed equal opportunity for housing and loans) as pursuant to the government’s counter-force that promotes the public good against private interest (Core #2).
ABORTION
Life begins scientifically at the zygote. American laws protect life, and the life of the zygote should be protected as the life of a human.
EVOLUTION
Evolution, as the inscriptions of “God” on currency, offends the ideology of many. However, as it is the majority opinion it is to be upheld until minority opinion gains force or majority conscience imposes a limit.
Evolution should be taught as a theoretical model that explains and/or predicts an otherwise mysterious phenomenon (as all science, even gravity, intrinsically does).