alarming new law?

[Richard Dougherty]

Well, maybe you will; see below.  Congress does this sort of thing regularly.  (Haven't seen one for atheists yet, but I can't keep up.)
Marty: Do you think the "whereas" you cited that was left out was omitted because it was too over the top, or because the wording of it might actually divide Christians?  (I'm thinking of the specific reference to the Bible especially.)
 
Richard J. Dougherty
Resolution on Buddhism (Vietnam):http://usinfo.state.gov/dhr/Archive/2003/Dec/01-499319.html
Resolution on Judaism:http://www.350th.org/commission/Jewish%20350th%20Res%20passes%20Joint%2011-24.pdf
Resolution on Islam:http://usinfo.state.gov/xarchives/display.html?p=washfile-english&x=20071003165444mlenuhret0.9762384&m=October
On Ramadan:http://pewforum.org/news/display.php?NewsID=14293
-----Original Message-----
From: "Jean Dudley" <jean.dudley at gmail.com>
Sent 12/15/2007 11:12:13 PM
To: "Law & Religion issues for Law Academics" <religionlaw at lists.ucla.edu>
Subject: Re: alarming new law?
It's not a law, it's a "non-binding resolution".  Legally, it's pabulum.  Still, it's a waste of the House's time, IMO.  What effects it has on society at large is up for speculation.  I see it as indicative of a wider mindset that Christians are "persecuted" here and the world over.  Of course they are;  As are Jews, Muslims, Atheists, Buddhists, and every other cultural subset.  Susan, you and I will not live to see a resolution like this passed for any other religion in the good ol' US of A.  
JeanOn Dec 15, 2007, at Sat, Dec 15,  8:49 PM, Susan Freiman wrote:This just came to me from an atheists' list.  Is it true?
Susan
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~`PRESS RELEASEFOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE The Council for Secular Humanism Chides Congress for Disrespecting Religions(December 14, 2007) -- Experts from the Council for Secular Humanism noted with alarm the passage of H. Res. 847 in the House of Representatives. This unnecessary, unwarranted, and bigoted law, under the misleading title "Recognizing the Importance of Christm as and the Christian Faith" passed the House with overwhelming bipartisan support It effectively undermines the sort of religious tolerance necessary in these changing times.  
Just days ago in the midst of the Jewish Festival of Lights, four Jewish men in New York City  were attacked on the subway for replying to a group of ten people who wished them a "Merry Christmas" with a similar greeting: "Happy Hanukkah.  For this, these men were first insulted, then beaten. It was a Muslim man who came to their physical defense.  The actions of the Congress, by passing the resolution and thus expressing preference to the Christian faith over all the others represented by the diverse population of these United States , encourages this sort of behavior.
The First Amendment's guarantee of religious liberty, and of the nonestablishment of religion, was devised to create a secular state in which all religions would be equally tolerated and none given preference. The language of the House resolution effectively undermines the design of the Founders, and creates an atmosphere where non-Christians will continue to be targeted, treated like second-class citizens, and even become victims of violence like those four Jewish subway riders in New York .
Paul Kurtz , CSH chair, stated, "It is deplorable that in this day and age and in light of violence against religious minorities here in the United States that the Congress would stoke those flames with preferential language in support of a single religion."  David Koepsell , CSH's executive director, noted,  "Te First Amendment Guarantee was designed to prevent the sort of religious intolerance that resulted in violence in Europe, and our Congress should respect the intent of the Founders."
We call on the Congress to reject this resolution, to stand up for religious freedom, secularism, and pluralism, and to foster a climate in which all believers and nonbelievers alike are treated equally.__._,_.__________________________________________________To post, send message to Religionlaw at lists.ucla.eduTo subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlawPlease note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private.  Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others._______________________________________________
To post, send message to Religionlaw at lists.ucla.edu
To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw
Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private.  Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.ucla.edu/pipermail/religionlaw/attachments/20071216/5b55f7af/attachment.htm