This is really sad. Charley is the one columnist I would read if I could only read one thing each day. Goodbye by Charley Reese http://www.lewrockwell.com/reese/reese493.html Hopefully someone else can pick up his pen and carry on. You can most of Charley's recent archive here, http://www.lewrockwell.com/reese/reese-arch.html ##
Peace to his family, but I won't miss Mr. Reese's columns at all. Declaring America a Christian country, he told all others to take a hike and leave. Not my cup of tea.
I believe you mean this one http://www.lewrockwell.com/reese/reese246.html I didn't interpret it that way, in fact, he admits that Christmas wasn't even part of his religious tradition. I think he was more making a statement that people are entitled to believe what they want to believe, and that the Constitution protects the right to have a religion, Christian or otherwise, not to drive religion out of the culture. Or maybe I'm interpreting it wrong.
Yep, that's the article, Guerilla. Where I took issue was here: and Endemic to this is that as America is a Christian land, if you don't like it, leave; secondly, if you're in the minority opinion, screw you as well; and, finally, that those of us who do have a problem with what we feel is an unconstitutional mixing of private faith and public governance - the subject of many threads, recent history here alone - are somehow psycho, un-American marginals. I wrote the op-ed in our local paper back then, and I don't remember my general state of mind; but for some time, I've had an issue with what I see as a perversion of Christianity, for one (my posts today on the "collateral damage" thread), and my perception of a profound conflation of the Christian right's theology, and American politics, as it has taken place over the last several years, for another. So, my op-ed spoke to that, particularly the last three paragraphs; I was trying in these closing comments to express my hope for tomorrow, for all of us living in America. Far too much "I'm right, you're wrong, and because of it, you're not American" - and it comes from both sides of the political spectrum. Nice to have a civil exchange, Guerilla.
Yes, very nice. On the first quote, I think the next paragraph is important to the context, but it's not a big deal to me. My personal impression of him was never that his religion came before anything else, but then I don't really look at the religious angle often, being an agnostic for a long time, and now an atheist.
Northpointaki, Can you explain what's wrong with this paragraph? "I don't believe there is a war against Christmas, but there are secular cranks and crackpots who hate it, and there are timid merchants, politicians and bureaucrats who seem to think it is better to offend the majority than the cranks and crackpots. The United States of America's population is overwhelmingly Christian, at least nominally. If you don't like Christians, then you should emigrate to China or Saudi Arabia, where they are definitely a minority. Then you won't have to be bothered by the rest of us celebrating Christmas or Easter, though why it should bother anyone is a mystery."
Content, Well, much of my issue is contained in the op-ed piece I reprinted above. Basically: -"Not liking Christianity" isn't un-American, and being in a minority opinion isn't a reason to be urged to leave my country; this is no different than being told "you don't support the administration's actions in the Iraq war, then get the hell out of America." Personally, there is much I admire in the historical Christ's message, though I also believe it has been extremely perverted over the last few decades with the rise of the Christian right. -Those of us who have an issue with the mixing of Christian theology and public governance are not marginal, psychotic social misfits; from John Adams, James Madison, Thomas Jefferson to today, we have a bona fide issue with the heart of what Mr. Reese is espousing in his view on the first amendment to the Constitution; -Mr. Reese got it wrong from the start - there isn't a "separation clause": And I tried to show some of the constitutional issues actually at play in my abridged review of some key decisions since WWII. Basically, though Mr. Reese's article is entitled "tolerate everyone's religion," in my opinion he cloaked this ecumenicalism - as Guerilla pointed out, he discussed celebrating other people's religious festivals with them - while perverting what has actually been said and written on the subject of religion and the state. For example, Mr. Reese cites Thomas Jefferson in support of his view on the first amendment: When, as I've printed elsewhere here, Thomas Jefferson couldn't be any clearer in disagreement. since he first coined the term "wall of separation" respecting private faith and public governance: Basically, I sniffed scapegoatism in the timbre of his article: Coming from a guy who showed a very poor understanding of the very First Amendment to the Constitution he used, I was offended, and my discussion of WWII, its costs and achievements included, was sincerely part of why I was offended. No one has the right to declare who is, and isn't, a "proper American," as there is room for all of us.
Oh no... Charley Reese retired from Antiwar.com too! Damn... He was good... Damn! There are few people who side wih justice, and are unafraid to tell the truth. Mr. Reese was one of those few... I hope he enjoys his retirement.. http://www.antiwar.com/reese/