For those interested in how Catholic beliefs can influence a view of law and policy, I recommend the blog Mirror of Justice. It should be a good read even for non-Catholics, and its run and posted to by some very intelligent people.
I wanted to take the time here to respond to part of a post by Professor Mike Scaperlanda (of the University of Oklahoma's law school) that was particularly interesting to me:
I feel I must disagree with him on that point. While I concede that many of our great public figures have had a strong element of faith in their lives, I disagree that that makes public theism (soft or hard) a part of American values.
What I think it demonstrates is an acceptance of both public theism and public atheism as expressions of personal beliefs in the public sphere. American leaders can express their religious beliefs because, as a people, we understand the difference between the guiding capability of a private conscience and the imposition of public theism.
In other words, America has a tradition of secular (extratheistic, if you will) leadership guided by morals, with those morals being theistic or atheistic depending upon the leader. While it's of course possible I misunderstood Professor Scaperlanda, I think "soft public theism" suggests a system where theistic values are accepted as public values in and of themselves, rather than as a private guide in the quest to determine public values.
I wanted to take the time here to respond to part of a post by Professor Mike Scaperlanda (of the University of Oklahoma's law school) that was particularly interesting to me:
With respect to the role of religion in one's life and education, our country has a long history of what I might call soft public theism. The Declaration of Independence, Madison's Memorial and Remonstrance ("Before any man can be considered as a member of Civil Society, he must be considered as a subject of the Governour of the Universe"), Washington's Farewell Address, Thanksgiving proclamations, Lincoln's Second Inaugural, etc. all testify to this.What I take Professor Scaperlanda to be saying is that American values are based in part on theism even though it is equally a part of our values to not impose our theology on others.
I feel I must disagree with him on that point. While I concede that many of our great public figures have had a strong element of faith in their lives, I disagree that that makes public theism (soft or hard) a part of American values.
What I think it demonstrates is an acceptance of both public theism and public atheism as expressions of personal beliefs in the public sphere. American leaders can express their religious beliefs because, as a people, we understand the difference between the guiding capability of a private conscience and the imposition of public theism.
In other words, America has a tradition of secular (extratheistic, if you will) leadership guided by morals, with those morals being theistic or atheistic depending upon the leader. While it's of course possible I misunderstood Professor Scaperlanda, I think "soft public theism" suggests a system where theistic values are accepted as public values in and of themselves, rather than as a private guide in the quest to determine public values.
No comments:
Post a Comment
I encourage commenters to use their real name, although I do not require it.
Blogger employs an automatic spam filtering algorithm for comments. If a non-spam comment has been filtered out, email source4politics@gmail.com and the issue will be investigated.