stencil wrote:
> Robert Owen:
>
> >
> >It is truly astonishing that, after the perhaps 2,500-year
> >documentation of the human tendency to inflict violence on
> >his own kind to achieve merely selfish ends, we still listen to
> >those who advocate that some personal acquisitive desire
> >should be regarded as superordinate to the welfare of the
> >community upon which this individual depends. Any claim
> >of privilege is forfeit by those whose very polemics are
> >grounded in social indifference.
> >
> If we substitute "God" for "society" in this paragraph we get
> something that - to me- is indistinguishable from religious
> enthusiasm.
It is certainly possible to deify a social group or its leaders --
we have in ancient times the Divine Emperor Augustus, and
the medieval "Divine Right of Kings". Consider the "Tribes of
Israel" -- not a deified, but a "sacred and chosen" people.
Very like "Manifest Destiny" during the expansionist, if not
imperialist, phase of American history. "Nationalism" can
degenerate into a perverse form of religious fanaticism.
But in a democracy, we are all in principle EQUAL* and we are
said to have "inalienable rights" not because we are divine
but because "we were endowed by our Creator" with these
rights. And one constitutional responsibility of our elected
government is to protect our right to life, liberty and the
pursuit of "Happiness", as well as to secure the General
Welfare. Our founding fathers were deists, not theists. The
majority were both Unitarians and/or Freemasons. The LAST
thing they wanted was a "theocracy" and that is why our
articles of incorporation stress the separation of church and
state.
All this is important because our utilitarian ethic is designed
to assure the greatest good for the greatest number --
that is the Ideal situation. But we neither worship each other,
nor our government, which we can abolish "if it becomes
destructive of these ends", nor our President, who has
exactly the same amount of power (in theory) as the
Congress and the Supreme Court -- we hardly worship
them.
I -- and probably you -- consider it a grave constitutional
error to include the word "God" in our loyalty oath -- all
societies have them. But I as an individual, and you, don't
make the rules; they are fabricated on the basis of what to
men and women of good will is considered a consensus of
opinion (in principle). But "love of country", like "reverence
for ancestors" and "devotion to family" DO tap some of the
same emotional resources exploited by organized religions.
The remainder of your post deserves a response -- I think
I should terminate this post here. We can continue our
discussion if you wish -- write me anytime either to talk
or tell me if you would like me to comment on the rest of
your thoughtful post online.
Respectfully,
Bob
--------------------------------------------------------
*Strictly, "created" equal and actually equal under the law.
This does not imply the absence of degrees of social merit
associated with offices any more than we all have I.Q.'s of
100 -- some children's' mental age exceeds their chronolog-
ica age and they merit special educational treatment. More
on "democracy" "aristocracy" and "meritocracy" if you wish.
=======================
Robert M. Owen
Director
The Orion Institute
57 W. Morgan Street
Brevard, NC 28712-3659 USA
=======================
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jul 27 2000 - 14:05:37 MDT