Priest Alert: They Aren’t Just After Your Kids Anymore. (part III)

Priest Alert: They Aren’t Just After Your Kids Anymore. (part III)

The scariest thing about the most recent nonsense wherein a candidate for President of the United States has announced that he does not think there should be a separation of church and state—read that “of government and religion”—in our country is that a lot of Americans seem to agree with him.

This may be what happens when you quit teaching Civics in public schools. Kids in school now do not know what a floppy drive is, or was, and they certainly do not know much about just why, and just how, our nation was formed.

For some time now, the Religious Right has been trying to get rid of public schools so vouchers can be approved so children can go to the religious school of their parents’ choice. Quit having class in Phys Ed, Geography, Math, Evolution, and cut out music programs, and before too long a self-fulfilling prophesy will be achieved and, because the public schools are producing morons who cannot cipher or think critically about anything, people will accept vouchers.

This is the way religion can create a theocracy. Little bite by little bit. And before too long, the Priests are making all of the rules. The inmates will be running the asylum. Faith based programs will pick up, and before too long churches will be running the country. Fundamentalist Protestants know this, and the Catholic Church well understands—better than the poor dumb Protestants whom the brilliant minds of the church have managed to persuade to take their side on the question of abortion. All so that the infallibility of the Pope on the issue of abortion can be upheld and no longer challenged. The church has been there before and religionists have learned how to avoid certain mistakes that may make citizens not want to trust their priests.

Christianity became the dominant religion of Europe after the collapse of the Roman Empire. And church and state became one. The Holy Roman Empire was born.

A thousand or so years of religious rule then came to pass, in what we call the “Dark Ages.”

Our nation has been infected by a bad dose of religion. Australia got the convicts, and we got the Puritans. And today we suffer from their influence on our lives and government.

But to put fundangelical ideas to work in the government of our country is not only highly unwise, such is also screamingly unconstitutional.

Our founders knew what horrors could be wrought by religion. The hanging of women in Salem who were shamefully convicted of the imaginary crime of being witches is only one example. Read “The Crucible” for horrifying details.

I do not intend to provide a list of black collar crimes and religious horrors. This history is easily accessible, so far anyway, and we need not correct or refute some Jesuits who are posing as atheists on these pages to tell us just what is wrong about our clear understanding, not only of the truths of their faith that are seen as bad and wrong, but as to the true truths about their faith.

The Catholic Church has already paid out huge amounts of money in settlement of lawsuits brought against it alleging that priests of the church have committed unspeakable crimes against children.
If gold rust, what will iron do?

Would the Church have settled these cases if the facts were on their side?

Do Americans need to learn the hard way just why we have a First Amendment? The first words of the Bill of Rights are: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion…” That was not added without reason.

Note that it prohibits “establishment of religion,” not “establishment of a religion.” That is really important.

As before in this rant, please understand this is all satire and humor directed at an imaginary evil. Isn’t it?

This writing contains exactly 666 words. Neat, huh?

Edwin Kagin © 2012.


  1. HP says

    There’s an idea I’ve been tossing around in my brain for a while now, and since you and I live in the same part of the USA, and I saw you speak at the FIG@20 conference a few months ago, and since this post seems to open up the opportunity . . ..

    Here’s the thing. The separation of church and state, as enshrined in the US constitution in the establishment clause of the first amendment, is exactly the reason why the USA is the most religious developed nation in the world.

    The primary purpose of the establishment clause is to protect overt religiosity, while avoiding religious violence. The whole damn thing is legally constructed so as to allow all forms of religious extremism to thrive.

    All of the most secular states in the world have (or until recently had) some form of established church. The Church of England. The Church of Sweden. The Church of Rome. Etc., etc., etc. When Church is wedded to State, the Church is effectively neutered, because it is legally tied to the interests of the state, and the interests of the state are always pragmatic.

    The establishment clause in the First Amendment is a huge problem, and secularists/atheists should be fighting to change it, rather than defending it on shallow, legalistic grounds like Rick Santorum’s candidacy and various other church/state issues.

    How much better off would we be today if we’d adopted something like the French legal doctrine of Laicism? Laicism (the doctrine that all public servants must present a secular case for whatever they advocate) would mean that a Santorum could never be a candidate in the first place. Laicism still protects freedom of conscience, but prevents overt religiosity from entering the public sphere.

    I think the Founders had the best Enlightenment intentions in mind when they drafted the first amendment, but subsequent centuries, and the experience of myriad secular democracies since then, should have taught us something.

    • Eloi says

      No, thanks. As an atheist, I prefer the first amendment, and the rights of others to believe what they will. If you didn’t notice, he already gave an example of what happens when government and religion meet – the Dark Ages. A religious government’s practical response to protect itself is to destroy anything unlike itself. If the church of Sweden isn’t dangerous, it’s because it’s been undermined by reason and secularism. Our choices may not always be right, but at least they are ours – not forced on us by the state.

  2. Jeff Thompson says

    “Establishment of religion” vs. “establishment of A religion”. Thanks for pointing out the distinction. Great post, Edwin

  3. colinmackay says

    Hey Edwin,

    here in Australia the_idiots are well underway with their political influence. Following the NAR roadmap to dominion and all. We’re all fighting the same battle on this one. America exports some good things; religion isn’t one of them:(

Leave a Reply