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" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent 12/15/2007 11:12:13 PM
To: "Law & Religion issues for Law Academics" <religionlaw@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 [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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@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.
_______________________________________________
To post, send message to Religionlaw@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.
