Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!uwm.edu!rutgers!dimacs.rutgers.edu!aramis.rutgers.edu!athos.rutgers.edu!christian From: jdd@db.toronto.edu (John DiMarco) Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian Subject: Re: Church and State Message-ID: Date: 2 Sep 90 04:07:23 GMT Sender: hedrick@athos.rutgers.edu Organization: Department of Computer Science, University of Toronto Lines: 79 Approved: christian@aramis.rutgers.edu coatta@cs.ubc.ca (Terry Coatta) writes: >> And so, where such contradictions occur, I must >> respectfully and humbly disagree with those holding positions in variance >> with my own. >But there is a vast difference between you, as an individual, disagreeing >with someone, and you, as an individual, participating in a process of >legislating the correctness of your viewpoint. Does legislation demanding >that everyone become a Christian produce a nation of Christians? You'd >have to have a peculiar definition of ``Christian'' to accept this. No Christian can legislate belief. I cannot force others to accept my beliefs (even my Christian beliefs) as true. However, insofar as I, as a citizen of a democratic state, participate in the legislative process of my nation, my beliefs can -- and will -- determine the principles I wish the laws of my nation to uphold. If I wish the laws of my nation to reflect Christian principles, and I believe that the Christian principles are the best foundation for these laws, it is my *duty* as a citizen of a democracy to do my best to make sure the laws of my country reflect Christian principles. Thus, I want laws against murder, stealing, fraud, abuse, etc. These Christian principles I uphold do not advocate the legislation of belief. They do, however, require the establishment of justice insofar as it is humanly possible. >> Love for another may involve fighting for legal protection for that >> other's life. >... At the risk of the wrath of OFM >I will note that many of those who clamour for laws against abortion violate >this principle by claiming that the foetus has a soul from conception and >so deserves the full protection of the law as a person. Permitting such >a law, justified in this manner, is tantamount to legislating the existence >of God. If I believe the "foetus" is a person, it is my duty as a citizen of a democracy and a Christian to attempt to ensure justice for that person. I have the right and the duty to so act, regardless of the foundation of my beliefs (i.e. whether I believe in the personhood of the unborn child for religious or scientific reasons). If some other citizen disagrees, that citizen has the right to oppose me in the democratic process. Your comment about "legislating the existence of God" illustrates what may be the crux of our disagreement. If you mean, by "legislating", the making or enacting of a law, and if you mean, by law, a prescribed rule of conduct or action, "legislating the existence of God" makes no sense, because the "existence of God" is not a rule of conduct or action. If, by this phrase, you mean "legislating the holding of a belief in the existence of God", your analogy to a law protecting the unborn falls apart, because a law protecting unborn children does not necessarily legislate a belief in the personhood of unborn children. However, such a law would *recognize* (not legislate) the personhood of the unborn child. If, by your "legislating the existence of God" comment, you mean *recognizing* the existence of God, then your statement is correct. Indeed, permitting a law protecting the unborn child, for the reasons stated, recognizes the personhood of that child in the same way as a law might recognize the existence of God. And Canada has a law which recognizes the existence (and even the *supremacy* of God): Whereas Canada is founded upon the principles that recognize the supremacy of God and the rule of law... (the very first line of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, Constitution Act, 1982). Why, then, should the laws of Canada not recognize the personhood of the unborn child? Or any other Christian principle that the democratic citizens of this nation choose to require that the laws recognize? John -- John DiMarco jdd@db.toronto.edu or jdd@db.utoronto.ca University of Toronto, CSRI BITNET: jdd%db.toronto.edu@relay.cs.net (416) 978-8609 UUCP: uunet!utai!db!jdd