The Decision of Catholic Bishops in the U.S. to possibly deny President Biden, and other Politicians who are members of the Church, Communion if they do not renounce and alter their views on Abortion is another attempt to FORCE INDIVIDUAL CHURCH DOCTRINE INTO LAW, MAKING IT BINDING ON ALL AMERICANS.
In the recent past, it was usually SOCIALLY CONSERVATIVE FAITHS EMPHASIZING EVANGELISM, WHICH OFTEN MEANT STRICT ADHERENCE TO THEIR OWN INTERPRETATION OF THE MEANINGS OF "GODS WORD" CONTAINED IN THE CHRISTIAN BIBLE, THAT SOUGHT TO CREATE A LEGAL SYSTEM ENFORCING SPECIFIC BELIEFS THAT WOULD BE APPLIED TO ALL AMERICANS, REGARDLESS OF FAITH.
The Catholic Church in the U.S. may now be attempting to do the same thing, possibly seeking an alliance with those BELIEF SYSTEMS THAT WISH TO CREATE A THEOCRACY IN THE U.S., ABOLISHING CONSTITUTIONAL LAW.
THE FOLLOWING IS AN ARTICLE I WROTE THAT ADDRESSES CERTAIN PARTS OF THE CONTROVERSY. I WILL EXPAND UPON THESE ISSUES IN A FUTURE POST.
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
ETHICS AND MORALITY. PERSONAL ETHICS VS INSTITUTIONAL ETHICS, OR FINDING GOD VS FORCING GOD. PT 1.
Why is it that people with certain Moral Beliefs, automatically feel it is their mission to see that others also adopt this same ETHICAL SYSTEM?
What is even more Disturbing, is their desire to see it instituted into Law, either by Statute or Judicial Decree. Unfortunately, the Lack of Freedom to Choose never seems to bother them, unless it inhibits their own ability to make Individual Decisions.
FREEDOM OF RELIGION, AS A RIGHT, INCLUDES THE ABILITY TO OBEY OR DISOBEY ANY FORM OF RELIGIOUS DOCTRINE. IT IS NOT A MATTER OF SELECTING WHICH FORMS OF FAITH CAN BE LEGALIZED, AND ADJUSTING THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM TO CONFORM. NONE OF THEM ARE TO BE PART OF ANY CODE OF LAW, BECAUSE THE CONCEPT OF 'FREEDOM OF RELIGION' WOULD BE MEANINGLESS.
A Response to this is could be something like: "The Word of God is Absolute, we must Convert or Convince others that their only hope for Salvation is accepting Scripture, and Submitting to Gods Will."
This type of Response makes the following Assumptions;
- DEFINING "GOD" IS THEIR RESPONSIBILITY AND MUST BE ACCEPTED.
- That Their DEFINITION OF GOD IS THE CORRECT ONE.
- THAT FAITH ALONE IS REQUIRED AND NECESSARY. NO LOGICAL PROOFS OR SCIENTIFIC METHODOLOGY IS NEEDED TO "KNOW THE TRUTH."
- That GOD HAS REVEALED INSTRUCTIONS FOR A MORAL LIFE, THROUGH INTERPRETATIONS OF SPECIFIC TEXTS, WHICH MUST BE ACCEPTED AS TRUE AND INFALLIBLE.
- "SALVATION" IS A DESIRABLE GOAL, THAT CAN ONLY BE ACHIEVED BY OBEYING THESE INSTRUCTIONS.
Now there is nothing UNCONSTITUTIONAL OR ILLEGAL about believing any of the above. A FREE SOCIETY allows each of us to find answers on our own and being able to share our BELIEFS OR FAITH with others.
HOWEVER, THERE IS A BIG DIFFERENCE BETWEEN CONVERTING OR CONVINCING SOMEONE TO ACT OR BELIEVE CERTAIN RELIGIOUS DEFINITIONS OR ABSOLUTES VOLUNTARILY, AND FORCING THEM TO THROUGH THREATS OF CRIMINAL OR CIVIL SANCTIONS INSTITUTED INTO LAW.
