# Christian Reconstructionism: An extreme splinter group of the Religious Right? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [November 22, 2004, 3:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christian-reconstructionism-an-extreme-splinter-group-of-the-religious-right/276036 "2004-11-22T03:29:47Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Evil\_Captor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/f17d59/32.png) [@Evil\_Captor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_Captor)\ **Post date:** [November 23, 2004, 3:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christian-reconstructionism-an-extreme-splinter-group-of-the-religious-right/276036/21 "2004-11-23T03:11:53Z")
> [@Captain Amazing](#): > > What evidence do you have to support that, though? Has Reed ever called for criminalizing heresy? Or are you just willing to believe that of him because you disagree with his stances on the issues? Reed, like the Reconstructionists, wants to move America closer to being a theocracy. He would like to put women who seek abortions, and doctors who provide them, in jail. He would like to put the people who produce and consume porn in jail. And those are just the folks who we KNOW he’d like to jail. There’s always that gap between what a scumbag will admit to, and what he really wants. After all, did Bush admit to wanting to invade Iraq. ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Amazing](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6de8d8/32.png) [@Captain\_Amazing](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Amazing)\ **Post date:** [November 23, 2004, 3:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christian-reconstructionism-an-extreme-splinter-group-of-the-religious-right/276036/22 "2004-11-23T03:59:29Z")
> [@Evil Captor](#): > > Reed, like the Reconstructionists, wants to move America closer to being a theocracy. He would like to put women who seek abortions, and doctors who provide them, in jail. He would like to put the people who produce and consume porn in jail. Abortion was illegal in the '50s, in most places, too, and we weren’t a theocracy then. And I’ve never heard Reed say he wanted to outlaw porn. But, even if he did, it’s still not a good comparison. Have you ever read what the Reconstructionalists want? “Idolatry is thus not only punishable by law as socially detrimental, it is in fact a capital offense. It constitutes treason to the King or Sovereign, to Almighty God.”-R.J. Rushdoony. > [@](#): > > You would, therefore, be open, I believe, to hold Muslim views or Hindu views in the privacy of your own home, provided it was not a Christian home that you’ve now come into to subvert and draw away from Jehovah. You would be able to hold these views as a private conviction. But you would not be allowed to proselytize and undermine the order of the state. -Greg Bahnsen About the sermon on the Mount > [@](#): > > The ethic of the Sermon on the Mount is grounded on the principle that a godly bribe (of goods or services) is sometimes the best way for Christians to buy temporary peace and freedom for themselves and the church, assuming the enemies of God have overwhelming temporal power. -Gary North “The god of Judaism is the devil. The Jew will not be recognized by God as one of His chosen people until he abandons his demonic religion and returns to the faith of his fathers–the faith which embraces Jesus Christ and His Gospel”-David Chilton ---
**Author:** ![Guinastasia](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/guinastasia/32/5751_2.png) [@Guinastasia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Guinastasia)\ **Post date:** [November 23, 2004, 5:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christian-reconstructionism-an-extreme-splinter-group-of-the-religious-right/276036/23 "2004-11-23T05:03:26Z")
> [@Siege](#): > > Uhmm, **Guinastasia** , Episcopalians _are_ Anglicans. It’s just that the term “Anglican” became unpopular around the time of the Revolutionary War, for much the same reason coffee suddenly became a lot more popular than tea. At least that’s what I was told. > > CJ True, although I noticed one of the local Episcopal churches changed their sign to say “Anglican” (I wonder if it’s over the split about homosexuality). I admit I was wrong about that and Catholicism being a majority, however, I don’t think that these Reconstructionists have nearly the man power they’d need. Doesn’t mean I don’t find them damned frightening. ---
**Author:** ![Polycarp](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/82dd89/32.png) [@Polycarp](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Polycarp)\ **Post date:** [November 23, 2004, 5:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christian-reconstructionism-an-extreme-splinter-group-of-the-religious-right/276036/24 "2004-11-23T05:21:35Z")
> [@Guinastasia](#): > > True, although I noticed one of the local Episcopal churches changed their sign to say “Anglican” (I wonder if it’s over the split about homosexuality). Yeah, more or less. While **Siege** is right on the money – in Scotland and the U.S., and a couple of other small national churches as well, the local national church of the Anglican Communion uses “Episcopal” rather than “Anglican” as its distinguishing nominal adjective. But schismatics claiming to preserve orthodoxy have had a tendency to use “Anglican” to distinguish their small splinter churches from Episcopalianism. They are not in communion with Canterbury, have bishops of questionable validity, and in many cases a large ego and a bitter smallmindedness. > [@](#): > > I admit I was wrong about that and Catholicism being a majority, however, I don’t think that these Reconstructionists have nearly the man power they’d need. Doesn’t mean I don’t find them damned frightening. People hear what they want to hear – a small group with some money behind it can make a significant impact on attitudes of people who don’t think things through. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [November 23, 2004, 5:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christian-reconstructionism-an-extreme-splinter-group-of-the-religious-right/276036/25 "2004-11-23T05:32:23Z")
I can’t take these folks seriously, and I’d like to ask the OP what specifically he sees this group being able to accomplish. We just had Judge Moore removed from the bench for refusing to get rid of the 10 Commandment monument in the courthouse. While I thoroughly agree with the action of reomoving the judge, his transgression was one of the mildest ones I can think of wrt the establishment clause of the 1st amendment. What could this Reconstructionist group do that wouldn’t be worse than the actions of Judge Moore, and that would NOT be undone by our legislative or judicial system? ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [November 23, 2004, 5:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christian-reconstructionism-an-extreme-splinter-group-of-the-religious-right/276036/26 "2004-11-23T05:43:49Z")
> [@MEBuckner](#): > > Whatever the results of the last election may be, demographically this country is increasingly post-Protestant and even post-Christian. Are you sure about that? From [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United\_states\_of\_america#Religion:](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_states_of_america#Religion:) > [@](#): > > As of 2001, the distribution for major religions in the United States was as follows: Protestant (52 percent), Roman Catholic (24.5 percent), “none” (13.2 percent), Jewish (1.3 percent) and between 0.3 and 0.5 percent each for Muslim, Buddhist, Hindu and Unitarian Universalist. An additional 0.3 to 0.5 percent, each, are professed agnostics and atheists. The largest single religious denomination in the United States is the Roman Catholic Church, followed by the Southern Baptist Convention. > > The United States, as a developed nation, is noteworthy for its high level of Christian religious devotion. However, the percentage of Americans calling themselves Christian has declined somewhat in recent years from 86.2 percent in 1990 to 76.5 percent in 2001. Of course, maybe it’s a matter of definition. America might be considered “post-Christian” in the sense that most of these self-identified Christians might not have been considered properly Christians at all by those of earlier generations. From _The Next American Nation,_ by Michael Lind (New York: Free Press Paperbacks, 1996), pp. 278-279: > [@](#): > > Conservatives do not recognize how much the nation has changed since the fifties in its religious attitudes. It may be that the religion of nominal Christians in the United States can no longer be described as traditional trinitarian Christian. The scholarly term for their belief is henotheism, the belief that all ethnic groups and cultures have, and should have, their own gods and rites. In Christian theology, this is the heresy of indifferentism. Robert Linder and Richard Pierard have described the evolution of American civil religion: “Its umbrella has changed from evangelical consensus to Protestantism-in-general, to Christianity-in-general, to the Judeo-Christian tradition in general, to deism-in-general.” The decline in belief in Christianity as the only true religion has been extraordinarily rapid in the United States. In a poll taken in 1924 in Muncie, Indiana, 94 percent of high school students agreed that “Christianity is the one true religion and all peoples should be converted to it.” By the late 1970s, merely 38 percent of respondents in a later poll in Muncie agreed that Christianity was the only true faith. Two-thirds of the respondents in a 1991 poll agreed that Christians, Jews, Muslims and Buddhists “pray to the same God.” ---
**Author:** ![MEBuckner](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mebuckner/32/2896_2.png) [@MEBuckner](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MEBuckner)\ **Post date:** [November 23, 2004, 5:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christian-reconstructionism-an-extreme-splinter-group-of-the-religious-right/276036/27 "2004-11-23T05:49:18Z")
> [@Aldebaran](#): > > Yes, but don’t you think there are still a vast amount of people who have no message at anything “religious” at all? I didn’t quite follow that. What? > [@](#): > > > [@](#): > > > > Whatever the results of the last election may be, demographically this country is increasingly post-Protestant and even post-Christian. > > Well, that is not quite how it looks like from the outside. [America’s Protestant majority is fading, University of Chicago research shows](http://www-news.uchicago.edu/releases/04/040720.protestant.shtml): > [@](#): > > The increasing secularization of American society has taken a particular toll on Protestant identity, presenting the prospect that after more than 200 years of history, the United States may soon no longer be a majority Protestant country, according to a new study by the National Opinion Research Center (NORC) at the University of Chicago. > > The percentage of the population that is Protestant has been falling and will likely fall below 50 percent by mid-decade and may be there already, the research reported. This is not to say there isn’t a vocal backlash from those who are being demographically demoted, but time does not seem to be on the side of the Religious Right in the United States. > [@Qadgop the Mercotan](#): > > Of course, they tend to say that after a few drinks, and I think that drinking is one thing the Reconstructionists frown on. Actually, Reconstructionists generally don’t have a problem with alcohol. After all, there’s really nothing in the Bible like a blanket condemnation of drinking; see [John 2:1-11](http://bible.gospelcom.net/cgi-bin/bible?passage=John+2%3A1-11&NIV_version=yes&language=english). Teetotaling is more of a Baptist and Methodist thing; the Reconstructionists, being from a Calvinist (Presbyterian or Reformed) background tend to sneer at such “un-Biblical pietism”. In fact, one of the signs you may have a Reconstructionist on your hands is if you’ve got an extremely socially and politically conservative, Biblically inerrantist Christian who likes to go on about how much he enjoys fine cigars and single-malt Scotch. > [@](#): > > Has their “blatant honesty” about their goals been replaced by a stealth approach? That would certainly be the thing to look out for. The thing is, I do think the demographics and the direction of social change in this country are strongly against the Recons. It’s probably no accident that “Scary Gary” North has predicted three of the last zero collapses of Western civilization. (Most notoriously, North claimed that the Y2K bug was going to bring about a new Dark Age. Before that, it was AIDS and I think in the '80’s he was predicting nuclear war with the Soviet Union.) Recons, unlike your typical Christian premillenialist fundamentalists, are postmillenial, meaning they think Christians must and will establish a godly order to rule for the “millennium” _first_, then Jesus will come back. However, while North and other Recons may sneer at the Christian pop culture notion that the End of History is imminent, the only way they’re likely to gain power is through some sort of wholescale collapse of the social order; which I think at least North deep down realizes. As for the tinfoil hat notion, I would recommend Frederick Clarkson’s book _Eternal Hostility: The Struggle Between Theocracy and Democracy_, which discusses the Recons along with some other theocratic movements in America (such as the Moonies). One of the points he makes is the need to have a balanced view of the more sinister elements of the Religious Right; as he puts it, between seeing them as “a juggernaut or a joke”. I think the Recons will never gain power, but I think the reason they will never gain power is because informed citizens will always be ready to point out just what it is they stand for and where they want to take this country. ---
**Author:** ![Aldebaran](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/c6cbf5/32.png) [@Aldebaran](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aldebaran)\ **Post date:** [November 23, 2004, 12:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christian-reconstructionism-an-extreme-splinter-group-of-the-religious-right/276036/28 "2004-11-23T12:01:37Z")
> [@MEBuckner](#): > > I didn’t quite follow that. What? I referred to the atheists in the US. My impression is that there are quite a lot of people who have no message at “the message” of any religion. Among them are also quite a lot who feel an aversion and even contempt for anything religious. So I was wondering: Suppose such extreme “Christians” like the ones the OP refers to gain enough influence to give it a serious try to push their views onto the US population. Supose they even get as far as getting influence or representation in the government or in its lobbyist circles. Suppose one day this extremist Christianity can even push through the candidacy of a governor candidate or even a presidential candidate. Don’t you think that above all others who feel they need to stop this madness, the atheist will be the first to raise their voices? Don’t you think that first of all those atheists who now maybe don’t bother to vote will get out of their houses to prevent such lunatic to get a grip on the country? > [@](#): > > Protestant majority is fading, University of Chicago research shows Possibly. Yet that is not how it looks like to the outside world. As long as you have canditates for political office and especially presidential canditates (and presidents) who must at least pay lip service to the Christian religion in order to survive politically, the US can not be sold as a “secular nation” to the world. The fact that someone like Bush - who utters the word God every few sentences whenever he speaks in public - got a second term largely thanks to the votes of his Christian supporters speaks volumes on its own. Salaam. A ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [November 23, 2004, 12:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christian-reconstructionism-an-extreme-splinter-group-of-the-religious-right/276036/29 "2004-11-23T12:53:36Z")
**Alde** , the point you persistently miss in your ongoing attempts to (deliberately?) misunderstand the _secular_ nature of the U.S. is that the Christian influence is much more a cultural artifact than a theological position. Bush’s constant references to God are partly designed to appeal to a particular faction in the country (and, perhaps, from some actual beliefs). However, the majority of the country _tolerates_ such speech rather than embracing it. Bush’s “Faith Based Intiatiatives” never went anywhere. The same laws governing the participation of religious organizations in government programs that are in use, today, were in use under Clinton. Bush has simply put a happy face on old practices to make it look (to his core supporters) as though he did something new for religion, but the rest of the country (as supported by the Congress, legislatures, and courts) has not gone along with any change in direction. The “defense of marriage” acts that passed in so many states, recently, are a hodge-podge of _different_ laws that each take different approaches to what they mean, with no overarching religious message involved. (Review the Same-Sex-Marriage threads on this board to see how many people are simply against the _cultural_ implications of using the word marriage to indicate a joining of two men or two women with no religious significance, at all.) Bush’s (1%) win _did_ rely on an appeal to a certain religious mentality, but if religion was the defining factor for the whole country, then he should have had an overwhelming victory, rather than the mobilization of a core electorate to give him a tiny edge. It is probably true that among countries with culturally Christian backgrounds, a larger percentage of people in the U.S. still hold to their Christianity. There is certainly a vocal minority who would like to keep more of their religious _cultural_ trafitions enshrined in law. This may look to the uninformed outsider as though the U.S. is not secular. However, until we begin actively pursuing religious laws, those perceptions are clearly based on uninformed misapprehensions. Note that the subjects of this thread will never get divorce outlawed in a nation with a nearly 50% rate of divorce. Laws prohibiting the sale of liquor on Sunday have been steadily crumbling for 60 years. There are no new laws proposed to outlaw retail sales on Sunday. You are confusing the trappings of culture with the core of government and you consistently get it wrong. > [@](#): > > Possibly. Yet that is not how it looks like to the outside world. I am not sure that I would be willing to take your personal views as those “of the outside world,” particularly as you have failed to demonstrate that you understand the distinctions within American culture throughout these many months of discussion. ---
**Author:** ![Aldebaran](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/c6cbf5/32.png) [@Aldebaran](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aldebaran)\ **Post date:** [November 23, 2004, 1:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christian-reconstructionism-an-extreme-splinter-group-of-the-religious-right/276036/30 "2004-11-23T13:40:09Z")
Tom, 1. I explicitely refer to the exsistence of a not-so-vocal yet clearly present amount of atheists in the USA 2. I mention the Christian religion which politicians feel that he/she must at least pay lip service to = this is referring to both the religious and the cultural mainstream which is, if you like it or not, stil showered with and based on Christian “values”. that hence are as such engrained in subconcience of the society. 3. I mention the habits of US presidents to mention “God” whenever they find a space in a text wher they can fit the word into their rethoric. This habit serves a clear purpose (in case of Bush it also seems to serve his own Messianic Delusion). I do not see any connection between my post and your reply. But if you think you can sell the USA as a completely secular nation to the world, be my guest and start lecturing that no president ever shall need to court the Christian electorate anymore in order to stand a chance to even get nominated for the presidential race. I wish you the besdt of luck since sadly enough you have the facts of the day clearly against you. A few other difficulties to sell the US’s “complete secularity” : The USA even has the word God printed on its money. (And do I need to remind you about the whole commotion surrounding the mentioning of God in the famous “pledge of alliance”?) Salaam. A ---
**Author:** ![Homebrew](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/c89c15/32.png) [@Homebrew](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Homebrew)\ **Post date:** [November 23, 2004, 2:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christian-reconstructionism-an-extreme-splinter-group-of-the-religious-right/276036/31 "2004-11-23T14:56:17Z")
> [@Aldebaran](#): > > 1. I mention the Christian religion which politicians feel that he/she must at least pay lip service to = this is referring to both the religious and the cultural mainstream which is, if you like it or not, stil showered with and based on Christian “values”. that hence are as such engrained in subconcience of the society. > 2. I mention the habits of US presidents to mention “God” whenever they find a space in a text wher they can fit the word into their rethoric. This habit serves a clear purpose (in case of Bush it also seems to serve his own Messianic Delusion). > > I do not see any connection between my post and your reply. I’ve gotta agree with **Aldebaran** on this one, **Tom~**. Until we reach a point when a candidate’s religion, or lack thereof, is ignored then it’s difficult to see us as a completely secular nation. If banging the Jesus drum is enough to gain a marjority, then we aren’t totally secular. You object that Bush’s narrow win demonstrates that religion played a small part in the election. But the problem with that position is the fact that Kerry, too, is a Christian. I wonder what the outcome would be if an avowed athiest or Buddhist ran for president. Do you doubt Christianity would play a bigger role then? I particularly disagree with your dismissal of the same-sex marriage bans as religious based. None of these laws are secularly motivated. **All** objections are religious based, with the exception of those folks who want to eliminate marriage entirely from government purview. Which culture do you think the “cultural significance” objections are based on? It’s Christian culture. Secular culture has no bone to pick with SSM. ---
**Author:** ![Qadgop\_the\_Mercotan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/qadgop_the_mercotan/32/83_2.png) [@Qadgop\_the\_Mercotan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Qadgop_the_Mercotan)\ **Post date:** [November 23, 2004, 3:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christian-reconstructionism-an-extreme-splinter-group-of-the-religious-right/276036/32 "2004-11-23T15:15:16Z")
> [@John Mace](#): > > I can’t take these folks seriously, and I’d like to ask the OP what specifically he sees this group being able to accomplish. We just had Judge Moore removed from the bench for refusing to get rid of the 10 Commandment monument in the courthouse. While I thoroughly agree with the action of reomoving the judge, his transgression was one of the mildest ones I can think of wrt the establishment clause of the 1st amendment. What could this Reconstructionist group do that wouldn’t be worse than the actions of Judge Moore, and that would NOT be undone by our legislative or judicial system? Well, in our area I see lots of individuals who believe in biblical inerrancy and the idea that our laws should reflect the bible getting elected to town boards, school boards, clerk of courts, etc. Having power, or at least responsibility, on a very local level seems to be a way to get certain things accomplished. (Perhaps) as a result, the local high schools still have graduation prayers led by local clergy, 90% of the populace seems to like it that way, and when informed that such activities are considered unconstitutional, the response is “you can’t stop us”. It’s not high profile, with state judges or senators sounding off on it. It’s very grassroots. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [November 23, 2004, 5:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christian-reconstructionism-an-extreme-splinter-group-of-the-religious-right/276036/33 "2004-11-23T17:39:48Z")
> [@Homebrew](#): > > Which culture do you think the “cultural significance” objections are based on? It’s Christian culture. Secular culture has no bone to pick with SSM. Regarding SSM, I think you are mistaken. I’m sure that there is a religious background to the issue, but an awful lot of people do, indeed, react to the simple use of the _word_ marriage for same sex couples, rather than holding a _religious_ opposition to same sex couples simply living together. (And once _in_ the culture, homophobia carries a life of its own, just as racism and other forms of prejudice have done.) There is a difference between the residual Christian culture carrying over into day-to-day life and **Alde** ’s persistent attempts to portray the U.S. society as religious and **not** secular. I do not deny the Christian influence on U.S. culture. I do deny that U.S. society is monolithically Christian or religious. (For that matter, Christianity, itself, is hardly monolithic, a point that **Aldebaran** has tried to ignore on numerous occasions. Even ignorant Americans can see that the Sunni/Shi’ite disputes in Iraq have a bearing on that country’s history and future, yet **Alde** wants to pretend that an Evangelical Protestant viewpoint in the U.S. would have no trouble dictating all U.S. policy, even if it began looking to impose sanctions on Catholics, Lutherans, Anglicans, and Mormons. Do you really believe that is possible?) My claim was never that the U.S. is _wholly_ secular. I only note that seeing the U.S. as “Christian” is overly simplistic, and that there is more that is secular (laws, media, entertainment, buying practices) than there is that is Christian. If we compare the U.S. to Turkey or Indonesia, then the U.S. is “Christian” where the other two are “Muslim,” but we are far from a theocracy and we are moving further from that point all the time. > [@](#): > > 1. I explicitely refer to the exsistence of a not-so-vocal yet clearly present amount of atheists in the USA This is actually your weakest point. The presence of atheists in the U.S. is miniscule, (far smaller than appear on this board). What the U.S. generally has in abundance are people who are nominally Christian, but who are basically irreligious or non-religious, people for whom religion plays little more than a nominal role in letting them identify themselves as part of some group–a group with whom they increasingly _do not interact_–people who are secular. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [November 23, 2004, 5:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christian-reconstructionism-an-extreme-splinter-group-of-the-religious-right/276036/34 "2004-11-23T17:59:43Z")
> [@Qadgop the Mercotan](#): > > (Perhaps) as a result, the local high schools still have graduation prayers led by local clergy, 90% of the populace seems to like it that way, and when informed that such activities are considered unconstitutional, the response is “you can’t stop us”. Just a point of clarification. Has the SCotUS actually ruled on the constitutionality of prayer at High School graduation ceremonies? I thought we were still hashing that one out. If it has been so ruled, there is indeed something you can do to stop them ---
**Author:** ![Qadgop\_the\_Mercotan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/qadgop_the_mercotan/32/83_2.png) [@Qadgop\_the\_Mercotan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Qadgop_the_Mercotan)\ **Post date:** [November 23, 2004, 7:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christian-reconstructionism-an-extreme-splinter-group-of-the-religious-right/276036/35 "2004-11-23T19:57:58Z")
> [@John Mace](#): > > Just a point of clarification. Has the SCotUS actually ruled on the constitutionality of prayer at High School graduation ceremonies? I thought we were still hashing that one out. If it has been so ruled, there is indeed something you can do to stop them Lee v. Weisman (1992) On June 24th 1992, the Supreme Court ruled in a 5-4 Court Decision that the graduation prayer during school graduation violated the Establishment Clause. In my area, challenges to this practice based on this decision have generally been dismissed because the challenger did not have “standing”. That is, it was not their child graduating. Therefore the court declined to take action. So the practice continues. A number of parents have stated privately that they disapprove of it, but are unwilling to take on the community over the issue. ---
**Author:** ![Aldebaran](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/c6cbf5/32.png) [@Aldebaran](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aldebaran)\ **Post date:** [November 23, 2004, 9:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christian-reconstructionism-an-extreme-splinter-group-of-the-religious-right/276036/36 "2004-11-23T21:42:13Z")
> [@tomndebb](#): > > Regarding SSM, I think you are mistaken. I’m sure that there is a religious background to the issue, but an awful lot of people do, indeed, react to the simple use of the _word_ marriage for same sex couples, Which -as it was very clearly explained to me in an other thread - has everything to do with the idea that “marriage” is a _religious_ institution. This idea is very much supported the confusing practice in the USA that _religious_ clergy who take care of the _religious_ marriage also receive the power to make that _religious_ ritual at the same time count for a **legal** union. Once you get rid of that habit, making the disconnection between religious marriage and civil marriage is easy enough, isn’t it? > [@](#): > > **Alde** ’s persistent attempts to portray the U.S. society as religious and **not** secular. No. I said that it does not come across as a secular nation to the outside world. You can argue against that all you like, it does not change that the fact that the USA does not come across as a secular nation when you look at it from the outside (and when you visit it coming from the outside). > [@](#): > > For that matter, Christianity, itself, is hardly monolithic, a point that **Aldebaran** has tried to ignore on numerous occasions. No, I don’t. I can only say about this that I noticed long ago is that you developped a habit of portraying mine for what they are not. Well, that is your problem, it can’t become mine. > [@](#): > > **Alde** wants to pretend that an Evangelical Protestant viewpoint in the U.S. would have no trouble dictating all U.S. policy Once again: **Read** my posts instead of interpreting them for what they are not. Those on **on this thread alone** contradict your blurred view and your persistence to misportray what I say. Salaam. A ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [November 23, 2004, 10:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christian-reconstructionism-an-extreme-splinter-group-of-the-religious-right/276036/37 "2004-11-23T22:19:25Z")
> [@](#): > > I can only say about this that I noticed long ago is that you developped a habit of portraying mine for what they are not. Just as you claim (without evidence) that “the world” perceives the U.S. as not secular, so I perceive your muddling of American religious views over the course of many months of posting, even when every once in a while you do take the time to admit that your overall views are not supported by the evidence. I will say that your recent posts show much more awareness of the many strands of the American reality than your earliest posts, but you still seem to look on the U.S. as very nearly monolithic in culture. ---
**Author:** ![Aldebaran](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/c6cbf5/32.png) [@Aldebaran](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aldebaran)\ **Post date:** [November 23, 2004, 10:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christian-reconstructionism-an-extreme-splinter-group-of-the-religious-right/276036/38 "2004-11-23T22:34:58Z")
> [@tomndebb](#): > > Just as you claim (without evidence) that “the world” perceives the U.S. as not secular, so I perceive your muddling of American religious views over the course of many months of posting, even when every once in a while you do take the time to admit that your overall views are not supported by the evidence. I think you make here a strange “comparison” and I don’t see quite what the first element has to do with the second (which is wrong as you are projecting just the same prejudice you always project.) > [@](#): > > I will say that your recent posts show much more awareness of the many strands of the American reality than your earliest posts, but you still seem to look on the U.S. as very nearly monolithic in culture. No I don’t. Yet as is the case with every “culture” one can detect particularities that are more or less supported and shared by the mainstream of the population and which makes that the US _has_ a “culture”. Or do you claim that the USA has no culture and that the USA hence is just like all the rest of the world (even when only speaking of the so called “Western” world), and that this world is then also just like the USA? Salaam. A ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [November 24, 2004, 12:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christian-reconstructionism-an-extreme-splinter-group-of-the-religious-right/276036/39 "2004-11-24T00:24:01Z")
> [@](#): > > Yet as is the case with every “culture” one can detect particularities that are more or less supported and shared by the mainstream of the population and which makes that the US has a “culture”. Of course, the U.S. has a culture (comprising multiple sub-cultures) that is strongly rooted in several of the Christian traditions. I simply note that the very presence of such multiple contributing cultures has compelled the U.S. to become pluralistic and more (not wholly) secular. When you make the claims that the U.S. is not secular (or you claim without presenting any evidence) that the rest of the world perceives that the U.S. is not at all secular, then you seem to be projecting your beliefs. Having spoken for the world, can you provide statements from other people of the world who share your view that the U.S. is religious? bin Laden condemned the U.S. for its godlessness, yet you insist that “the world” sees it the way you do. I’m just curious who these other people are who share your belief who make up “the world.” ---
**Author:** ![Lilairen](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/8491ac/32.png) [@Lilairen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lilairen)\ **Post date:** [November 24, 2004, 1:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christian-reconstructionism-an-extreme-splinter-group-of-the-religious-right/276036/40 "2004-11-24T01:16:36Z")
> [@tomndebb](#): > > Having spoken for the world, can you provide statements from other people of the world who share your view that the U.S. is religious? bin Laden condemned the U.S. for its godlessness, yet you insist that “the world” sees it the way you do. I’m just curious who these other people are who share your belief who make up “the world.” For what it’s worth, the vast majority of my non-American friends and acquaintances have commented, more than once, on the strange pervasiveness of American religiosity. (I’ve seen this comment from people originating in the UK, Australia, New Zealand, Italy, Iceland, and Canada.) Many of them have cited statistics noting that the percentage of people who consider themselves religious in the United States is _significantly_ higher than anywhere else in the West, pointed, and gone, basically, “What the heck?” A (Welsh, now living in Montreal) friend once joked that she suspected that the UK’s practice of state religion served as a vaccination against more virulent forms. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christian-reconstructionism-an-extreme-splinter-group-of-the-religious-right/276036.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/christian-reconstructionism-an-extreme-splinter-group-of-the-religious-right/276036.md?page=3)