# KY Tries Ed Run Around Establishment Clause **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [August 28, 2009, 6:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ky-tries-ed-run-around-establishment-clause/508005 "2009-08-28T06:35:53Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Sinaijon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/dc4da7/32.png) [@Sinaijon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sinaijon)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2009, 8:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ky-tries-ed-run-around-establishment-clause/508005/41 "2009-08-28T20:49:30Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > The KY law forces people to say that polytheism, animism and ancestor worship are false theological paradigms. Hardly. “the safety and security of the Commonwealth cannot be achieved apart from reliance upon Almighty God.” is basically just an elaborated retread of ‘In God We Trust’. The SC has already ruled the ceremonial deism doesn’t count as establishment of a religion. ---
**Author:** ![mswas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e99b99/32.png) [@mswas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mswas)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2009, 8:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ky-tries-ed-run-around-establishment-clause/508005/42 "2009-08-28T20:50:11Z")
> [@begbert2](#): > > I don’t believe in people who are “just theists”. I literally don’t think it’s possible to believe in a god or gods without defining properties about it - you _have_ to, to distinguish it from other concepts like “curiousity” or “blue” or “cheese”. That still doesn’t make it a religion. > [@](#): > > And once you’ve cooked up your system of beliefs about your god and/or gods, then poof! Religion. No, system of beliefs != religion. Religion implies that there is a scripture, and some kind of organization/community. Something can be a religion and not be theistic, like Buddhism, or it can be theistic without being religious. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2009, 8:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ky-tries-ed-run-around-establishment-clause/508005/43 "2009-08-28T20:52:44Z")
I think it makes more of a _thunk_ than a _poof_, really. ---
**Author:** ![begbert2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/begbert2/32/3357_2.png) [@begbert2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/begbert2)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2009, 8:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ky-tries-ed-run-around-establishment-clause/508005/44 "2009-08-28T20:53:09Z")
> [@mswas](#): > > That still doesn’t make it a religion. > > No, system of beliefs != religion. Religion implies that there is a scripture, and some kind of organization/community. Something can be a religion and not be theistic, like Buddhism, or it can be theistic without being religious. Really? So the wiccans didn’t have a religion until they wrote the Book of Shadows, or whatever they have? The last Catholic standing will cease to be a catholic when his last peer dies? We can both agree that the word is _really_ poorly defined. I elect not to agree with your more limited definition. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2009, 8:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ky-tries-ed-run-around-establishment-clause/508005/45 "2009-08-28T20:54:30Z")
No, it goes further than Ceremonial Deism (which is bullshit, theocratic judicial activism anyway). It makes a definitive statement of belief _about_ a particular deity, and attempts to force others to acknowledge that belief as fact. ---
**Author:** ![mswas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e99b99/32.png) [@mswas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mswas)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2009, 8:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ky-tries-ed-run-around-establishment-clause/508005/46 "2009-08-28T20:54:33Z")
> [@begbert2](#): > > Really? So the wiccans didn’t have a religion until they wrote the Book of Shadows, or whatever they have? The last Catholic standing will cease to be a catholic when his last peer dies? I don’t know the precise origins of Wicca but as I understand it there was no religion of Wicca until the twentieth century though they cribbed a lot of their beliefs from prior belief systems. > [@](#): > > We can both agree that the word is _really_ poorly defined. I elect not to agree with your more limited definition. Ok. Maybe one of the forum’s linguists can weigh into this. As I understand it the root of religio has something to do with it’s social parameters. From Wikipedia FWIW. > [@](#): > > A religion is an organized approach to human spirituality which usually encompasses a set of narratives, symbols, beliefs and practices, often with a supernatural or transcendent quality, that give meaning to the practitioner’s experiences of life through reference to a higher power, God or gods, or ultimate truth.[1] It may be expressed through prayer, ritual, meditation, music and art, among other things. It may focus on specific supernatural, metaphysical, and moral claims about reality (the cosmos and human nature) which may yield a set of religious laws, ethics, and a particular lifestyle. Religion also encompasses ancestral or cultural traditions, writings, history, and mythology, as well as personal faith and religious experience. > The term “religion” refers to both the personal practices related to communal faith and to group rituals and communication stemming from shared conviction. **“Religion” is sometimes used interchangeably with “faith” or “belief system,”[2] but it is more socially defined than personal convictions, and it entails specific behaviors, respectively.** ---
**Author:** ![Giles](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/giles/32/60_2.png) [@Giles](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Giles)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2009, 8:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ky-tries-ed-run-around-establishment-clause/508005/47 "2009-08-28T20:55:12Z")
> [@mswas](#): > > No, system of beliefs != religion. Religion implies that there is a scripture, and some kind of organization/community. Something can be a religion and not be theistic, like Buddhism, or it can be theistic without being religious. I don’t see how a scripture is necessary, even if that includes texts orally transmitted in pre-literate societies. And a single person can have religious beliefs, without sharing those with others and hence without being part of a community. (Did the Prophet’s beliefs constitute a religion before he converted anyone else to Islam?: I think they did.) ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2009, 8:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ky-tries-ed-run-around-establishment-clause/508005/48 "2009-08-28T20:55:55Z")
> [@mswas](#): > > That still doesn’t make it a religion. > > No, system of beliefs != religion. Religion implies that there is a scripture, and some kind of organization/community. Something can be a religion and not be theistic, like Buddhism, or it can be theistic without being religious. Atheism isn’t a religion either, but you would get very upset if the Government made an official declaration that God does not exist. ---
**Author:** ![mswas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e99b99/32.png) [@mswas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mswas)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2009, 8:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ky-tries-ed-run-around-establishment-clause/508005/49 "2009-08-28T20:58:04Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > Atheism isn’t a religion either, but you would get very upset if the Government made an official declaration that God does not exist. See post [#37](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=11496153&postcount=37). ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2009, 9:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ky-tries-ed-run-around-establishment-clause/508005/50 "2009-08-28T21:01:17Z")
Wait, I’m confused. Who’s Ed, and where’s he running? ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2009, 9:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ky-tries-ed-run-around-establishment-clause/508005/51 "2009-08-28T21:02:23Z")
> [@mswas](#): > > Ok. Maybe one of the forum’s linguists can weigh into this. As I understand it the root of religio has something to do with it’s social parameters. It’s from a Latin word meaning to “bind, tie, fasten.” Figuratively, it meant to be bound by a duty. ---
**Author:** ![Camus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ba8739/32.png) [@Camus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Camus)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2009, 9:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ky-tries-ed-run-around-establishment-clause/508005/52 "2009-08-28T21:02:25Z")
> [@Sinaijon](#): > > Hardly. “the safety and security of the Commonwealth cannot be achieved apart from reliance upon Almighty God.” is basically just an elaborated retread of ‘In God We Trust’. The SC has already ruled the ceremonial deism doesn’t count as establishment of a religion. The language that Kentucky wanted to include, particularly the words “dependence” and “reliance” by the government of Kentucky on God indicate an interventionist God, not a deistic Divine Watchmaker. These statements more than imply that without a very specific Almighty God, Kentucky would not exist or be able to continue existing. Far more than a mere ceremonial slogan. ---
**Author:** ![begbert2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/begbert2/32/3357_2.png) [@begbert2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/begbert2)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2009, 9:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ky-tries-ed-run-around-establishment-clause/508005/53 "2009-08-28T21:03:49Z")
> [@mswas](#): > > Ok. Maybe one of the forum’s linguists can weigh into this. As I understand it the root of religio has something to do with it’s social parameters. > > From Wikipedia FWIW. From M-W FWIW Main Entry: re·li·gion Pronunciation: \ri-ˈli-jən Function: noun Etymology: Middle English religioun, from Anglo-French religiun, Latin religion-, religio supernatural constraint, sanction, religious practice, perhaps from religare to restrain, tie back — more at rely Date: 13th century 1 a : the state of a religious \ b (1) : the service and worship of God or the supernatural (2) : commitment or devotion to religious faith or observance 2 : a personal set or institutionalized system of religious attitudes, beliefs, and practices 3 archaic : scrupulous conformity : conscientiousness 4 : a cause, principle, or system of beliefs held to with ardor and faith IMHO theistic belief that includes a sufficient system of beliefs about the God to be able to distinguish him from, say, a hassock, would satisfy 4, and also 1b2. 2 also distputes that a personal set of beliefs is not sufficient. Sure, it _usually_ means that posse of peeps in that big building over there with the symbol next to the door. But not always, and _certainly_ not enough to say I’m _wrong_ in using it otherwise. ---
**Author:** ![Punoqllads](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/d2c977/32.png) [@Punoqllads](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Punoqllads)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2009, 9:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ky-tries-ed-run-around-establishment-clause/508005/54 "2009-08-28T21:09:06Z")
Talk about God outside of religion is like talking about a hamburger outside of a bun. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2009, 9:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ky-tries-ed-run-around-establishment-clause/508005/55 "2009-08-28T21:15:34Z")
_Mmm… open-face belief system…_ ---
**Author:** ![Sinaijon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/dc4da7/32.png) [@Sinaijon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sinaijon)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2009, 9:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ky-tries-ed-run-around-establishment-clause/508005/56 "2009-08-28T21:17:08Z")
> [@Camus](#): > > The language that Kentucky wanted to include, particularly the words “dependence” and “reliance” by the government of Kentucky on God indicate an interventionist God, not a deistic Divine Watchmaker. These statements more than imply that without a very specific Almighty God, Kentucky would not exist or be able to continue existing. Far more than a mere ceremonial slogan. > [@](#): > > (6) encourages the American people to commemorate the national motto through personal acts of piety, patriotic and sacred assembly, prayer and petition on behalf of the Nation’s elected and appointed leaders at the Federal, State, and local levels of government, and through a rededication of trust in God for the good and providential protection of this great Nation. Establishing ‘In God We Trust’ as the national motto. [http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c109:H.+Con.+Res.+411:](http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c109:H.+Con.+Res.+411:) ---
**Author:** ![CannyDan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cannydan/32/548_2.png) [@CannyDan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CannyDan)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2009, 9:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ky-tries-ed-run-around-establishment-clause/508005/57 "2009-08-28T21:20:00Z")
Yes, \*\*begbert2 \*\*and \*\*Punoqllads \*\*have it. “God” is a religious concept because it is only due to a set of beliefs that the capital G is required. Having a Big G God means having a religion, regardless of the number of believers or their systematization. ---
**Author:** ![Camus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ba8739/32.png) [@Camus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Camus)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2009, 9:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ky-tries-ed-run-around-establishment-clause/508005/58 "2009-08-28T21:29:26Z")
> [@Sinaijon](#): > > Establishing ‘In God We Trust’ as the national motto. > [http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c109:H.+Con.+Res.+411:](http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c109:H.+Con.+Res.+411:) This link is to a resolution, not a law. The House in particular passes all sorts of odd or curious resolutions all the time, precisely because they are symbolic and do not actually do anything. It certainly isn’t a stamp of approval from the Supreme Court that the “In God We Trust” means what the resolution says it means or that placing this kind of language in an actual statute that requires government actors to take make certain public statements is constitutional. ---
**Author:** ![Unauthorized\_Cinnamon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/bc8723/32.png) [@Unauthorized\_Cinnamon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Unauthorized_Cinnamon)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2009, 10:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ky-tries-ed-run-around-establishment-clause/508005/59 "2009-08-28T22:32:30Z")
By the way, I’ve never quite gotten the proponents of ceremonial deism. Their side of the court cases seems to be a two-part argument: 1. This is a vitally important issue - you’ll take our references to God when you pry them from our cold, dead hands. It is absolutely imperative that these references be protected to preserve, life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness! and 1. Meh, it doesn’t really mean much. Just an empty habit really. At least the Kentucky fruit loops seem to be slightly more consistent fruit loops. ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2009, 10:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ky-tries-ed-run-around-establishment-clause/508005/60 "2009-08-28T22:34:01Z")
> [@Captain\_Carrot](#): > > Most of this post is ridiculous. Care to point out why? Or is it just because you say so? > [@Captain\_Carrot](#): > > When Kentucky talks about “almighty God”, they mean one God, one particular God, and one religion. They mean the God in the Declaration of Independence, which most liberals have argued is NOT an endorsement of Christianity, but simply of a Creator God. and that God has been an accepted part of our government. Just look at our currency. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ky-tries-ed-run-around-establishment-clause/508005.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ky-tries-ed-run-around-establishment-clause/508005.md?page=4)