|
so what exactly is banned here? I don't understand. Until I do, I'll elaborate my opinion (that's all it is, you know).
While I do see that the Pope being the head of the "vatican state" seems to gain him loop-hole political status, he is still a religious leader first and foremost. I don't disagree that he led lots of people that respected him, sure. My point is that the recognition of one particular religious political leader and not recognizing others is a breech of separation of church and state. The government should be totally neutral when it comes to these events, let the media and individual followers do their own thing. Keep my government out of it.
Really, it's not this one event that upsets non-religious folks like myself. It's the culmination of a great number of events that point toward religious fanaticism taking over the US. I mean, it was religious fanaticism that drove people away from England in the first place, that was why the founders made it very clear that we don't repeat those mistakes. Now it seems that politians have gone the other way, using religious iconology to gain support and getting elected by promising "moral" and "ethical" changes which reek of religious dogma.
ohh when will humans get over this god fantasy.. I hope sooner than later.
feel free to attack, I enjoy it.
S
|