Re: Sacred tangent (was Re: just checking...)
Mike Findlay <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.music.dadl.ot |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Palin didn't refer to the govt. has sacred. I'm pretty confident that she would say out current govt. has run far afield from what was created/envisioned in the constitution she referred to as sacred. Would anybody, objecting to the use of sacred, had a problem if she had said "revered" instead? Mike F. ________________________________ From: Lance McLain <lance-X3DuywwxauBWk0Htik3J/[email protected]> To: DADL (off topic) <[email protected]> Sent: Fri, January 14, 2011 1:05:47 PM Subject: Re: [DADL-OT] Sacred tangent (was Re: just checking...) On Jan 14, 2011, at 1:02 PM, Bruce Geerdes wrote: On Fri, Jan 14, 2011 at 11:56 AM, Lance McLain <lance-X3DuywwxauBWk0Htik3J/[email protected]> wrote: > >The concept of manifest destiny, it seems to me has sprung out of this >quasi-religious view. And I think that was very undesirable, especially to the >native americans (not to mention the ecology). Yes, but I'm thinking more of nowadays, since we're so concerned about Palin's affect on people who cling to guns & religion. Well, for me, it is that a "sacred government" demands faith by it's participants. Faith that the government always has our best interest at heart, even if we don't understand their actions. For some reason I'm reminded of Logan's Run. And quite frankly, I'm not ready to bestow sacredness on Obama's or Palin's version of government. regards, -Lance -- dadl-ot mailing list http://mail.thehood.us/mailman/listinfo/dadl-ot_thehood.us http://news.gmane.org/gmane.music.dadl.ot