Re: Sacred tangent (was Re: just checking...)

>>> Nothing about the sacred constitution means this is a religion.
>>
>> Apart from that thing called Civil Religion, of course.
>
> ***reaching.  And if true, that just diminishes the dangers and helps 
> explain the context.

Except when you see what a nation like the U.S. *does* with those 
sentiments.

**Like?  The constitution itself limits that.



>> And, as we have noted repeatedly, Palin and her ilk are making common 
>> cause with Mormons like Glenn Beck, for whom the Constitution *is* 
>> apparently divinely inspired, as per the tenets of their faith.
>
> **I think that is also a stretch.

Which part?  The Mormons-believe-it's-divinely-inspired part, or the 
Palin-and-Beck-take-part-in-promoting-religious-sentiments-together part? 
Because as far as I can tell, both of those statements of fact are pretty 
much indisputable.

**only because you refuse to accept that sacred in her context may not have
been meant as religions.


-- 
dadl-ot mailing list
http://mail.thehood.us/mailman/listinfo/dadl-ot_thehood.us
http://news.gmane.org/gmane.music.dadl.ot