Comments on: Catholictown USA http://www.liberalwalrus.com/2006/03/02/catholictown-usa/ Large Liberal Commentary Thu, 11 Mar 2010 20:30:29 +0000 hourly 1 By: The Liberal Walrus » Blog Archive » http://www.liberalwalrus.com/2006/03/02/catholictown-usa/comment-page-1/#comment-57 The Liberal Walrus » Blog Archive » Mon, 13 Mar 2006 16:56:25 +0000 http://www.liberalwalrus.com/index.php/2006/03/02/catholictown-usa/#comment-57 [...] Excellent questions. The assumption that faith, or prayer, always benefits people has echoes in the story I blogged about a few days ago, wherein President Bush declared that faith based charities deserve more federal funding because they get results, or the story of the Domino’s Pizza founder who decided to create a Catholic town–a plan which drew praise from Jeb Bush. In all these cases, the freedom of religion of the individual is constrained by the institutionalization of one particular religion by the government. While some argue that Presidents, Governors, and military chaplains have their own freedom of religion, Poppleton deftly shows why that is irrelevant to the question: The First Amendment states, “Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.” The First Amendment wasn’t meant to allow a military officer or a government institution the free exercise of religion; on the contrary, it was designed to allow the individual to be free of the government — military — established religion. President James Madison thought that paying congressional chaplains out of the public treasury was “a palpable violation of equal rights as well as of constitutional principles.” He went on to say, “Even military chaplains are a mistake, mixing as they do political, military and ecclesiastical authority.” [...] [...] Excellent questions. The assumption that faith, or prayer, always benefits people has echoes in the story I blogged about a few days ago, wherein President Bush declared that faith based charities deserve more federal funding because they get results, or the story of the Domino’s Pizza founder who decided to create a Catholic town–a plan which drew praise from Jeb Bush. In all these cases, the freedom of religion of the individual is constrained by the institutionalization of one particular religion by the government. While some argue that Presidents, Governors, and military chaplains have their own freedom of religion, Poppleton deftly shows why that is irrelevant to the question: The First Amendment states, “Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.” The First Amendment wasn’t meant to allow a military officer or a government institution the free exercise of religion; on the contrary, it was designed to allow the individual to be free of the government — military — established religion. President James Madison thought that paying congressional chaplains out of the public treasury was “a palpable violation of equal rights as well as of constitutional principles.” He went on to say, “Even military chaplains are a mistake, mixing as they do political, military and ecclesiastical authority.” [...]

]]> By: walrus http://www.liberalwalrus.com/2006/03/02/catholictown-usa/comment-page-1/#comment-39 walrus Sat, 04 Mar 2006 17:55:03 +0000 http://www.liberalwalrus.com/index.php/2006/03/02/catholictown-usa/#comment-39 You know, as I read over what you write I do think I may have over reacted to an extent. As you correctly point out, there are many counties that restrict various things in accordance with local norms, and that is not illegal. As I think it over there are two points in the story that raise discomfort for me: 1. The restriction on birth control and abortion: I think of this as a womens' rights issue, not to mention that the right to an abortion is (for the time being) constitutionally protected. And, as I wrote in the post, how wil the town handle people going to other towns to acquire these things? 2. The public statements by elected officials: I don't think that public officials should publicly endorse, or describe as "wholesome," any one religion. Every citizen, no matter their beliefs, should be respected and valued by the government. Anyway, those are my more distilled thoughts. Thanks for an insightful comment. You know, as I read over what you write I do think I may have over reacted to an extent. As you correctly point out, there are many counties that restrict various things in accordance with local norms, and that is not illegal. As I think it over there are two points in the story that raise discomfort for me:

1. The restriction on birth control and abortion: I think of this as a womens’ rights issue, not to mention that the right to an abortion is (for the time being) constitutionally protected. And, as I wrote in the post, how wil the town handle people going to other towns to acquire these things?

2. The public statements by elected officials: I don’t think that public officials should publicly endorse, or describe as “wholesome,” any one religion. Every citizen, no matter their beliefs, should be respected and valued by the government.

Anyway, those are my more distilled thoughts. Thanks for an insightful comment.

]]> By: Maryland Conservatarian http://www.liberalwalrus.com/2006/03/02/catholictown-usa/comment-page-1/#comment-38 Maryland Conservatarian Sat, 04 Mar 2006 17:40:45 +0000 http://www.liberalwalrus.com/index.php/2006/03/02/catholictown-usa/#comment-38 Not sure I understand the source of your discomfort here. You don't like the idea that certain stores will not carry certain products - calling such restrictions "unconstitutional". Well, doesn't nearly every community seem to have some retail restrictions: liquor sales, drugs in general, cigarettes, restrictions on when certain products can be sold, etc...and the FCC already limits TV-Radio communications. I'm not big on a lot of government regulations but I find them a lot more burdensome at the Federal level than I do at the community level. Obviously, Mr. Monaghan need not send you a brochure. But there are communities all across the country that reflect the local norms - dry counties, Sunday blue laws and bans on "adult entertainment"clubs. What, besides the Catholic flavor here, makes this one uniquely worthy of the Liberal Walrus ire? Not sure I understand the source of your discomfort here. You don’t like the idea that certain stores will not carry certain products – calling such restrictions “unconstitutional”. Well, doesn’t nearly every community seem to have some retail restrictions: liquor sales, drugs in general, cigarettes, restrictions on when certain products can be sold, etc…and the FCC already limits TV-Radio communications. I’m not big on a lot of government regulations but I find them a lot more burdensome at the Federal level than I do at the community level.

Obviously, Mr. Monaghan need not send you a brochure. But there are communities all across the country that reflect the local norms – dry counties, Sunday blue laws and bans on “adult entertainment”clubs. What, besides the Catholic flavor here, makes this one uniquely worthy of the Liberal Walrus ire?

]]>