First, Do No Harm
Accepted labels of human “belief” systems have been flying around the globe for centuries sticking themselves to the rise and fall of societies throughout all of recorded history. They cause all manner of harm, alienating one group of people from another, demanding compliance to a strict set of rules, and dooming societies to self-destruction, as individual rights are usurped by whatever majority rule comes out of the mix. The need for an ever-narrowing description of individual beliefs should serve as a warning to a pending doom wherever it is encountered, but it isn’t recognized as the evil that it truly is until it is far too late to stop the effects of the “grouping disease.” In the final assessment, previously intelligent, adult human beings are reduced to a playground full of name calling children who resort to the basest of human actions. Chaos prevails over reason and humanity self-destructs with the majority of the whole not knowing what to believe.
We can easily see this played out on the political stage as the two main parties face off and sling their mud in an election year. The smaller, not so powerful and more radical parties end up making more logical sense to many, but are seldom able to overcome the lack of power in numbers, or they insist on clinging to certain tenets that alienate individual intelligence and doom them to failure. If a label doesn’t fit exactly, definitions are changed until the largest majority can feel secure wearing that label and opposing all others. The rebel individualist is swept under a rug of unimportance, thus each individual’s rights are lost in a group mentality that ignores individual rights.
In the religious arena we see a much more persecuting phenomenon taking place as beliefs are tested against each other and overrun by rationalism and non-belief. The idea of individual rights must have a champion that isn’t dependent on a finite label of restrictive rules. This champion is hard to find and define without being a part of the problem, and often gets discounted before it is fully explored. That is because the so-called non-believers think they have all the answers to individual rights, when they really haven’t a clue from whence they spring. They balk at any suggestion of a power greater than themselves, which is tied to human independence. We cannot call them ignorant, for they seldom are. They are generally much more learned than their devout counterparts – indeed, trained to debate and win, influence and subvert, coerce and overcome with the very label of “free thinker” which is ill fitting and ironically destructive of their own cause.
For even the non-believers fall into the trap of organizing and grouping their non-beliefs until they become true believers in their own denial, a religion all its own no matter what they would have you believe.
I am a Christian in that I believe in the Holy Trinity. I may only further define my beliefs under a label of Protestant, simply because I reject the tenets of Catholicism. Beyond this, no label fits, for I believe that religion is a personal thing that cannot and should not be grouped and labeled. Likewise, I believe that Christianity offers the only salvation for individual rights because it offers the only champion of them – faith in a progeny of faith handed down with an everlasting respect for the spirit and value of human life and honor.
As the continuing debate on exactly where God belongs in American Culture takes the case to the courts, there are many Christians who are secure in the belief that the Supreme Court would ultimately and steadfastly come down on the side of God – that this would continue to be a nation under God with unalienable, individual rights protected by our divinely inspired founding documents. I am afraid they would be wrong.
Unfortunately, Atheism (as a religion) does not recognize its own fallacy or give credence to the wisdom of the faithful. Faith in the very God atheists scorn is the only reason that tolerance for their views exists, but because He has been portrayed by too many as unattainable except through a narrow path, He is discounted.
There is much evidence that has been provided out of context to indicate that America’s Founders were given to divorce God from government, even as they invited His presence in their meetings and on their battlefields. There can be no doubt that each of them wrestled with his own faith as they worked to insure that our Republic would withstand the test of time. Their wisdom and sacrifices have brought us through to this uncertain future as their intentions are constantly questioned and debated. Faith is continually tested by logic and substantiated by the beauty of the human soul at its best. The various “teachings of man” must not negate the inspiration of God or all civilizations will fall. This I know beyond a shadow of doubt.
For a painstakingly researched and well thought out article on the dangers of Atheism to individual freedom read this article by Bob Just, published on WorldNetDaily recently. It is, to say the least, an eye opener to possibilities that should leave believers and non-believers alike fearful of a wrong choice and determined to “first, do no harm.”