Letters to the Editor
-
"How to be a Millionaire and never pay Taxes..."
First, get a million dollars.
Then, convince the tax-collector that you have a personal hotline to the supreme creator of the universe, and that the state has no right to interfere with your beliefs.
Seriously, though...as an atheist Buddhist, I'd raise a few quibbles.
1) "Atheism" can be formally defined as "non-theist." That is a completely different definition than "one who asserts the non-existence of God."
I am an atheist. I do not assert the existence of God. I ALSO do not assert the non-existence of God. Heck, maybe He's out there. I dunno. I don't care in the least.
I distinguish my view from "agnosticism" because I AM "gnostic." I very much believe (in line with the beliefs of many Buddhists, gnostic Christians, etc) that it is my own personal insight and experience which will lead to the cultivation of my wisdom.
2) I suspect that most self-proclaimed "agnostics" are far closer to atheists than they are "agnostics." It is telling that so many people in the US decline to embrace the label of "atheist." I've perceived a significant prejudice against my declaration that I am an atheist, and it's easy to understand why someone might use a less misunderstood term to define their personal spirituality.
3) Being a big fan of the US Constitution, the First Amendment is something profoundly important to me, and the efforts of ANY religious persons to erode my rights as guaranteed by that amendment because of THEIR religious beliefs are simply not compatible with the well-documented aims of the Founding Fathers in creating a formula for government which would resist theocracy and totalitarianism.
My tolerance for moderate believers is no different from my tolerance for devout fundamentalists. I support all of them in their right to worship and believe as they wish, and I am completely committed to preventing their beliefs from ruling my life through the power of the State.
As was stated by another poster recently, those moderately religious citizens who tolerate religious extremists' effort to bind their religion into the laws of man would do well to consider the threat of encroaching theocracy.
"Render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's; render unto God that which is God's."
God didn't write the Constitution. Leave him out of our basis for law.
4) RealName: you need to look up the definition of "democracy," as your recent assertion shows such a complete misunderstanding of its meaning.
"The Stalinists, however were essentially democrates [sic]-they killed everybody without distinction, and they regarded the World Outlook not as a dogma but as a guide to action."
"Democracy" is a philosophy of political rule, not the belief that "everyone should be killed without distinction," as you imply above. There was nothing democratic about Stalin's rule at all.