Page 1 of 1
Posted on May 10 at 12:23 a.m.
It's hard to understand the FUD (fear, uncertainty, and doubt) presented in this article and in the comments. The group is "evangelical": they have a common goal and hope to persuade others to join it. Can you please name any other organization which doesn't? Imagine if Young Democrats of America met in the school after school hours--which they are certainly and freely allowed do. Don't they have an "agenda" to persuade others? How about environmental clubs--aren't they trying to persuade their peers and change society? Even soccer moms launch campaigns for exclusive programs: as a child who didn't (and couldn't) play soccer, I was singled out and embarrassed by my peers--and soccer was a quasi-official school program. Does that mean soccer should be banned? Ms. Stewart and the Independent betray a clear double standard.
The Supreme Court recognized a specific danger: excluding religious groups on the basis that they are religious is itself a proclamation by the State against religion. Either religious groups get treated like any other, or else we start denying rights to "undesirable" groups.
Marcelivan, if you want to make 1930's parallels, start by reading about the German Confessing Church. Some of those radical evangelicals in the CEF might just save your life someday (and Ms. Stewart's, too), against Bush III or whoever.
On Reading, Writing, and Original Sin