After five states, four flights, a cruise (of sorts) to christen some friends’ new sailboat, some vacation, some lobbying, some fun, some family, a funeral and a long time being a long way from home, I’m back. I have a lot of catching up to do, but wanted to comment quickly on this to re-open for business (from here):
“And as for the idea of the secular. Why can people not understand that the secular is not anti-religious? It is indifferent to religion or irreligion. It is the space in which religious and non-religious can gather to settle their problems and learn about the world without interfering biases from idiosyncrasies of belief.”
The secular needn’t be anti-religious, I agree. Indeed, I want a secular government even though I don’t want a “naked” public square and have no axe to grind with the secular in general. However, when so many of the leaders of what passes for secularism in this country are so loudly and clearly anti-religious and insistent upon the silly idea that religion and science are somehow “incompatible” and that much of what we hold dear “poisons everything” and ought to be eradicated, should we really be surprised by the confusion? Moreover, is it reasonable to expect people routinely accused of being irrational, delusional and stupid to gather sweetly with their accusers to “settle their problems and learn about the world”?