Secularism is part of it, as is essentially American Whiggishness and a teleological turn toward progressivism as postmodern post-Christianity.

But don’t underestimate the whole Calvinist Protestant Work Ethic and Gospel of Wealth that exists here.  We’re by nature a very individualistic people who esteem material wealth as a side-effect of being faithful.  We esteem big business as much as big government.  To piggy back on Mark Shea’s astute observations The Left replaces God with Caesar and Bacchus and Moloch, and the Right replaces God with Mammon

That’s just as much of why we’re here as Secularism.

Bill,

I absolutely love this sentiment you just offered:
“The Left replaces God with Caesar and Bacchus and Moloch, and the Right replaces God with Mammon.”

It’s nice to see someone finally point out that the Right is causing just as much moral chaos as the Left. It is time for faithful Catholics to secede from both parties, to purify ourselves from th Big Two(tm) parties and stop sacrificing our spiritual consciences. God bless.

Ben,
If the GOP continues on it’s path away from being pro-life I’d be tempted to agree, but possibly a third option is for the grassroots folk to continue to “infiltrate” their local GOP delegations.My daughter has been active in her area, much to the dismay of the old country club set in the Republican Women’s Club.A whole lot of those ladies are approaching retirement & time will have it’s effect in the end.

I am a Catholic and a veteran. I will not abandon the Republic that I spent four years defending so that Leviathan can rule my life, and the lives of my children. My family came here one hundred years ago to seek freedom from the tyranny of European monarchies. My great-grandfather, my grandfathers, my dad, my uncles, my brother, my cousins…we have all served America. Is it time to abandon our country? To retreat into local and regional associations? To withdraw from our Constitutional government? Is that where we are now? Or do we fight back against the powers and principalities that rule Wall Street and murder the unborn?

We are Americans. We don’t surrender. Fight back.

Ben, while I understand why you feel the way that you do, who would be served by taking that position and attitude?!?

Will we ever see bipartisan politics in our country again?  The fringe element within the Republican Party has pushed them all to the far right of the isle where they’ve gridlocked our government for two years now.  Will the next two be any different?  They’ve been very public about their main goal being to block and bamboozle the President’s every move.  It takes many hands to paint the Blackface on Obama.

Again, the Register authors blame-shift.  This analysis is interesting but very rudimentary.  To understand the state of the US, one must look at our history.  Americans are misinformed and unaware of the incremental steps that govt has taken, which has led to what we see today.  We must understand the Federalist Papers, and the anti-federalist.  Sadly, generations of Americans were never taught the truth, the history which references the letters and journals of the Founders.  Our federal govt would like us to believe that our secular voters and lack of morality are the problems.  Granted, morality must be important to our ejected officials and society as a whole.  The problem is that the federal govt has overstepped its limited and enumerated powers, the Supreme Court has ignored the text of the Constitution, and the system had become filled with corruption, deceit, and demagoguery.  This deceit and corruption began as early as 1798, with the Alien and Sedition Acts.  Today’s problems are party of a process which is more than a century old.  Sadly, such problems will continue until we understand our history and the true meaning of our Constitution.  We do not know the truth, and therefore we do not understand how to assert our authority over the federal govt. The authority is within the states.  The attitude of blame empowers no one, and it does not align with Catholic values, nor the NCR readers.  NCR has work to do.

Best wishes and prayers to MJCIV from an Indian.(Ultimately I’m helping myself).

The fiscal cliff is coming from the Right, specifically the combination of devout Reagonmics fans and Ayn Rand acolytes.  In their view, destroying a strong federal government is the goal, meaning the Cliff and the economic chaos are good things. The more secular, less religious party is trying to stop the cliff, never wanting the sequestration that came from holding our debt hostage to conservative economic theology. The liberals want to make the country work, and have everyone pay their fair share. Street lights, firemen, and the military cost big money, and only the most selfish Scrooges argue with that. But now we have firemen letting houses burn because the owners decided they didn’t want to pay for fire coverage (looking at you, Tennessee).

Ironically, Ayn Rand was the most anti-religious figure possible in economics, yet most conservative Christians joined the movement pushing her selfish, hateful ideas.

MJCIV, look up Article 3 of the Constitution you once swore to uphold and defend. Depending on the terms of your service(assuming you have been discharged?), you might still be obligated by your Oath and liable under the UCMJ (you might not - some variables there).

The Constitution defines treason, as a practical matter settled by the Civil War, to include secession.

Tricia,
You are right that the Constitution is not being followed any more, or the federal government could never have gotten to be the gargantuan behemoth that it is.  But WHY is it not being followed any more, and why do few people care?  That is the deeper question that Dr. Wiker answers.

Mike horn,
Since the government no longer upholds the Constitution, why do we have to?

Obviously, both parties want to stop the cliff, but they want to do so with different methods.  Saying that only the Dems are trying to stop the cliff is beyond ridiculous.  They’re both to blame.

Insightful article. We all long for something meaningful. Current culture is replacing trust in God with materialism.
We will keep longing.

Dave,

In what way is the government not upholding the Constitution?  That is an impeachable offense for anyone in office, regardless of branch.  Please clarify.  Back to the article, since the USA is a secular nation, then was it always doomed or is that just modern religious/ideological attack using current events as a pretext?  If you disagree that we are secular, you need to read your history again.  Also, study how the Vatican banned the writings of Thomas Paine.

The government has authority to tax as they see fit, and there are very different views on that along the partisan divide.  I contend that the far Right has been trying to “starve the beast” as a tactic in pursuit of their goal of drastically smaller government.  Nothing starves the beast more than going over this cliff.  The Left definitely does not want this, because according to Keynesian economics it is one of the worst things we could possibly do at this point, drastically reduce spending while also raising taxes on everyone.  The Cliff is happening because the Right held the debt ceiling hostage, and this is the best that could pass back then.  Since the validity of the national debt “shall not be questioned”, perhaps we are in Unconstitutional territory here from the Tea Party wing, and questioning whether the law requiring the raising of the debt ceiling is itself not Constitutional.

mikehorn, neither the Republicans nor the Democrats are entirely to blame for the financial situation we find ourselves in today. Both parties, over decades and decades, have used the federal government in ways that are beyond the intent of our Founders. The powers of the federal government, by design, are limited and finite. The powers of states are much more flexible. Much of what Washington tries to do is well-intentioned but ultimately not its role. We need to return to the enumerated powers as spelled out by the Constitution, and leave the rest to the states. This is especially true when it comes to social spending: half of all Americans pay no federal income tax, and roughly half are now receiving some kind of transfer payment. This situation is not sustainable. It doesn’t matter if we like it, if we think it’s great, if we think it’s just…it is not sustainable.

Republicans in Washington have been completely co-opted by money and monied interests, as well as by the military-industrial complex. Democrats are statists who worship Leviathan (as Hobbes called it). The ONLY way to end this is to reduce the amount of money that goes to DC, and to return power to the states. If we want to argue about the interstate highway system and carbon emissions as being things the feds might need to dabble in, that’s fine. But all social spending programs need to be set up by states. There is no other way.

I am 44 years old. I grew in an America that had unimaginable prosperity. That America is gone. Power needs to be returned to the people at a state level. Leviathan will destroy us all.

The Catholic Church has been the biggest single welfare lobbyist in American history.  Social Justice = socialism.  It lobbies against immigration reform and for open borders.  The bishops fought against Clinton era welfare reforms and work requirements.  They even fought for Obamacare! Seculars are being blamed for everything from CT shooting (the shooter actually went to Catholic school) to the national debt (how many of us backed war in Iraq).  Welfare programs are a fraud.  So is blaming seculars for the national debt when your Church is so generous with other people’s money.

Mike,
We are doomed because our system of government only works if the people are virtuous.  I’ll let John Adams speak for me here, “Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.”

As to what way the gov’t is not upholding the Constitution, I’ll just refer you to Tricia’s comment above.

The 14th Amendment statement about the “validity” of the national debt cannot be reasonably interpreted to mean that the amount of the national debt can never be limited.  In other words, the point of Section 4 is not to say that “we are writing ourselves an unlimited blank check.”

One year we are going to go over the cliff. We are running out of money. Perhaps that is what it will take for our nations to turn to God!

@Andrew, reduce the money going into DC and there will be less-or none- to lobby for.

Dave, Thank you for your post.  I do fundamentally disagree with the author’s premise. The reason the the Constitution has not been followed dates back to the late 1700’s. It has little to do with Catholics, Catholicism, and voters as a whole. I will agree that politicians lack a strong moral fiber and that immorality and secularism are more apparent today than 100 years ago, but over all human nature and society has not changed much in my opinion, while some might argue it has improved.

I respectfully disagree with to and maintain that the NCR attitude of blame is not only a moot point, it is also somewhat condensing.  I will challenge anyone to read the Federalist and the Anti-federalist, and the untainted US history starting with the Alien and Sedition Acts of 1798 through the activities that lead to the Civil War. I would challenge anyone to consider authors that reference the original letters of the Founders, as well as their journals.  We have not been taught the entire story .  Just as the author leaves out a major piece of information,  our mainstream historians have done the same. The answer to your question lies within the untainted history of the US.  ( see, for example, , Thomas Woods-  Catholic, and prolific author on Catholicism and US history)

Dave, lastly, I would argue that very many people do care about the Constitution and they are becoming more informed. Sadly, mainstream media is biased and does not report such stories. They too lack information and have preconceived notions…..also see Dr. Kevin Guzman as another resource.

@Tricia, the government is now expected to step in and do the job that—for all of our history—was the responsibility of families: feeding, clothing, housing, and educating children. As unwed mothers become normative, and scofflaw men fail to care for their children, we will see more and more demand for the government to step in and pick up the slack. THAT’S a big societal change!

Thanks, all for this excellent discussion.

Tricia,
I am a follower of Woods and I agree with his analysis…but I don’t think that it is an either/or proposition.  I think that he is right, and I think that Dr. Wiker is right too.

Mike horn, the Supreme Court today interprets the Constitution according to its own Doctrine and cases, instead of the actual text and the Federalist…...for starters.  We were not inten ded to be a nation, rather the US-the union, was intended as a Compact-see Compact theory..  The central govt. has limited and enumerated powers. They have far exceeded their pepper role and authority. Obamacare is unconstitutional, and the states may nullify as some have already, just as with marijuana laws.  The Founders argued vehemently as to whether the Constitution should be ratified.  Also some favored a top down government. Only 9 of the 13 colonies signed initially. There were only 2 Catholics involved,btw. Patrick Henry refused to attend the Philadelphia convention, while Rhode Island refused to attend as well.  In reality, the anti-federalists were right. The govt we have today is exactly what they feared. DC will never fix DC, it its full of dcvers…..solutions lie within the states.  We must learn our true history…..look at the stories of the real Lincoln…..he could have cared less about slavery…..we do not know what we do not know…....

Also to Dave’s point on social justice, this term was used by Pope John Paul II single handedly dismantled the Communist Party in Poland, during his time their Cardinal.  The liberal democrats pay a lot of money to wordsmith their Campaigns. They use this term out of context.  Social justice meant something else to the former Pope, just add with the Vatican II call for economic justice. These terms also refer to those countries outside of the US as well. .

Dave. And this is new since Roosevelt? Great discussion indeed. I am not saying it is an either or, I am saying Dr. Wilker omitted this very key point among other things…again his analysis was interesting, yet rudimentary.

The left-right divide does not exist, as each side is authoritarian on certain issues, libertarian on other issues. The Republicans, who attracted approximately 25% of the total non-religious vote based on 2012 presidential exit polls, are big government in the domains of military, religion, transportation, housing, agriculture, drug trade and immigration. In the exit polls of New Mexico, the Libertarian Party presidential candidate, whose platform includes reducing a number of government departments, including the military, by 43% and eliminating the drug war, was most popular amongst those who never attend a place of worship.

as bizarre as this sounds for me, a dyed in the wool Republican from way back, the Right scares me much more than the Left does today…

Randian Objectivism makes me even more scared than if we become Sweden. 

It’s radicalism vs radicalism today.  The healthy Vidal vs Buckley stuff is over.  It’s not progressivism vs traditionalism.  It’s progressivism vs a different kind of progressivism.

I suppose that is why the pope lives in such humble poverty, as his reward in the next life will be so great.

The term “secularism” exists because people who believe in dieties, monsters, myths, witches, fill-in-the blank stories as reality exists.  People who were born with the innate understanding that what you see is what you get, have to deal with the here and now and what is impending for the generations down the road….here on earth.

Until churches pay taxes religion has no right to try & govern. Perhaps if the riches of the vatican were sold to help elevate the suffering in the world people would laugh do hard st articles like this.

This is a joke of an article. I’m not going to defend the left or right politically speaking as how you arrive upon blame in that department depends largely on news sources and religious affiliations, etc, etc.

But putting the fiscal cliff on secularism? That is hilarious and a gross misrepresentation of secularism. First of all, as a secularist, we feel our duty is to consume as little as possible to ensure there is still something left of our earth for our future generations. I’m surprised that you don’t realize the reality that secularists tend to be pro-environmentalists. Secularists actually care about REALITY and people, but not faith and personal beliefs revolving around ideas absent of facts or provability.

Second, before you start throwing stones at the ‘materialism’ inherit in all out naturalism, you should consider the wealth of the Vatican. You should consider the history of your organization and quickly realize you are throwing rocks inside a glass stained window…house.

Secularism isn’t absent of virtue as you purport, secularism is the only way in which true virtue can exist. Consider what is more virtuous: the person who does good deeds because god decreed and because god rewards; or, the person who does good deeds because they care about others and explicitly for that reason and expect nor want a reward. It’s simple to see which is most virtuous. I’m surprised this author has anything published.

I’ve been a secular humanist for a long time, and I’ve never met the person described here.  Most Humanists are politically liberal, because we see ways to utilize government to solve human problems.  Our main difficulty with the Catholic church, other than the tax money it receives, is trying to force parents to have more children than they can afford.  The people I see in our society who are going for all the wealth they can achieve are nominal Christians, using other Christians (Catholics included) to give them power.  If we would stop causing wars, increase taxes to cover the costs of governing, and create a single-payer government-run health care system with controlled costs this would be a better country.

Who is to blame??? It is the combination of the ‘Say Nothing’ and ‘Do Nothing’ Bishops and priests and the Bishops and priests who are dancing with the Devil ( Marxist Democrat Party ). Then there is the “Entitlement” class who could care less about a Fiscal Cliff. All they are concerned with is “Gimme my Free Stuff”. The Devil Dancing Bishops and priests obviously could care less about a Fiscal Cliff because they are enablers of the Entitlement Class under the disguise of looking after the “POOR”. Just ask Bishop Blaire out of Stockton, California.  We are a bankrupt nation both fiscally and morally. Obama and the Marxist Democrat Party are hell bent on taking us down.

If secularism is to blame, then why don’t all of the most secular nations in the world have a fiscal cliff?

What hypocrites you religionists are.  Every cathedral, even in the poorest country is a temple to materialism.  You thrive on a tax-free status, and shift the burden to others including us non-believers.  How about a little humility.

You must be kidding me! I am a secularist and am insulted that its assumed I’m a greedy person with no virtue. I don’t believe in heaven or hell but I still have a moral compass, not out of FEAR but because its the right thing to do. And I suppose no Christians have ever sought “superfluous pleasures, titillations, entertainments and luxuries”. Really!

Here is another take on it, why not make the churches pay taxes?  That would reduce the taxload on the rest of us.  Is it because the real problem is that churches are as greedy or more so than most people?

Funny how many adults still believe in supernatural creators. Yet not one of you can define the god you’ve
created for yourselves. Nor can any of you explain how consciousness survives death. Religious people have such superficial beliefs.

Do you really think the Catholic Church has any place criticizing the acquisition of money and other material things? Ha!

It is true that we have many lazy people perfectly willing to take advantage of our largesse (of course, that includes religious ‘leaders’) and efforts need be made to reduce those costly problems, just as efforts need to be made to stop the much, much more costly fraud and dishonesty in our financial sector.  And the fact that religious leaders have had a huge impact on societies (Poland, U.S.., etc) simply means they had the following to do so, not that religion, in and of itself, was the prime factor.  Majorities tend to eventually gain control.  Religion is still a very powerful force, but it is frightened right now of losing the young generation and wants government (shock, shock) to enforce its religious creed by providing special privileges and by forcing certain religious beliefs be taught in public schools.  It is simply sick to imply that, were we a religious nation (actually we are), there would have been no school shootings, no fiscal problems, etc., as so many of our ‘moral’ leaders have publicly stated.  Morals are developed by societies, not religions, and those morals change as societies change.  That may be why we no longer see the morality in drowning, hanging or burning witches these days, although I acknowledge the desire in some for the return of religious brutality and persecution of certain ‘classes’ of people.  There are countries in the world where religion rules the roost, but none I want to reside in.

like clockwork the atheists come in

always insulted

always back with tired tropes about papal luxe that even the most ardent fundamentalist wouldn’t even bother with

always here about the flying spaghetti monster or whatever

they taunt what they do not understand

they embrace the surface

their love is nihilistic, fading, decomposing

they are the biggest bores because they have no interest in seeking…

they are the least inquisitive

the shallowest

Our need to seek, our inquisitiveness–all the things you say we don’t have–provides you with all the comforts of the modern world, and indeed this very platform.

You denounce us as bores while standing on our shoulders.

The surface we embrace is called reality.

You should really try checking into it sometime.

In response to:
like clockwork the atheists come in

always insulted = you feel embarrased

always back with tired tropes about papal luxe that even the most ardent fundamentalist wouldn’t even bother with = everyone knows we are hypocritical

always here about the flying spaghetti monster or whatever = your concepts are too deep

they taunt what they do not understand = we are disappointed our arguments don’t carry water

they embrace the surface = there is nothing under the surface

their love is nihilistic, fading, decomposing = they couldn’t possibly love people without god commanding it could they

they are the biggest bores because they have no interest in seeking… = they ask too many questions and never accept answers without proof

they are the least inquisitive = they don’t read the bible everyday

the shallowest = they make me feel stupid

Tricia, Obamacare is most definitely Constitutional, even from the most conservative court we’ve had in several decades.  The Court rules what is and is not Constitutional, if the disagreement goes that far.  They ruled in favor, which means your claim otherwise is flatly wrong.

We do change as time goes on.  We have Amendments, for one thing.  The Constitution is incredibly vague and has a mechanism for relatively permanent change built in, plus many mechanisms for ensuring that what we do remains Constitutional.  There are several schools of thought about how to determine that, but the Original Intent is only one of them present on the Supreme Court, meaning that those chosen as the arbiters don’t even agree on approach.  In my opinion, this is how it should be.  We are the marketplace of ideas where we argue unceasingly over everything.

For the atheists and humanists in this discussion: first, thank you for chiming in. Your have a valuable point of view. Second, when morality exists solely as a human invention, you can justify anything. Values based in objective truth—the ‘moral arc of the universe’ as Dr. King called it—do not bend in the face of human opinion. I salute the intentions of secularists, and I share their discomfort with religious extremism, fundamentalism, and irrationality. At the same time, when you remove God from a society, you create stagnation/extinction (like W. Europe) or horror (Communist China, Russia, Nazi Germany).

So I understand your points, and I am familiar with your arguments. I ask that you consider history: look at societies where God has been removed and replaced by the state, which is what we are talking about. Not some hypothetical utopia, but real places. Would you like to live there? Are these societies sustainable? If not…why?

Peace. This has been a very good and thought-provoking thread.

Benjamin needs to open a dictionary and look up the definition of secularism.

MJCIV, the evidence actually shows that free societies that abandon religious nonsense (especially Christianity) produce the

happiest, healthiest, most peaceful, and most moral societies in every conceivable category. Religion goes hand in hand with

poverty and immorality (see sources below).

Not only is the idiotic “atheists have no moral basis and are Communists/Nazis” refrain untrue, it is pure bigotry. Hitler was

raised as a Roman Catholic, was inspired by Martin Luther (who wrote a 65,000 word treatise titled “on the Jews on their lies”),

and wrote in Mein Kampf that “by defending myself against the Jew, I am fighting for the work of the Lord”; but I’m not about to

accuse you of being a Nazi sympathizer if you happen to be a Roman Catholic. Likewise, the Bible is filled with accounts of

God-mandated genocide and ethnic cleansing, but I’m not going to assume that you condone such horrors, and I’m not going to

assume that you think the type of ethnic cleansing found throughout the Old Testament ought to be repeated. For most modern

Christians, reason outweighs dogma, and I thank them for their hypocrisy.

Atheists derive their morality from reason, and religious superstition clouds that reasoning. This is why free, secular socities

invariably correlate with high rates of health and happieness. Christopher Hitchens was right: Religion poisons everything.

http://www.secularhumanism.org/index.php?section=library&page=pzuc kerman_26_5
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/are-atheists-more-inclined-to-help-the ir-fellow-man-than-religious-people/#
http://prairieweather.typepad.com/big_blue_stem/2011/04/and-finally-at heists-are-more-moral-than-christians.html
http://backyardskeptics.com/wordpress/proof-that-atheists-are-more-mor al-than-christians/

These are all savory comments but few address the logic of Mr Wiker. I have read many denials (larry) but none that address the points of Mr Wiker.

Clearly, folks fall on both sides of the story line, but the article does not say that only non-believers are secular. Its about Secularism, and the fiscal cliff being an outcome of this worldview.

So far I have yet to see any language that repudiates Mr. Wikers opinion.

Cheers
Tom

The author may want to buy a dictionary so that they can look up what secular means.

Secular: of or pertaining to worldly things or to things that are not regarded as religious, spiritual, or sacred; temporal: secular interests.

Wiker is so wrong. Secularism isn’t the removal of god from society. Rather, religion is the overlay of god belief and spiritualism on top of secular society. Remember that Christianity is barely 2,000 years old.

Wiker also confuses materialism with secularism. There is nothing inherently materialistic about secularism. Indeed, responsibility and compassion are tenets of Secular Humanism.

The bottom line is being good is being good regardless of whether you’re an Atheist, Christian, Jew, Muslim, Hindu, Buddhist, etc. Likewise, overspending is reckless regardless one’s belief system. Moreover, since 80% of Americans identify themselves as religious (primarily Christian), the religious are to blame since they, not Atheists, govern this country.

Tom P, I did address this.  We are a secular nation, and the cliff is a current thing.  Secularism is not the cause.  The logic of the article is faulty in that it says that, since secularism has been on the rise and now we are at the fiscal cliff, then secularism is to blame.  There is no connection there.  Equivalent logic is that we didn’t have nuclear weapons before women got the vote.  Now we have them, and it is women’s fault.  I made the point that it is the religious conservatives that voted in the intransigent, obstructionist Tea Party that is all about doing nothing about any problems except shrink the government.  We have obligations already set that we must pay for, and haven’t.  Shrinking the government will not solve that.  For instance, every taxpayer in the country owes close to $7000 just for the Iraq War, which has not yet been paid for, a total of about $1T.  No draft, no war bonds, no taxes.  All “emergency funding measures”, which really means bald deficit spending.  Such are the fiscal concerns of religious conservatives.  Now they rattle sabres against Iran and Syria.  War, yes.  Take care of the poor, no.

Secularism, where concern for fellow men, our nation, our land, is placed in the hands of voters and government and taken away from churches, served us well from 1932 on till fairly recently.  American Conservatives started to tear down that ideal starting in 1980, though rigid insanity didn’t take hold until the lead-up to the 2010 election.  Before 1932 there were many bright spots.  Selfishness caused the great depression, and is center-stage today, though dressed up with tea bags and brandishing a new prophet, Ayn Rand.  The conservative Catholic, Paul Ryan, has a budget proposal and economic ideas indistinguishable from this prophet of selfishness, to the point where the ACCB formally condemned it.

Forget secularism or religion, those are beside the point.  We got out of the Great Depression and WWII with the Greatest Generation.  We got into Iraq and this financial mess with the Greediest Generation.

MJCIV, you said:  “when morality exists solely as a human invention, you can justify anything.”

Wrong.  Absurdly wrong.  Let me put it this way:  if your belief in your religion is the only thing keeping you from being a serial-murdering cannibalistic pedophile, then you better not come within miles of me or my family.  Morality is independent of any religion.  It existed prior to any current religion, meaning no faith today has any claim on it.  Somewhere short of one billion people today live without any belief in any god, and they get along just fine. (this number is hard to pin down because you cannot count anyone in places like China, where public acknowledgment of faith is suppressed).  The most peaceful nations in the world also have the highest number of non-believers.  Buddhism is often an atheistic religion, and they practice pacifism above all.  If non-belief was a recipe for evil and immoral behavior, we would expect that our jails would be full of non-believers.  The opposite is true.  If religion was the source of good works and positive behavior, we would expect history and current events to reflect that.  A quick look at Northern Ireland, the Balkans, and the Middle East, not to mention India/Pakistan quickly dispels that notion, looking back only decades.

Anyone of faith must ask:  is something good because their god said so, or did their god say something is good because it is intrinsically good?  If the first is the answer to morality, then morality is arbitrary.  A reading of the Old Testament shows how frightening this scenario can be.  If the second is true, then a god is irrelevant.  We are capable of deciding moral and ethical questions on our own.  The better answer is that morality is a complex equation that has been building, changing, and growing with us as a species.  There was great benefit to forbidding murder, theft, and dishonesty 100,000 years ago, and we are continuing to refine it today.

“That we seem to be merrily rolling along toward a fiscal cliff is evident. Why is not as clear — at least not the deep why.”

The WHY is because our leaders spend more money than they take in. Why?  Because they  buy votes to stay in office. Why?  Because they enjoy the power and income. 

I do agree that our increasingly secular culture is the root cause of this immoral cesspool in which we currently live. Take what you can get; any way you can get it!  The Democratic Socialist Party is the party of death and encourages freeloaders.  Just this week, a woman on the beach (with very obvious breast implants) was asked who she voted for in the last election. Her response was “I was told if I didn’t vote for Obama, I would lose my food stamps.” She probably got the breast implants on Medicaid!!  

We are a very sick nation!  As Hitler once said, vote for me and in four years, you will not recognize Germany!  And we know what happened in that country. We are headed down that same path. We have already killed more babies through abortion than Hitler killed in the Holocaust. Next will be the elderly, terminally ill, and those whose care costs more than their usefulness. 

I do not recognize this country after the last four years!  This last election was proof that the “takers” are in charge and we cannot return to prosperity without much prayer and GOD’s compassion.  Woe to America after the next four years!  

Have you for one moment researched the number of people who claim they are secularists? The united states is 88% religious, with 74% Christian of varying denomination. That amounts to roughly 12% Non religious and only about 10% actually secular with 2% maintaining a “spirituality” as their chosen faith. This basically translates to we secularists being the least common denominator in the equation and therefore the least viable target for your blame game.

Our government was founded on secularist ideals but is run by religious zealots the intentions of whom remain to push secular ideas out of the government we have today. In fact, our only redemption as a nation has come time and again in the form of secular humanist behaviors and laws. Face it, you’re a hateful type of person shouting from a rooftop about how terrible people you don’t understand must be.

Anti-secularism is just the new anti-protestantism, sexism, racism and antisemitism you’re just not a courageous enough group of people to reach out and try to better understand your fellow man. It’s the same game that has been played by bigots and the small minded throughout history and as soon as we have won the battle to shut out your hatred you’ll find another minority group to pick on.

I pity you in your weak-willed weak-minded confusion and hatred. Do not however confuse me with someone who cares enough to hope for you, as far as I’m concerned the world would be a better place without the divisive curse that is religion on the whole.

Is it better to fear a mythical god, an imaginary hell and try for a mythical heaven when in your inner self, where we all dwell, you do not believe.  You, the religious, would keep everyone on your defined path because you believe the truth of it.  It is true that in the secular world there is no sin, but there is always right and wrong, which must ultimately be decided and acted upon by the individual.  Your god does not stay my hand, or lift it.  I stay my own hand or pull my own trigger.
We are all human.

Tom P “These are all savory comments but few address the logic of Mr Wiker. I have read many denials (larry) but none that address the points of Mr Wiker.”  I have to admit I don’t understand this comment.  The article is about religion vs secularism and the harm that secularism causes and that religion would either repair or prevent.  Since there is no actual evidence to support the statement that secularism has caused this problem, no logic exists that needs addressing.

Mike horn,  I understand that the most conservative SCOTUS ruled on some aspects of Obamacare as Constitutional.  You are correct. However, the SC basicyearally said please accept my opinion under the guise of adjudication.  Since Marbury, in 1820,.....don’t quote me in the year, SC has failed to interpret the Constitution on its textual content. Instead they ignore the Federalist Papers, and rule according to their own Doctrine and specific cases. Among many, especially those at Yale law school, the textual interpretation is the only method of interpretation-non-negotiable.  To the Constitutionalist and those that wish to preserve liberty, it is not the role of the federal govt, regarding Obamacare. Moreover, the SC does not represent the last word or “check and balance”, rather it is the states. This is demonstrated in Article V, the tenth amendment, and sheriffs’ interposition, for example. In fact, many statesvery recently were successful with exercising the 10th amendment rights, as well as Article V. In fact, there are the Article V initiatives currently, one of which is very non-partisan and is now under consideration in over 30 states. 

You mentioned earlier that secession is not legal, and you are correct that in Lincoln’s mind the Union took precedence over the sovereignty of the states. Lincoln, however was wrong to wage war on his own people, while they states then and today do have the right to as a , and it is considered a last resort.  The govt we had from the early 1800s, that has incrementally gained more control, is exactly what the anti-federalists feared.  I believe that people can self-govern. Yet today our fellow citizens support laws that penalize and also slap the hand of offenders and the innocent. 

Perhaps the area that you and I may disagree, is our definition of the role of govt.  We are a Constitutional Republic, and I would like to preserve it, IMHO.

MJCIV:  I agree with you that there are societal characteristics that are different today, yet I do not agree that overall human nature has changed.  Our cultural, new norms-are very much like gnosticism and Manacheanism of the early centuries AD.  The 11th and 12th centuries were very dark, where the ” Old religion”, had become malevolent. Let’s fast forward to the early 20th century and the Eugenics movement and the rise of nationalism.  Margaret Sanger, Planned Parenthood founder, along with Adolf Hitler worked together on the same UN population Fund. They believed that Catholics, slavs, blacks, convicts, those with psychological impairments , etc. should not be allowed to reproduce. This committee supported by Darwin and others, campaigned to create an application process for anyone who wished to become pregnant, the elite Arian excluded. This UN Committee still exists today and continues to work on providing birth control to every country, and for less than virtuous reasons. Nationalism was a trend in Europe and Hitter was admired in that sense by our own Pres. Roosevelt, until his infamy. Sanger dropped back after Hitler’s rise to power, yet promoted her plans under the guise of women’s rights…....so do you still think that humans have really changed? Think about the fall of Rome as well; they were more hedonistic than we are today.. Today’s sins are not new.

“This is why free, secular socities
invariably correlate with high rates of health and happieness.”

These same free, secular societies are failing to reproduce. I’m sure being in Denmark right now is marvelous. Twenty years from now, not so much.

Communist Russia, communist China, and Communist N. Korea were and are hell holes. They are real places where religion—that which ‘poisons everything’—was forcibly removed in order to create a secular utopia. Nazis worshiped the state no matter what they called it. But I’m sure THIS time it will be different.

Richard Dawkins, in “the God Delusion,” talked about some vague, 20th century global morality that recognizes universal human rights, all while ignoring the religious origins of this morality (abolition, for example). Secular humanists base morality on their opinion. Opinions change. Natural moral law does not.

To those that are secularists:

I empathize with you, as the author marginalized all secular non-religious individuals in a most negative light. I do not believe it was intentional of the author to do so. There are some who feel the secular movement supports an anything goes mentality, while many media outlets show only the angry disgruntled atheists. 

I am Catholic and can tell you that it is not the Catholic way to sit in judgment. I was not pleased to read this article, as i find blame shifting to be abhorrent for any reason. I have noted this trend of blame in several recent NCR articles. I plan to write a letter to the archbishop as I am embarrassed. We can Co-exist. Peace.

I did rebut this article very clearly, but what I think you are looking to place on secularism is consumerism. And consumerism is not worldview specific.

Nathan Johnson: I disagree with the evidence you cite; it seems anecdotal. In the US, the only Republic in the world, rights are God given, vs. govt provided. That is the fundamental premise. So, even if one does not believe in God there is a good reason to do so. I am not trying to convert you to Christianity, I am just saying. Further, in order to implement socialism and communism, religion cannot be allowed, especially in the public square.  Again, I am just saying…..

Don’t need to refute Wiker. He hasn’t made an argument, just a series of assertions rooted in a particular view. It’s called cognitive bias. He’s entitled to his opinion; but feeling, opinion and personal belief prove nothing about secularism or anything else for that matter. ... Just because it feels good to his worldview doesn’t mean it is true or has any merit. Pointing a finger at secularism as a root of “evil” or financial woe is merely another play on the fruit or the snake or Eve for the fall of mankind. Quite frankly it’s childish, even irresponsible, and hypocritical, and one reason why so many have turned away from the Church (lest we forget that Rome was built upon material wealth).

  Contrary to the thesis of the article there is a strong correlation between nations that are least religous having the best quality of life such as lower crime rates, lower divorce rates, better health statistics etc. http://www.alternet.org/story/144174/is_belief_in_god_hurting_america
  I would point to rampant unchecked capitalism and plutocracy that profits off of all our human weaknesses as a major force in our culture. 9/11? - go shopping. Celebrate Christmas? - go shopping. Feeling depressed? eat some Doritos. Feeling bored? Eat some more and play a computer game for the next 10 hours. Not feeling sexy enough? Buy a new car - on your credit card. Taking the time to figure out what we really want instead of going with our first impulse for instant gratification is an awareness practice that we could do more of, this writer included.

To the religion bashers, please study Catholicism before throwing your self-centered mal-aligned opinions at it. I am also interested in what brought you to this site.

I did address his points. His main point was drawing a connection between secularism being on the rise and our looming fiscal cliff. Of course I denied the connection, because there is no connection. That’s the problem with those given to religious and superstition, you see connections and patterns between things that don’t really exist. Further, even if you could draw a connection between the two, it wouldn’t be evidence for your god’s existence as that would be a nonsequitur, however it would be evidence that secularism was real.

The only thing the author successfully demonstrated was his ability to use non-sequential data to establish a faulty cause and effect. I’m surprised at how vapid and empty these responses are to a legitimate criticism of this article. You can keep believing in fairy tales if you like, but you’ll just keep pushing your ideas to the fringe. Especially when you can’t meet legitimate criticism with counter arguments.

I wish that Mr. Wiker would explain how a person who quits their job because of laziness and not illness or disability is “entitled” to $60,000 a year in government largess. I’m unable to find enough sources of these giveaways to come anywhere close to $60,000.
I also find it interesting that many church leaders continue to demand more and more taxpayer gifts with no strings attached. I guess they figure that if the peons lose their benefits there will be more money for the church which will attract the huddled mass’s.

To look to the government to solve all our problems is a fool’s game. It’s purpose is to maintain order, restrain sin and provide for the national defense.  Other institutions, church, family, civic, and business (large and small), are much better positioned to deal with the many other issues that face us.  These institutions are obliged to make changes through persuasion and hard work.  When government is charged with solving problems it resorts to bully tactics to enforce the policies and ideologies of a self appointed elite class.

“if your belief in your religion is the only thing keeping you from being a serial-murdering cannibalistic pedophile, then you better not come within miles of me or my family.”

Actually the only thing keeping me from eating little kids is my wife. She is downright strict about that sort of thing.

“Anyone of faith must ask:  is something good because their god said so, or did their god say something is good because it is intrinsically good?”

As an atheist, or a humanist, can you tell me where ‘intrinsic good’ comes from? In the absence objective moral truths, where does the definition of ‘good’ come from? Consensus? Feelings? Where?

Just because I went to St. Joseph’s Grade School, Cathedral Prep High School and Gannon University, does’nt mean I stayed Catholic. It just took longer to rid myseld of the brainwashing.

I should have studied Foreign Languages.

Dear Karen Karbowski

I was one of the critics of the Catholic Church. My POV comes from being raised Catholic , and then becoming progressively more disappointed in the hierarchy of the Catholic Church, its all to frequent abuse of power, the corruption, lack of introspection and moral irresponsibilty and constant shifting of blame. I know many Catholics, many religious people, many humanists and I assure you that none are more ethical or moral as a group than the other. Believing in God is essentially for internal strength and comfort. Worshipping a religious is fraught with peril. This article was linked to a site on Progressive Christianity.

Ben, I must reiterate that secularism is the base state of mankind and not “the removal of Christianity and the Church from the defining center of the culture.” You have the cart before the horse.

Greed is not unique to persons of faith or no religion. It insults me and other secularists to suggest that it is secular in nature. No doubt you are aware of prosperity theology. That’s about as greedy as you get. And the greed of the Catholic church speaks for itself.

I left the Catholic church more than half a century ago for the reason that many of its teachings didn’t square with reality. Fifty plus years later, I continue to believe that many of the church’s teachings (including all those that relate the existence of god and Jesus as the son of god) are wrong.

Which brings me to issue of morality. No world view has a monopoly on morality and ethics. The immorality of Christians and in the name of Christianity are legion. The list is very long. To claim that secularism is responsible for immorality is sheer bigotry.

At the heart of your blog seems to me to be the notion that “lavish entitlements” are responsible for the Fiscal Cliff. Certainly, unfunded entitlements are one of the causes, tho I wouldn’t call them lavish. The problem is much bigger. It’s the nature of politics. Politicians promise, promise, promise.

So please do not forget that unfunded wars of choice (by gun-ho presidents and members of Congress), lack of regulations or bad regulations in the financial arena, tax entitlements for the wealthy such as “carried interest” (think Mitt Romney), capital gains treatment and dividends, like-kind exchanges, charitable contributions and (unfair) international trade agreements are equally if not more to blame for our current economic problems.

The solution, it seems to me, is a constitutional amendment requiring a balanced budget (permitting a two-third’s vote permitting additional spending in times of national emergency), a constitutional amendment overturning the Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision and a progressive income tax rates (i.e., based on ability to pay) with a standard deduction without other deductions, exemptions and credits.

I also believe that Social Security and Medicare must be funded not from current funds or government IOUs but based on actuarial liability.

Last, and this dig seems appropriate, Congressman Paul Ryan (R-WI) is a Catholic and one of the Republican Tea Party obstructionists in the U.S. House of Representatives. There’s a lot of Catholics and other Christians in the House. It’s time that they do the right, moral thing. On the other hand, there are not many, if any, in Congress who self-identify as secularists so don’t blame us for the Fiscal Cliff.

The way this article merely blames secularism is overly simplistic. The top comment mentioned the protestant (Calvanist) “work ethic” and I believe that along with the old money that has always existed this side of the pond has a lot to do with it as well. I know of plenty of so-called orthodox, wasp-flavored Catholics, even, who make plenty of money and have amassed unseemly amounts of luxury, largely having brought into the right-wing, libertarian ideology that more wealth than you honestly know what to do with isn’t a bad thing at all, that it is, in fact, a very good thing. I know how many of those who feel that they are the ‘remnant’ of the faithful feel the need to ‘other’ and scapegoat everyone who thinks differently about the world than they, but that really isn’t going to bring us closer to perspective on this issue.

When you ask “where do we get good from?” you are implying that you have an answer, while I don’t. You cannot say “god did it” and expect that to work, especially if you speak of the god in the OT. While you will not like the naturalistic response, it will at least not be a response we will require you to accept upon pain of torture postmortem; however, you cannot afford me the same decision. You need understand something, god is not talking to all of us. While you may seriously believe you are talking to god, there are LOTS of us who are not hearing anything or seeing anything supernatural. Hence the emphasis on faith among the religious. Therefore, any belief requiring faith is a belief without sufficient reason, and a belief without sufficient reason can not be sufficient reason itself for anything—let alone morality.

Wasp-flavored Catholics?  Does that mean Catholics who support abortion, gay marriage, women priests, eliminating the celibacy requirement for all priests, euthanasia, etc., etc. ?  They are NOT Catholic and give a bad name to all faithful Catholics!

@Lin No, not necessarily. While there are plenty of those who are as you described them, there are still plenty more who are pro-war (ie. pro-spend-tons-of-money-on-the-military), pro-torture, Libertarian (diametrically opposed to Catholic social teaching) neo-cons who believe that being a good Catholic merely requires being on the right side of all of those cultural issues you mentioned while maintaining their place with Evangelical right-wing America. Americanism (which IS secularism seeping into Catholicism) exists on both sides of the aisle. As I said, scapegoating everyone who espouses liberal ideas (not all of which are opposed to Catholic social teaching, though on the contrary, many of which help to uphold Catholic social teaching), will not get us closer to perspective on the nation’s debt and how to deplete it.

It is great to have one institution to rmeind us that the more pleasures we enjoy in this world the fewer we can expect in the next. I must add though, pictures of the princes of the Church indicate most of them could get benefits in both worlds by eating only what the poor can afford.

All true, and well written. But as to the cause of the elimination of the Church and God from society: as the Church goes so goes the world. We did it first.

@Robert. I never mentioned one political party over another. As I said in a previous post, the last election proves that the takers are in charge.  As long as people can get what they need for no effort, and the government can steal the makers money and give it away for votes, we will not solve our fiscal problems. People who know and live THE TRUTH could turn this country around in no time.  But they could not get elected. Our country needs GOD above all else!  Let us pray he will intercede and safe us from ourselves!  Happy New Year!

@Lin And neither did I. When I use “Libertarian”, I mean it strictly in the ideological sense, not in reference to the American political party. Though by categorizing individuals into either “givers” or “takers”, something the Church has actually discouraged, I can tell more discussion is to no avail. Happy New year to you as well.

How. Can someone say that churches are best positioned to help the needy when it spends millions if dollars settling lawsuits because for some reason it couldn’t figure out a way to address the sexual, psychological, and spiritual abuse of its most vulnerable charges?

Generally the most religious parts of the world are the poorest and the most secular are the wealthiest. When you study iron age technology to handle the modern world what else would one expect?

@Robert. Makers and takers, not givers and takers. We are obligated as Christians to take care of the poor and sick but the government is not the most efficient method of caring for these people. I go to DC every year for the March For Life and am always amazed at the miles of government office buildings with thousands of employees that are paid for by the taxpayer. If we just reduced the size of government through attrition and introduced incentive measurements, we could balance the budget in no time. There is no incentive to improve performance in the public sector.  Too many people, in both the public and private sector, do not have a conscience and they TAKE whatever they can wether they have earned it or not.  Government and waste are two peas in a pod. And no one can fix it because the majority (takers) have their hands in the cookie jar.  What is waste to us hard working citizens is someone else’s all expenses paid (by the taxpayer) to Hawaii!  You must have seen the lavish parties thrown by government agencies on the news.  The government grants to friends of the politicians for businesses that go bust in less than 6 months.  Who but GOD can put an end to this!  GOD bless you and pray he has mercy on us!

Rusty Yates:

I do not mean this as a challenge, but more as an honest question.
Do you have some stats on your statement?  I have worked for over ten years in the poorest parts of the world, where they are not religious, and if there is a faith, it is not Christianity. Poverty is sustained because the government controls all goods and services, and incomes are taxed at high rates.  Frankly, in the Communist and Socialist countries, religion is not allowed, especially in the public square.  Thanks.

Moogie:

You wrote:  How. Can someone say that churches are best positioned to help the needy when it spends millions if dollars settling lawsuits because for some reason it couldn’t figure out a way to address the sexual, psychological, and spiritual abuse of its most vulnerable charges?

Today, Catholic charitable services alone represent 30% of all health and human service delivery in the US, while services or the Protestant and Hebrew faiths and others add significantly.  Some of the best hospitals,clinics, nursing homes, orphanages, and adoption services are run by religious organizations, which operate quite well. The laity, including the sisters, and clergy - rabbi’s etc, devout themselves to their work as they see it as a vocation vs. a career.  We tend to forget that these institutions include some of the best doctors and experts in the world, and that the world’s most famous scientists and doctors were/are members of the Pontificate Academy of Sciences. 

Your reference to the clergy is understandable, but it does not touch on the real question here, and that is; when the founding fathers seceded from the British were they right in doing so under the premise that you and I can self-govern - that we can self-govern? It was not intended that the role of the Central Government grow to be a large entity, rather under the Federalist 45, it states that the central govt. has limited and enumerated powers while sovereignty lies within the states.

There were basically two mindsets back then - Alexander Hamilton and Thomas Jefferson.  Hamilton wanted a monarch-like central government, while Jefferson preferred the bottom up approach - in a nutshell.  So shortly after the Constitution was ratified in 1789, the central govt. grew out of control, seizing power and ignoring and misinterpreting the Constitution- see the Whiskey Rebellion 1791, and the Alien and Sedition Acts of 1798.

While I empathize with you, the offenders in the church system do not reflect the whole of the 2.2 billion Catholics in the world.  I prefer the idea of Liberty (i.e. the Freedom to do what one ought.”)  over the idea that government must control the economics as with socialism, and that everyday Americans cannot own and deliver goods and services.  It was intended that we all own property and our own means of gaining prosperity. Govt. has made that more difficult for us.  I believe it is possible, but govt. today wants 3 out of every 4 dollars we make.  I would place my bets on my neighbor, church and otherwise, before I would trust any politician in DC. The odds are better in that regard, as DC is full of DCvers, who are motivated by power and money.

FrankN:

You wrote:  Your god does not stay my hand, or lift it.  I stay my own hand or pull my own trigger.  We are all human.

Catholics believe that too.  We do believe in inspiration, yet we understand that we are given the freedom to choose.

I find it interesting that the author blames “secularism” for the economic problems of America when America remains the most religious modern nation on the plant.  A majority of Americans profess religious beliefs such as the belief in heaven and hell.  And last I heard, there was only one member of Congress who admitted to being “non-theist.”  So who are these secularists who have taken over our country?  And if there is but one non-religious representative, senator or president in Washington, how can you blame their mistakes on “secularism?”

Just think of how much $ we could spend on much better things if institutions of superstition (ooops- I mean faith) weren’t tax exempt!

Lin, please do not use the pronoun “we,” for I am not a Christian. I am an Atheist.

Yes, some Christians feel obligated to take care of the poor and the sick, except that is, those Christians who do not feel such an obligation.

I’ve never seen a study on who is the most “efficient” provider of carrying for the people on a large scale, so I can’t say whether government is efficient or inefficient in comparison to other groups. I can say, however, that I do not want my taxes given to religious charities. So what’s the alternative to government?

Waste is not restricted to government. We all have waste or excesses. I am aware of no one who is perfect. So why are you holding government to a higher standard? I’ve worked for the federal government and a local government before. There are a lot of hard working people in the government. And some rotten apples. Is that any different than commercial businesses? I’ve worked there too. Even owned a business. Based on my experience, I can’t say whether government is better or worse than businesses.

I dare say that some corporations and charitable organizations have had lavish boondoggles. The point is that government, businesses and charities are a reflection of ourselves. We can all strand improvement.

Last, your mythical God isn’t capable of putting an end to waste, fraud and abuse. If we want to make government better, WE (collectively) must vote out politicians who are not serving our best interests and vote in those who do will act in our best interests.

I do not pray, so I will not pray for you. Instead, I wish you the best in the New Year.

Utter hypocrisy. Blaming secularism for the problems of a nation where 93% profess belief in God!!
Religiots can never produce a rational argument- no wonder, as your whole belief system is IRRATIONAL. Meanwhile Il Papa sits atop his golden throne, clothed in ermine and pontificates about sharing wealth, doing good and being moral; this is the same evil clown who ordered his bishops to cover up child abuse until the statute of limitations runs out. DON’T lecture about morals and ethics!

Secularism isn’t part of it. Just look at Europe: no fiscal cliff there. The problem lies with the two parties, they can’t agree on anything and why? Cause one party can’t bear to work together with the other one.

So, you think that in a Nation of 70% religious people that secularism is the problem? You think that making up numbers and touting them is the answer? Show me where you get 60,000 a year in entitlements for average citizens. Show me where you get 167 a day in this nation. I call BS on your whole premise.

David:
Europe, no fiscal cliff? What makes you think that? Spain, Greece, and Portugal are bankrupt seeking bailouts from Germany, while France just raised their income tax for some high wage earners to 75%!  In the UK some pay as much as 70 %, which us why Ireland and Scotland are discussing secession.  China is thriving because we continue to borrow money and print money.

Secularism is a problem, but it has been spurred on by the odor of sanctity of many on the right who care little or nothing for those who happen to find their way out of the womb (abortion is the only issue in which they show compassion) and are not billionaires. For instance, many so-called “pro-life” Republicans are eager to cut the child tax credit, automatically raise taxes on struggling families by going over the fiscal cliff, and do everything in their power to oppress the poor and diabolize a government that’s trying to help them. Shame on you modern-day hypocrites (many of whom yes, are Catholic)! Furthermore, such people are leading a generation of young people away from God and organized religion with an outward piety and holier-than-thou attitude whose purity is like that of a bag of crack cocaine. Many look to Christians for Christ-like examples, and all they see are Pharisees, leading them away from salvation…

Tricia… I can’t speak for outside the u.s. but my husband and I both work in healthcare and we have both worked for catholic healthcare employers. Things have changed significantly. The archdiocese in the u.s. do not fund the salaries of the doctors and nurses. It’s revenue.. It’s federal funds and Medicare, Medicaid and private insurance. In fact one of the hospitals I worked at a few years ago is currently be audited for its lack of provision of uncompensated care( the uninsured)). There was a time when there was a need for Protestant hospitals and catholic hospitals and Jewish hospitals. It is no more of a historically religious thing. When a person is taken by et to a catholic hospital by ambulance they are subjected to the religious beliefs if that provider because they couldn’t necessarily tell them to do otherwise. This applies to some end of life care andainpin management issues that very much violate a patients autonomy and self determination. In the area I live in the catholic hospitals are the least progressive, the most patriarchal in terms of honoring their patients desires on a number of issues.  Catholics have done many good things but a lot of what I hear is simply misinformation.

“We must be clear here. The problem is not, as such, the government providing a safety net for its most unfortunate citizens. If that were all that the state did, the states wouldn’t be going bankrupt. The problem is that the various entitlement programs go well beyond a safety net and provide ever more lavish benefits to more and more people so that now middle-income people are dipping into the federal entitlement pie.”

How on earth is ‘middle class welfare’ in anyway caused by secularism? It kind of beggars belief that one of the richest of the organised faiths who benefits directly from substantial tax breaks (IE taking money from the government) can then claim with so called authority that the lack of government money to pay for government debt is actually all secularism’s fault.

Hey, glad you mentioned those two Catholic countries Spain and Portugal, but let’s not leave out Ireland and Italy! What is it about Catholic countries and fiscal cliffs? I guess I have to dust off my Max Weber. Now how about looking at Sweden? Sweden is a prosperous country with very generous social programs, relatively high taxes, very low unemployment and inflation… AND Sweden has had an amazing string of BALANCED BUDGETS! The World Economic Forum ranked Sweden as the fourth most competitive economy in the world. Sweden wasn’t always like that, but they seem to have found the right balance between a large government sector and a vibrant capitalist economy. Are Swedes maybe more virtuous than other people? They are certainly more secular. Oh, all my information comes from Wikipedia if you care to look.

The countries with the worst positions in the European debt crisis:

Greece
Ireland
Portugal
Spain
Cyprus
Italy

And according to the Eurobarometer Poll 2005 Cyprus, these are their positions for postive responses to the question “I believe there is a God”

Greece - 3rd equal with 81%
Ireland - 7th with 74%
Portugal - 3rd equal with 81%
Spain - 9th with 59%
Cyprus - 2nd with 90%
Italy - 6th with 73%

All in the top 10 out of the 25 EU25 countries. Greece is mainly Greek Orthodox. Cyprus is Greek Orthodox and Islamic. The others are strongholds of Catholicism.

I’m sure that I also don’t have to point out to you that the USA is a surprisingly religious country for a developed democracy, and it is impossible to get elected there without overtly religious inclinations.

There is more data that refutes your thesis. But even if your thesis were correct, would you want to promote a belief in things (god, heaven, hell), for which there is no valid reason to believe them, in order to promote the side-effect? That way lies idealogical terror.

Please look outside of your echo chambers.

This life IS all we have. Let’s make it as close to a heaven, for everyone, as we can. (And, no, that doesn’t mean more material stuff - but that shouldn’t need stating).

See Pascal’s Wager.  Belief in GOD and practicing the faith are two different things. If everyone lived their lives by obeying the Ten Commandments, this would be Heaven on earth. Sin is the absence of LOVE. And GOD is love.  May God give you the grace of understanding.

@Stuart M. One has to have a budget first in order to balance it!  not something this administration or the takers who voted for them are concerned about!

@ Evan. This goes way beyond safety net and middle income. There are millionaires benefitting from tax loop holes and government payouts!  Name something our government doesn’t subsidize!  Takers are not necessarily the poor. We need to take care of the poor. GOD help our country!

@Tony. You are definitely watching too much MSNBC and CNN!  And leading a generation away from GOD?  Yes, the majority of mass media are doing a good job at that but not by false piety!  Just look at the rubbish being passed off as entertainment!  We Christians do need to catechize better.  If we have one major failing today, that is it!  God bless you!

To equate secularism with materialism is dishonest.  My definition of faith is ‘pretending to know things you do not know’  and to base government decisions on faith is surely madness?  They should be based on the information available, which, simplistically is that the government expenditure exceeds its income and needs to be corrected.him

In the USA the secularist party wants to limit the powers of Wall Street. The Republicans (and even more the Tea Party wing) want strive for libertarianism. The latter are much more inspired by Christianity then the Democrats. Also Europe and other countries in the world are much less religious than the US. The current financial crisis is mostly caused by deregulation of the financial sector in the US.
So I find it hard to see a relationship between secularism and Christianity and I think this article is written by someone who thinks that morals come from religion, not by upbringing and environment in general. and only wants to smear secularists (and of course atheists) for being godless immoral people.

But look at the wealth of the Vatican, where did that come from? Then there is the abuse of children and the cover-ups by the church. Did the threat of hell help to avoid this from happening? History teaches us the opposite. And how the church supports inequality of women and gays, while scientific knowledge screams that homosexuality is not a choice but everybody is born with his or her sexual preference. The catholic church says that the Aids virus can somehow passing through condoms, which in fact is even much more unlikely to happen than water can pass through a balloon. So the Catholic church propagates total lies with possibly many very unhappy and even dead people as a result. I could give many more examples of immoral behavior by religious people. Religious people think that acting like the bible tells them to do is somehow moral, but I have my doubts if that is necessarily so. So I’d like catholics and other religious people to reconsider the meaning of what’s “moral”, being bigoted about the biblical morals or follow the rational reasoning.

Moogie:
Thanks for your response.  I’m not sure you made your case based on your original statement. You mention one hospital and the fact that the employers you mentioned accept medicare, medicaid, and insurance is a function of there requirements in order to stay open within their community. In many states hospitals are required to meet a set of criteria to prove community benefit. And last i heard, audits are customary and by no means prove guilt. Lastly, it its the fault of govt that employer based health insurance is the only option for the most part.  Up until this time, hospitals ran mostly on donations and revenues based on hospital bonds. 

Hospital services represents one small area of Catholic services.  I wills argue that you pose your question as to why such services are better provided by the govt, to the clergy ir administrators.  Aside from the fact that it its not throne of govt, charitable services of any kind have the right to do what they can to stay in business. They must create revenues….

Stuart M:
I interpreted your post to be overly simplistic, although I did not feel this article represented a sound analysis either.  Lack of adherence to a moral code, except for times when it is convenient, certainly has a deleterious affect on society. The above article however; seems repugnant in my opinion.

With regards to your point about Sweden…...Sweden has serious problems related to its negative population growth.  the implications are staggering…..and as for Catholic countries…..........what you state is a misnomer…........last i checked Ireland was still under the govt of the UK, where the House of Lords is appointed royalty and clergy of the Anglican Church…..I could be wrong, but Catholicism in those countries does not reflect the state if its economy, rather the nationalistic socialistic philosophies are the problem.

Tony:
you wrote:
Secularism is a problem, but it has been spurred on by the odor of sanctity of many on the right who care little or nothing for those who happen to find their way out of the womb (abortion is the only issue in which they show compassion) and are not billionaires.

When we abide by a moral code only when it is convenient it is a problem.  that said; there is much more that has lead to the state of things today.  To single out Republicans is bigotry, and it is exactly what those in DC hope we will do - attack each other.  While we are busy at each others throats, business in DC among the DCvers goes on as usual…...

i mean no disrespect, but you and the author of the article above should really read the Federalist Papers, and some untainted American History.  find our why Patrick Henry said he “smelled a rat”, refusing to attend The Philadelphia Convention, and why only three years after the Constitution was ratified, Washington was waging war with farmers over taxes - (Whiskey Rebellion), and ten years later citizens, senators, and the grandson of Benjamin Franklin were thrown in jail for uttering a word in disagreement of the President who as Jackson at that time(1798 - Alien and Sedition Acts).  Until we realize that DC has been serving itself and not its people, and that the Union was meant to be a Compact vs a nation we will continue down a road of debt and loss of personal authority. 

I will buy into your argument when the Catholic church gives up its billions of dollars in assets. Greed seems to have worked well for Catholicism for quite some time.

Someone commented about only religious individuals dedicating their lives to serving others. I just wanted to share an interesting TED talk by a scientist named Bart Knols who has dedicated his life to developing innovative methods to prevent the spread of malaria, simply because he is passionate about making the world a better place with less human suffering. I wonder how many uneducated nuns it would take to match the difference this man has made in the world!

http://www.ted.com/talks/bart_knols_cheese_dogs_and_pills_to_end_malaria.html

I am what you would refer to as a “non-theist”. My morality is based on how I believe my actions will effect those around me and I believe it is stronger than someone who acts based on a fear of repercussions in the afterlife or a religious obligation. Acting morally to avoid negative consequences seems more like a form of self preservation than morality. I would call it a false morality at best. You wouldn’t say that someone who doesn’t commit murder only because of a fear of incarceration is very moral. What makes religious morality any different?

Sarah Green:
I know you do not mean to be offensive.  You are so very mislead. 

Do you mean that the only opulent buildings should be built for government and business?  Does this mean that the church is not entitled to hold on to its assets that have spanned the millennia, 2000 years, and for which great artists like Michelangelo dedicated their life?  Do you believe that Catholics are not entitled to donate their money to the church for more than Charitable services? Does the existence of a beautiful cathedral discount the contributions around the world, and the 30% of all charitable services in the US alone? What about the multitude of priests and sisters who have been arrested for helping the poor in foreign nations. What about those that have given their life, having been executed for praying?  Does this mean that the historical relics preserved by the Church negate the amazing contributions?  Does this mean that no Catholic church may accept gifts from others? 

The notion that the Church is rich and hoards their wealth is simply a result of misunderstanding.  Mainstream media will never capture the truth about the Church. Frankly, the majority of laity and clergy are much to humble to boast of their phenomenal contributions to charity, science, life, humanity, education, medicine, and brotherhood.  I would challenge anyone to seek alternative information for their own sake. Talk about the multifaceted contributions to our world….......Here is a bit of trivia, did you know that it was a Catholic Jesuit Priest physicist, whom theorized the Big Bang theory?  There are so many facets of our faith, of which most are completely unaware.  It is simply a way of life.

Tyler J
Although your questions are very reasonable, your understanding of Catholicism and other regions is just plain incorrect. It would serve us all well if you investigated our faith and why we believe what we do. It is not motivated by fear of the afterlife. Further, the scientific and world health contributions are staggering amongst a very humble group of clergy and laity. See pontificate academy of sciences, for example. 

I am often stunned by the bias and bigotry towards Catholicism. Walk a mile in the shoes of a clergy member or someone like Mother Theresa. The faithful come from a place of love and humility with a sense of compassion.  We are all sinners as well, humbled with a calling to serve.  Then again, for those with faith, no explanation is necessary; for those without faith no explanation is possible . ( Thomas Aquinas)

moogie,
Your complaint about extravagant abuses of power, etc.. by the hierarchy probably simply reflect a personal issue with authority. Please cite this huge list of abuses, et. al., as you know them. I’m sure there is a list, because you’re talking about humans (as bishops are) but I’m sure that list is shorter than any other list from an organization.
It’s a normal part of development to question authority, and life in general, when growing up. It’s unfortunate that some cannot overcome those issues.

Sarah.  Indeed the Catholic Church is complex and can be credited with many great deeds.. Largely by the nuns and priests so are the foot soldiers and without much power. Please don’t act like the ” mainstream” can’t get it.. The church obviously has a huge problem with seeing its own warts and doing something about it. I was raised catholic. The habitual under reaction regarding the epidemic of sexually disordered priests and upper clergy is nothing less than socio/psychopathic. The church shows that it will sacrifice human decency to preserve its upper ranks and its image. I hear ” well, police and teachers do it? Where is the outrage?”  WThat is the immature reaction of a child. i believe the church hierarchy is in a stte of arrested development.  iI strongly believe that there is a much higher rate of sexual predators in the clergy than in the general population but the church refuses to break rank and find out the tough answers… Even if it means healing for the sick clergy and their victims. He emphasis on fealty to the church regardless of the situation disturbs me to the core… At 42 I am still recovering.  I really think the Vaticans power is so unchecked that it thinks it is God. Leaving the catholic church out of self preservation never meant I was turning my back on God. Much to the contrary. You said it yourself the church is like a corporation.

@Tyler.  Religious morality is based on love not fear of consequences!

Tricia… You wonder where the anti catholic bias omens from? It often comes from anguished and tortuted former Catholics. But this is typical ... If Catholic Church asserts its power out on others it acts surprised when it is criticized. Then there are the. ” leave us alone” while failing to introspect on whether any of the criticism might have truth and use it as an opportunity. Oh but I forgot this is gds one true churc.

That is such a typical response. If someone questions the moral authority of the Rcc leadership. , surely it must be a failing on the part of an individual. Why don’t you look into the work of Barbara Blaine and snap. Or father thomas Doyle? Or the Mexican priest who raped and spiritually abused his charges for decades? Check out ” deliver us from evil”  am glad that you acknowledge that all clergy are people and thus fallible. It’s healthy and necessary to do so.  Or you could talk to my childhood friend who, for once a week, would Have special time with a priest who told her to give him oral sex, then told her to confess and absolved her of Her sins. I know many great servants o god who ate catholic and are good. That doesn’t erase the sins and abuse and cover ups.
I don think I have a problem with authority, I have trouble with the abuse of it.

Tricia, I’m fascinated by your criticism of those to criticized the Catholic Church—especially your suggestion that “It would serve us all
well if you investigated our faith and why we believe what we do.” I would suggest you do the same, but also I would add that you be skeptical of what the Church tells you. For example, while the Catholic Church has contributed to science, it has also stood in the way of science. Case in point, its persecution of Galileo. And, YES, the Catholic Church uses the fear of afterlife in Hell to scare people into believe the Church’s theology. Regrettably, the Catholic Church is behind the biggest lie ever told—that Jesus was the son of God. There is no credible evidence to support that view.

Moogie:
It saddens me to learn what you took from my post. I don’t wonder why opponents of the church take the position they do. If you note, i began my post with, ” your questions are reasonable.

I suspect that you equate your faith in Catholicism with the teachings of its human leadership, vs. the teachings of Christ. Of the 2.2 billion Catholics in the world, the Catholic Church, specifically its laity and clergy are filled with sinners, some of which have abused their leadership role and its followers. The abuse and egregious behavior is unacceptable.

Many threw the” baby out with the bath water”,  when they left the church due to these horrific actions. All I am saying is that there is an alternative point of view which is, that nothing-nothing will steer me away from my commitment to Christ and the Church He founded. Christ did not intend for us to follow him only on “fair weather days”, nor did He wish that we would support and remain members of the church only as we judge.  Lastly, our faith is the contract with Christ, not the myriad of members, most of whom are good people,, as I suspect you are.  To leave the Church based on its sins, IMHO is like telling Christ, ” sorry dude but the church and the Eucharist is just but good enough, and I am too perfect. This mindset is simply not reflective of the way of Christ.  It resembles decisions made out of anger, in line with the subtle ways of evil, that is; self-righteous vs. righteousness.

I can only have mercy on the souls of the sinful whom have given up their life with Christ.  In our judgment, anger, and hate, haven’t we done the same ? . 

Bob Ritter:
Galileo, while dismissing every other scientist up to and including Einstein….....You judge me too quickly to infer that I have not researched my own beliefs.  Sadly, I suspect you have never walked in the shoes of a devout member of the clergy or laity, nor researched the full story of Galileo .  There are sinners within the 2.2 billion Catholics, in fact we all are sinners.  It takes a lot to seek to emulate the heart of Christ, which is the fundamental premise.

As for evidence, there is plenty among the historical documents and findings. The problem is that those whom are skeptical seek to substantiate this logic with logic. Just as with any science, theories and postulates must include assumptions, otherwise the reasoning process becomes circular. Frankly, it includes the leap of faith. Even Stephen Hawkins states that there is no proof that God does not exist. Something had to exist in the beginning, since only nothing can come from nothing.  It seems most logical to agree that this was not simply one colossal accident.  Yet then again, as i noted earlier, for those without faith no explanation is possible. I feel blessed to know that Christ has given his heart to the faithful, and in my human weakness struggle to live up to it.

Faithful follower: I am appreciative of your faith. I simply do not accept the premise that the Catholic Church is the one true church. It has no special connection to god in my eyes. Because if that belief, your well intended statement borders on the spiritually abusive. please have more humility and don’t pretend to know what my statements mean or don’t mean in terms of what message I am sending to God I also ont believe that Jesus is the son of god. I don’t believe in the immaculate conception . I believe in the message of Christ and that e was. Prophet and an important spiritual teacher. A well formed conscience is the ultimate moral authority.. No brick and mortar, man made institution can be a substitute for that. Like you, I believe I was created with a purpose and I have spent considerable time praying for what hat is. If the actions of a man made institution frighten and disturb me, I would thank you to listen and reflect and not assign blame to my character or my fealty to god. I am concerned at he number of people who feel so empowered to do so.

Wow, this article about mammon sure did spark a heated debate.  120 or so responses so far!  That’s huge.  It looks like people are very concerned about their wealth.  

What’s interesting to me is that an article by a Catholic author, posted in a Catholic forum, garnered so much hatred from anti-Catholics - about a third of the comments were blatant Catholic-bashing.  The comments section started out nice enough, the first fifteen or so were civilized and brought up some good points.  Then a few mild comments contesting the author’s premises showed up.  And then the Catholic haters opened the floodgates of abuse.  Of course the Catholic faithful responded with characteristic civility.  But what vehemence and anger from the seculars and anti-Catholic bunch - how dare anyone question the twin gods of secularism and materialism that run rampant in America now!  The name-calling from those attacking the Church was insulting and vile.  Their accusations and arguments were the same old tired lies and exagerations that Catholic haters have been spouting for decades so I’m not even going to try and address them. 
 
I am a devout Catholic and don’t hide my Faith (you might catch me openly wearing a Crucifix or reading a Catholic book or newspaper, like NCR, in public - scandalous!).  If someone questions me about my Faith I will gladly talk about my God but I don’t push it on anyone.  What never happens is that the seculars/humanists/materialists approach me with such vicious and maligned attacks as you see here and elsewhere on the Internet.  This leads me to believe that you hatemongers must in fact be cowards and blowhards skulking around good Catholic sites waiting to post your one-sided rants while hiding behind the anonymity of the web.  So, I challenge you - try your foolish arguments against a devout informed Catholic, in person no less, so you can have an honest debate…unless you’re afraid of Conversion.  May God Bless  you all.

Moogie:

It saddens me that you see my post as critical of you personally.  It puzzles me how you came to these conclusions. My post was in response to your earlier statements, nothing more. They were not a critique of your character, rather a general observation of the mainstream thinking. You wrote:

You wonder where the anti catholic bias omens from? It often comes from anguished and tortured former Catholics. But this is typical ... If Catholic Church asserts its power out on others it acts surprised when it is criticized. Then there are the. ” leave us alone” while failing to introspect on whether any of the criticism might have truth and use it as an opportunity. Oh but I forgot this is gods one true church.

I chose not to feel hurt by the sarcasm in your comments. Since you mentioned that my posts border on spiritual abuse, then I assume your thoughts were directed to me personally, someone you do not know.  I would ask the same of you to have more humility, and less judgement.  We all could use some time to reflect on the “well formed conscience and prayer”. 

For your won sake, I would ask that you take a moment to read my earlier post in a less critical manner. Like putting on another set of glasses, you might find a much more neutral message.  If you notice I did not criticize you or your choices; I do not even know you!  What I did do was write about my general observations - plain and simple. In this forum, I feel everyone has a right to express themselves.

At least get to know the Catholic faith, beyond your own experiences, before you judge us.  There are 2.2 billion Catholics in the world, and we are all human and sinners.  Catholics believe in the supernatural God, and that the Church represents the body of Christ.  We believe in the Pentecost, which has nothing to do with man made buildings. We take our cues regarding the moral authority directly from the Word of God, and the Holy Spirit. 

As St Thomas Aquinas said; “those with faith need no explanation, for those without no explanation is possible.”  I would ask you to take your own advice where you write: “I would thank you to listen and reflect and not assign blame to my character or my fealty to god. I am concerned at he number of people who feel so empowered to do so.” 

My comments were not directed at you.  My faith teaches me to have a much bigger heart, albeit at times it is a challenge.  In fact, Catholic teaching says that Christ gave us His heart.  For me, it is often difficult to live and accept it. Catholics believe we are weak and strive to openly admit our faults, while celebrating the forgiveness and love of Our Father. 

I do not believe that you write the truth when you wrote; ” I am appreciative of your faith.”  I am not sure why you are hear in the first place, if you are not a faithful Catholic and have such strong opinions against the faith. 

As for why we are here on this earth, for Catholics it is simple.  I know I am here on this earth to serve God and follow in the lifestyle intended for us by following the ways Christ.  It was intended for us to be happy, raise families, and share in the body of Christ.  We believe that our inspiration comes from our hearts and conscience, where God speaks to us. As Catholics we are all called to be Saints. It is something we can aspire to as many of the saints have a sinful past. It is that simple.  We know when we feel lost, it is because we are headed on the wrong direction. Just sharing my faith - not pointed at you…...

I wish you peace and love, and you have my sincere apologies if anything I had written seemed offensive.  I was not writing about you personally, how could I?  We have never met. 

Wow, this article about mammon sure did spark a heated debate.  120 or so
responses so far!  That’s huge.  It looks like people are very concerned about their wealth. 
What’s interesting to me is that an article by a Catholic author, posted in a Catholic forum, garnered so much hatred from anti-Catholics - about a third of the comments were blatant Catholic-bashing.  The comments section started out nice enough, the first fifteen or so were civilized and brought up some good points.  Then a few mild comments contesting the author’s premises showed up. And then the Catholic haters opened the floodgates of abuse.  Of course the Catholic faithful responded with characteristic civility.  But what vehemence
and anger from the seculars and anti-Catholic bunch - how dare anyone question the twin gods of secularism and materialism that run rampant in America now!  The name-calling from those attacking the Church was insulting and vile.  Their accusations and arguments were the same old tired lies and exagerations that Catholic haters have been spouting for decades so I’m not even going to try and address them.
I am a devout Catholic and don’t hide my Faith (you might catch me openly
wearing a Crucifix or reading a Catholic book or newspaper, like NCR, in public - scandalous!).  If someone questions me about my Faith I will gladly talk about my God but I don’t push it on anyone.  What never happens is that the seculars/humanists/materialists approach me with such vicious and maligned attacks as you see here and elsewhere on the Internet.  This leads me to believe that you hatemongers must in fact be cowards and blowhards skulking around good Catholic sites waiting to post your one-sided rants while hiding behind the anonymity of the web.  So, I challenge you - try your foolish arguments against a devout informed Catholic, in person no less, so you can have an honest
debate…unless you’re afraid of Conversion.  May God Bless you all.

@Curtis. There are a lot of Catholic hating trolls that visit this site. God bless you!

Without variants….  can i use some different than viagra http://vi-edu.us/  how cheap is viagra http://www.mywot.com/ It is remarkable, it is an amusing piece   <a >can i use some different than viagra to last </a> vigera cheap I am final, I am sorry, but you could not give little bit more information.