I REALLY hate to disagree with you, Ahban, but I must. It is not Christians I trust with the guardianship of my rights but God. A strange concept for a Buddhist to hold? So be it. With all due respect, the majority of citizens in this country, to this day, are Christians and we find ourselves where we are today, perhaps in spite of them, in big trouble.
The essence of my point was that our rights are said to issue from a source above and beyond man's will, a source named as "our Creator", and this is said in the black and white of our most primal document the DoI. It is that concept being bound in a civil code, which Judge Moore refers to as "organic law", that sets our civil law apart from all others. The existence of God is not an issue here as His existence is not provable to the non-believer and needs no proving for the believer. Individual belief is not an issue either for the believer should have no problem trusting that God is the author of rights. What problem is there for the non-believer? If he truly believes that God doesn't exist then those who do can't make it so by saying it is so. The non-believer's choice is this; accept that rights are inherent to life and that codifying them in civil law by naming "our Creator" as their source is the only rational way to secure them from men or accept men as rulers.
That is not to argue the point that Christianity wasn't the religion of almost all of our Founding Fathers. It was and those who have reverence for the truth will admit it. It is not to argue that the concepts of freedom and justice our Constitution was framed around weren't Christian concepts. They were. (It also doesn't ignore that other religions embody many of those concepts as well. But that is historically irrelevant since our Founders weren't of other religions.)
IMNHO it is vitally important for all Americans of all faiths and non-faiths to understand and embrace this. The alternative is to accept privileges granted by men because men can't grant rights and if we wipe the concept of a higher authority from our founding documents the only authority left in civil law is man's.
Been tried. Kills millions. Enslaves millions more.
It is truly amazing to hear of all the things Judge Moore's monument is capable of doing. Without a legislature convened or a word written a law is created. Without a word of law on the books to enforce and no one enforcing this unwritten law people are compelled to ... do something ... I'm not sure what. That's entirely in the realm of superstition. I thought these secular humanists were above all that. Where is the rational logic? Where is the clarity of thought? Where are the direct responses to even a few questions posed to them? They don't believe in the sanctity of life yet a few words from a Judge's mouth or a large piece of granite constitute a mojo so powerful it makes them tremble.
Ironically, athiests are safer ruled by such theists than they are under other athiests.However, the followers of all religious beliefs are safest under a religiously neutral government that respects the inherent contradiction between true religious belief (a matter of pure conscience) and the inherently compulsive nature of law.
Separation makes the United States of America the safest place in the word to be an atheist, an agnostic, a Deist, a Buddhist, a Hindu, a Pagan, a Jew, a Muslim, or any type of Christian one desires.
-Eric