I dont understand these articles. Does it occur to them that maybe there isn't a God and that its a good thing people don't believe in myths and fairytale? There is a good reason people are more and more agnostic and atheist. We see that the Virgin birth story happened multiple times in history, we know that our religious beliefs are a direct result of where on earth we were born, we have so much more knowledge now and its like the writer of the article wants us not to know these things. Just accept what the pastor says, don't think for yourself.
The article itself includes a thesis statement that is impossible to misunderstand :
"When a society loses either its religious heritage, its shared history and identity, or its collective cojones, its continued existence becomes problematic. When it loses two of the three, it will fall, whether sooner or later. When it loses all three simultaneously, it will effectively be gone in the cosmic blink of an eye."
One might disagree with this statement, but it is stated with complete clarity.
We don't begrudge anyone the freedom to reject traditional Christian theology or morality. We argue that those traditional beliefs have been part of the cement holding American culture together. When that cement is continually and sequentially rejected there is less holding us together, until there is nothing holding us together. A libertarian ethic is simply not sufficient for an enduring culture of freedom because we can only surrender incremental *individual* liberty for common *ordered* liberty when we all agree on some common currency for the bargain. One of the reasons the country is falling apart before our eyes is that we don't all agree on the premises of this exchange. Anyone can reject traditional Christian ethics and theology in their private lives, but when we corporately reject them as a basis for understanding law then we ultimately reject a law that preserves freedom.
You argue above that "we have so much more knowledge now"; it does not follow that we have more understanding. In fact a very solid case was made by Richard Weaver that we actually have less of the latter *because* we have more of the former. Our understanding of phenomena has been greatly improved by the scientific method, but values and human freedom and man's place in the universe are not mere phenomena.
Do Greeks lament people not believing in Zeus and posieden? You can't stop changing beliefs because it makes you uncomfortable.
But what basis do you assert for your position, other than your own personal discomfort with our beliefs? Is someone trying to force you to attend church, or participate in communion, or swear to articles of faith? If you are not the victim of this coercion, do you see someone else being forced?
In the title of the article, is says losing our freedom. But can we point to the freedoms we have lost. When this country was founded, black people were property and women couldn't vote. Ask a Chinese rail.worker about freedoms we used to have. Throughout our history, it seems we have gained more freedoms. Not perfectly of course, but I think we have moved to the ideals expressed by the founders. Equality for everyone, no religious persecution or tests, everyone has the right to pursue happiness without being abused for the way they live their life.
There were so many people that were outcasts, I think its a good thing more views are expressed in media.
I don't know anyone, here or in real life, who wishes to abuse others or deny freedoms or return to institutionalized racism. As you state yourself in the bold portion above, the ideals of the founders have served the country well and enabled human progress in our interactions with each other. But those very founders, and later men who strove to more nearly perfect those ideals, are now derided, rejected, and their statues torn down because they did not conform to a particular current ethic.
The basis of our common agreement to freedom, the US Constitution, is interpreted according to perverse and arcane misapplications of clear language in part precisely because we have lost common belief, to the point that the very definitions of words are now fluid. The men who created and later built on that basis are now derided as unworthy. If you want to replace all that with "live and let live" you'll find it completely inadequate.
Why should we have any confidence in the continued health of the Tree of Liberty, other than our own willingness to water it?
