Religious Privilege

I ran across another diarist’s entry which was talking about the whole issue of displaying the Ten Commandments on government property.  It was an interesting read in that it demonstrated just how poorly some people really understand this topic and the real issues behind it.

I won’t link to the other diarist’s entry out of respect for her.  (That is, I don’t want to send people over ther who may flame her.)  However, I will briefly summarize her argument.  By the way, she’s for posting the Ten Commandments.  Basically her argument is based on the idea that atheists (apparently, she’s not aware that some of us who oppose posting the Ten Commandments aren’t atheists) oppose this matter because they take issue with the contents of the Ten Commandments.  She specifically focuses on the commandment that says "thou shalt not kill" and asks why atheists are opposed to such an idea.  She then goes on to suggest that maybe it’s not that commandment, but the fact that the list also includes the commandment that prohibits adultery.  She actually goes on to ask if atheists are really against not hurting other people and generally living a good life.

This is the height of misunderstanding, and more than a little silly.  Of course atheists think it’s good not to kill people.  Atheists also think it’s good not to commit adultery.  They may not have a problem with pre-marital sex or having a polyamorous relationships as long as everyone involved consents.  But cheating on someone you promised to be faithful to?  I don’t know a single atheist who would be okay with that.  In fact, other than the first two commandments, I think most people would be inclined to agree with the list and follow them on principle.

But that’s just it, we don’t need the Ten Commandments to tell us to be good people.  We figured out how to be good people on our own.  Or we have other religious or philosophical sources that tell us how to be good people.  And a lot of Christians need to realize that.  Christianity and the Bible don’t have a monopoly on living a good, virtuous life.

And therein lies the real problem.  This whole Ten Commandments debate is about the belief that Christianity is or should be special somehow.  It’s about giving it priveleged status by pushing it into the government.  You don’t see Christians (or anyohe else for that matter) trying to get the commandments to be a good person from the Havamal put up on government-owned property.  And yet, it says much the same as the Ten Commandments, and even more.  (And that doesn’t mean that Christians somehow disagree with the virtuous life ordered by the Havamal.)  So why should we give the Ten Commandments such a special place?

Truth be told, the people who should most want to keep all religion out of government places are the Christians.  After all, they’ve shown time and again that they can’t stand it when other religions get their due recognition.  Whether it’s a Wiccan pentacle being displayed along-side a Nativity scene during the winter holidays, a Hindu prayer offered before the U.S. Senate, or Pagans (and later atheists) asking for the same access to school children as already granted Christians, Christians tend to get uptight when the government starts granting other religious (and non-religious) groups the same opportunities they want for themselves.

And that’s the important thing to remember about each of those incidents I just mentioned.  In every case, the other religious groups were given a chance to do what they wanted because the Christians fought for the same opportunity for themselves first.  So in accordance with the First Amendment, the government agencies were required to extend that opportunity to everybody.  But that wasn’t okay with the Christians.

That’s called "special privilege," and it’s not allowe by the First Amendment.  And that’s what the Ten Commandments issue is actually all about.  It’s not about non-Christians wanting to be immoral.