The bliss of ignorance

[adwon]

I see a lot of froth and anger over the Obama speech. I don't see much evidence the angry bothered to read it. Here's a link and a little excerpt. Link: http://obama.senate.gov/speech/060628-call_to_renewal_keynote_address/index.html

Excerpt:

This brings me to my second point. Democracy demands that the religiously motivated translate their concerns into universal, rather than religion-specific, values. It requires that their proposals be subject to argument, and amenable to reason. I may be opposed to abortion for religious reasons, but if I seek to pass a law banning the practice, I cannot simply point to the teachings of my church or evoke God's will. I have to explain why abortion violates some principle that is accessible to people of all faiths, including those with no faith at all.

This may be difficult for those who believe in the inerrancy of the Bible, as many evangelicals do. But in a pluralistic democracy, we have no choice. Politics depends on our ability to persuade each other of common aims based on a common reality. It involves the compromise, the art of the possible. At some fundamental level, religion does not allow for compromise. It insists on the impossible. If God has spoken, then followers are expected to live up to God's edicts, regardless of the consequences. To base one's life on such uncompromising commitments may be sublime; to base our policy making on such commitments would be a dangerous thing.

We all know the story of Abraham and Isaac. Abraham is ordered by God to offer up his only son, and without argument, he takes Isaac to the mountaintop, binds him to an altar, and raises his knife, prepared to act as God has commanded.

Of course, in the end God sends down an angel to intercede at the very last minute, and Abraham passes God's test of devotion.

But it's fair to say that if any of us saw a twenty-first century Abraham raising the knife on the roof of his apartment building, we would, at the very least, call the police and expect the Department of Children and Family Services to take Isaac away from Abraham. We would do so because we do not hear what Abraham hears, do not see what Abraham sees, true as those experiences may be. So the best we can do is act in accordance with those things that are possible for all of us to know, be it common laws or basic reason.

--Seems quite a bit different from the hype I've seen in several threads

[TomInTib]

1. Huh...WTF...!!!???

[adwon]

2. ?

Huh?

[TahitiNut]

3. Folks who rely on the 2nd-hand reports of the broadcast media are fools.

Worse still are most of the editorials, discussions, and commentators. I've read post after post on DU over the years where folks formed adamant opinions without going to the source material, even when it was readily available. How many times do folks have to learn the "invented the Internet" lesson??? Our news media doesn't do nuance. Our nes media is sensationalistic tabloidism. Our news media cares less about accuracy and veracity than ratings. Much of our "news media" is run out of the entertainment division - and the rest might as well be.

[H2O Man]

4. Good point.

In jail, a rumor twice repeated is widely accepted as fact. Our minds do not need to be incarcerated by rumors.