Nationalized Dogma (where is the line?)

Before I start, I think it's best if I get out of the way what exactly I mean by "nationalized dogma". Allow me to present to you the definition of dogma (more for argument's sake than me needing to define the word).
 dog?ma   (dôg m , d g -)
n. pl. dog?mas or dog?ma?ta (-m -t )
1.    A doctrine or a corpus of doctrines relating to matters such as morality and faith, set forth in an authoritative manner by a church.
2.    An authoritative principle, belief, or statement of ideas or opinion, especially one considered to be absolutely true. See Synonyms at doctrine.
I'm not going to deny that for most people, dogma is an essential for even getting up in the morning.  That is what makes humans remarkable over other animal; when problem solving fails; we have the ability to look to a celestial being, or just hope and faith to get us by.  It is that faith that makes all people strong, no matter what the situation. The nationalization of dogma is referring to the government selecting and forcing upon the citizens of the United States their specific ideas of faith.
Now then, just recently (and most unfortunately), George W. Bush was re-elected to office.  Being as he is our president, it's Bush's job to guide the country in a manner which is not only constitutional, but morally sound.  What happens, then when you have a president whose morals are not based on American culture and what is going on in the modern world, but one whose moral fiber has been weaved by the bible?  A problem is what you get.   Bush is what is as a "compassionate conservative".  This phrase in an oxymoron to the educated and it is moral position of greatness to the ignorant.  But that is neithe ...
Word (s) : 858
Pages (s) : 4
View (s) : 547
Rank : 0
   
Report this paper
Please login to view the full paper