Quote:
Originally Posted by DalekSec
I think you miss my point as a matter of philosophy! Further, while I am not religious, I am not prepared to consider the possible existence of a "Creator" as utter crap, nor do I think it all that wise to dismiss the beliefs of the Founding Fathers.
As a matter of philosophy, is it a good idea to elevate man and by extension, Govt. to the same position once held by the divine? Saying men are the natural and only guardian of “Rights” and by extension , is it not, putting the fox in charge of the hen house? Having that much faith in men and Govt. is, I admit beyond me.
|
I think you're making connections that are not necessary. The Founding Fathers were largely deists that believe in a Creator. However, this is not an endorsement on Divinity or Divine Authority, but, one could argue, the most acceptable idea of origin at the time due to relatively limited progress of science in explaining nature. The very declaration of a purely democratic republic was a rejection of Divine Authority assumed in monarchies.
Additionally, you seem to contend that if we wish to deny the recognition of a Creator unlike the Founding Fathers, we must dismiss all of their other beliefs. I see no reason to refuse the whole when one can just reject a tenet we now know is unreasonable and extend and adapt the ideas to reflect this revelation.
I would be cautious in saying man has taken the place of the divine. Certainly man is the final authority of his own behavior, as he has always been even in cases where he believes he must temper his behavior to meet the standards of a higher authority. Let us not, however, assume that this gains him far more counter-productive qualities granted to the divine like omniscience, omnipresence, infallibility, etc.
Man secures his own rights knowing that it is his self interest, and man establishes societies and government to collectively pursue the interest of the constituency at their discretion, far better than an individual could.
There is no faith in men or government to always be right, but rather the sober realization that man must accept charge of himself in lieu of no alternative authority, and the expectation that man will advance beyond his shortcomings in serving his own self interest. What I do not quite get is how you can applaud the wisdom of the Founding Fathers or celebrate your own ability to pursue your own self interest, and yet claim the idea of trusting man with his own fate is beyond you.