Indexes
February 9th, 2010
February 8th, 2010
February 6th, 2010
February 5th, 2010
February 4th, 2010
February 3rd, 2010
February 2nd, 2010
The following stories have received the most reader comments during the last 7 days.
- Will terrorists be given Miranda warnings? (75)
- Lodi Unified School District president issues warning to speakers over cuts (64)
- President Obama's first year (45)
- Many reject the politics of 'no' (45)
- Islamic symbol in mosaic — what is all the fuss? (44)
- Writer comments on Neely column (42)
- The Home Depot hopes to join Costco at Reynolds Ranch (41)
- Time to shed the convenient sham of 'Don't ask, don't tell' policy (34)
- We need to conduct respectful conversations (30)
- Tasered suspect claims he is Yosemite Sam (25)
ADVERTISEMENT
We are a republic, not a democracy
Thursday, July 16, 2009 6:51 AM PDT
Lodi, a Christian community? It would appear that watching Iran stumble through their democracy would make us in Lodi more fearful of Bob Johnson's and Fred Rhodes' comments that Lodi people are mostly Christians, and as such, we must all hear a Christian prayer before all city meetings.
Since our Constitution is not a democracy but a republic, even if 99 percent of our population were Christian, we cannot ignore that 1 percent non-Christian population.
The differences between a democracy and republic is (a) "The Majority Unlimited, in a Democracy, lacking any legal safeguard of the rights of The Individual and The Minority," and (b) "The Majority Limited, in a Republic under a written Constitution safeguarding the rights of The Individual and The Minority" (www.lexrex.com/enlightened/AmericanIdeal/.../demrep.html or Google "Democracy vs. Republic").
Certainly, I forgot that our nation was founded as a Christian nation, as I have always thought that many of our citizens came here to become free from religious governments. I never realized that we had a Christian "Supreme Leader" and/or a 12 member "Guardian Council" (such as Iran has) written into our Constitution.
What title do we introduce these Christian members (opening up our meetings with prayers) if not the Supreme Leaders or members of our Guardian Council? Where in our Constitution does it assign the responsibilities of these religious leaders and how do they get appointed?
I do not remember voting for a single religious position in our city government since I have been living in Lodi. But then, I would be surprised if the Iranians voted for their Supreme Leader or any of the 12 Guardian Council members either.
Which of our many different Christian faiths do we all agree to lead us?
Whether or not we are a Christian city, there may be many Christians in Lodi who would not support getting religion involved with our government. The writers of our Constitution made a special effort to keep religion out of governmental affairs so as to protect both our government and our various religious groups, Christians or not. Let's keep it that way.
Duane Heinz
Lodi
Search for Ads 
Today’s Print Ads 
RSS Feeds
Reader Feedback
dyan wrote on Jul 19, 2009 10:36 AM:
Billy Rubin wrote on Jul 17, 2009 12:25 PM:
anthropis wrote on Jul 16, 2009 3:08 PM:
anthropis wrote on Jul 16, 2009 2:59 PM:
Cogito wrote on Jul 16, 2009 2:50 PM:
wtf wrote on Jul 16, 2009 2:21 PM:
You could think of it that way; however, I prefer to think of it more as a Kakistocracy - The government of a state by the worst citizens. LOL! "
anthropis wrote on Jul 16, 2009 1:47 PM:
Where here in the United States we have in our courts supreme secular councils who have immersed themselves in religious matters and dictate the segregation of God from public life. Neither of the councils tolerates conflicting or diverse viewpoints for they and only they have the final word. and we like sheep follow! "
wtf wrote on Jul 16, 2009 9:45 AM:
Nicely said, Cogito; this about sums things up. "
jrs wrote on Jul 16, 2009 8:59 AM:
Cogito wrote on Jul 16, 2009 8:18 AM:
yeah you wrote on Jul 16, 2009 8:14 AM:
Jerome R. Kinderman wrote on Jul 16, 2009 8:04 AM:
This part of the U.S. Constitution couldn't be clearer on its face or as it is interpreted in context to one of the important reasons people left Europe to establish a home in the New World. Our government may not create any form of religion by law (requiring its citizens to become members) nor can the government prohibit any citizen from worshiping as they please. Simple.
This convoluted "separation of church and state" did not become part of the American lexicon until the 1950s. And since that time it appears to me that those who rail against religion rely upon that premise rather than what the Founders had intended. As an example, rarely do we hear anyone refer to the First Amendment when fighting to keep prayer out of a City Council meeting. Instead, the first words in support of their argument contain the verbiage that has only been used for less than 60 years.
Frankly, I'd rather we stick to the Constitution. "
stantaves wrote on Jul 16, 2009 7:52 AM:
CaPatriot wrote on Jul 16, 2009 7:50 AM:
Mazie wrote on Jul 16, 2009 6:00 AM:
Comments on this story are now closed.