Congressmen: Careful how you pass legislation

[Tousi]

This was in a forwarded e-mail from my in-laws:

DARRELL SCOTT TESTIMONY


Guess our national leaders didn't expect this, hmm? On Thursday,
Darrell Scott, the father of Rachel Scott, a victim of the Columbine
High School shootings in Littleton, Colorado, was invited to address the
House Judiciary Committee's subcommittee What he said to our national
leaders during this special session of Congress was painfully truthful.
They were not prepared for what he was to say, nor was it received well.
It needs to be heard by every parent, every teacher, every politician,
every sociologist, every psychologist, and every so-called expert! These
courageous words spoken by Darrell Scott are powerful, penetrating, and
deeply personal. There is no doubt that God sent this man as a voice
crying in the wilderness. The following is a portion of the transcript:

"Since the dawn of creation there has b! een both good & evil in
the hearts of men and women. We all contain the seeds of kindness or the
seeds of violence. The death of my wonderful daughter, Rachel Joy Scott,
and the deaths of that heroic teacher, and the other eleven children who
died must not be in vain. Their blood cries out for answers.

"The first recorded act of violence was when Cain slew his
brother Abel out in the field. The villain was not the club he used..
Neither was it the NCA, the National Club Association. The true killer
was Cain, and the reason for the murder could only be found in Cain's
heart.
"In the days that followed the Columbine tragedy, I was amazed
at how quickly fingers began to be pointed at groups such as the NRA. I
am not a member of the NRA. I am not a hunter. I do not even own a gun.
I am not here to represent or defend the NRA - because I don't believe
that they are responsible for my daughter's death. Therefore I do not
believe that they need to be defended. If I believed they had anything
to do with Rachel's murder I would be their strongest opponent.
I am here today to declare that Columbine was not just a
tragedy-it was a spiritual event that should be forcing us to look at
where the real blame lies! Much of the blame lies here in this room.
Much of the blame lies behind the pointing fingers of the accusers
themselves. "I wrote a poem just four nights ago that expresses my
feelings best. This was written way before I knew I would be speaking
here today:

Your laws ignore our deepest needs,
Your words are empty air.
You've stripped away our heritage,
You've outlawed simple prayer.
Now gunshots fill our classrooms,
And precious children die.
You seek for answers everywhere,
And ask the question "Why?"
You regulate restrictive laws,
Through legislative creed.
And yet you fail to understand,
That God is what we need!


"Men and women are three-part beings. We
all consist of body, soul, and spirit. When we refuse to acknowledge a
third part of our make-up, we create a void that allows evil, prejudice,
and hatred to rush in and reek havoc. Spiritual presence! s were present
within our educational systems for most of our nation's history. Many of
our major colleges began as theological seminaries. This is a historical
fact. What has happened to us as a nation? We have refused to honor God,
and in so doing, we open the doors to hatred and violence. And when
something as terrible as Columbine's tragedy occurs -- politicians
immediately look for a scapegoat such as the NRA. They immediately seek
to pass more restrictive laws that contribute to erode away our personal
and private liberties. We do not need more restrictive laws. "Eric and
Dylan would not have been stopped by metal detectors. No am! ount of gun
laws can stop someone who spends months planning this type of massacre.
The real villain lies within our own hearts.
"As my son Craig lay under that table in
the school library and saw his two friends murdered before his very
eyes-He did not hesitate to pray in school. I defy any law or politician
to deny him that right! I challenge every young person in America , and
around the world, to realize that on April 20, 1999, at Columbine High
School prayer was brought back to our schools. Do not let the many
prayers offered by those students be in ! vain. Dare to move into the new
millennium with a sacred disregard for legislation that violates your
God-given right to communicate with Him. To those of you who would point
your finger at the NRA - I give to you a sincere challenge. Dare to
examine your own heart before casting the first stone!
My daughter's death will not be in vain!
The young people of this country will not allow that to happen!"

Do what the media did not - - let the
nation hear this man's speech. Pl! ease send this out to everyone you can.

 

[web730]

I have read of this before and agree with Mr. Scott's comments. A powerful message that the media and those spirit-emptied politicans (most) usually avoid.

It's obvious that most of our past politicans still don't undertand what they reaped for what they sow. The outrageous law that was made back in 1963 to prohbit bibles in the public schools. Then prayings and then pledge of flag (under the God) and now with the Ten Commandents .. then what next?

Church and State to be seperated and thus that of those freedom of religion is being tolerated. That's the problem.

Bibles and simple prayings were outlawed from the public schools then there come the guns, gangs, drugs, immorals, rapes, killings, etc. that spread chaos into the public schools, gradually. Still do. So it basically 'spiral' these problems that we face nowadays and are dreaded of.

By the way it should make you wonder why God allowed whoever assassinated JFK the one who signed the law bill to prohbit bibles in the public schools. He was a great man that made a great mistake. Congressmen did it first then had him sign it as official .. so remember that.

And yes, the congressmen ought to be more careful what to pass or what not to pass the new laws to come. It never is good to leave God out. It only makes worse and thus that makes Lucifer merrier.

 

[Teresh]

I don't have a problem with very much of what he said... The statement that our nation's universities started as theological seminaries is simply incorrect, however. The fact that there were many terrible things occuring in our schools even before Christianity was removed from the public school system is evidence that whether or not religion is involved in schooling apparently has no effect on violence (Bath school massacre, anyone?).

The outrageous law that was made back in 1963 to prohbit bibles in the public schools.

If there is such a law, I agree, it's ridiculous.

Then prayings and then pledge of flag (under the God) and now with the Ten Commandents .. then what next?

The original Pledge did not have any reference to God. Congress decided to add "under God" to it in the 60s. Prior to that, it was "one nation, indivisible".

Church and State to be seperated and thus that of those freedom of religion is being tolerated. That's the problem.

There's a problem with freedom of religion?

Bibles and simple prayings were outlawed from the public schools then there come the guns, gangs, drugs, immorals, rapes, killings, etc. that spread chaos into the public schools, gradually. Still do. So it basically 'spiral' these problems that we face nowadays and are dreaded of.

These things have been happening for much longer than we've even had a public school system. They're not the result of how things are now--They've been going on for forever.

By the way it should make you wonder why God allowed whoever assassinated JFK the one who signed the law bill to prohbit bibles in the public schools. He was a great man that made a great mistake. Congressmen did it first then had him sign it as official .. so remember that.

God doesn't "allow" people to do things. People do things because they have free will. JFK was shot because Lee Harvey Oswald, for whatever reason, chose to kill him.

Assuming that the Bible is 100% true and to be taken literally, why did God "allow" Cain to kill Abel? By your definition, God would only allow it as punishment for Abel's crimes. According to the Bible, Abel had never committed any crimes.

And yes, the congressmen ought to be more careful what to pass or what not to pass the new laws to come. It never is good to leave God out. It only makes worse and thus that makes Lucifer merrier.

You have no idea what you're talking about... You know nothing about politics or about your own religion. Go get educated. Now.

 

[Tousi]

Teresh, that last line of yours..... sugar-coat it, why don't you? (End of sarcasm mode)

 

[MorriganTait]

The outrageous law that was made back in 1963 to prohbit bibles in the public schools.

The 1963 Law to which you refer does not ban Bibles in schools. It banned manditory devotional Bible readings. I doubt that you would want Catholics or Mormons leading YOUR children in a Bible Study, nor would I want just about any mainline Christian leading MY children in a Bible study. I certainly would not want Jewish, Muslim, Hindu, Buddhist or Atheist children forced to read the Bible, nor would I wany MY children forced to read the sacred scripture of any of these religions. Bibles are allowed on school campuses, as well as a full variety of other devotional or sacred literature, and students may study it at their own choosing, use them as materials for classes, find them in many school libraries, and may even form groups to study. The law prevents school administrators from mandating a specific course of study. I have explained this to you before in another thread too, but it seems you haven't had a chance to reserach it further yet.

Then prayings and then pledge of flag (under the God) and now with the Ten Commandents .. then what next?

The Pledge was originally a poem written in a women's magazine, not mentioning God. God was inserted in 1955. I myself to not recite the Pledge because I believe it is a form of idolatry. I love my country, am a patriot-voter-tax payer, and even serve on jury duty, but my loyalty is to God and God alone - I do not make pledges to inanimate objects or to a nation-state created by man - this would userp my responsibility to God.

Church and State to be seperated and thus that of those freedom of religion is being tolerated. That's the problem.

The separation of Church and State ALSO prevents the State from dictating to churches what they can and cannot say, do, believe. I don't want the State to tell me what to worship or how.

Bibles and simple prayings were outlawed from the public schools

They are not. You are just plain, flat, completely and totally wrong. Go back and check your facts. NO ONE can stop any student anywhere from praying of their own choice. What is prevented is mandatory prayer forcing students to make prayers that may or may not be in agreement with the religious teachings of their particular sect. Students may carry Bibles in school, may talk about them, study them alone or in groups, quote them, use them as class materials, and you will find them in many school libraries. What is prevented is mandatory readings, devotions, etc. The first amendment protects our right to practie religion, and our right not to be forced to practice someone else's religion. Get it yet?

 

[web730]

.. The original Pledge did not have any reference to God. Congress decided to add "under God" to it in the 60s. Prior to that, it was "one nation, indivisible".

Maybe so. I really said that they wanted the word "God" omitted from the Pledge of Flag. I don't know as if they did omit it yet. Did it?

There's a problem with freedom of religion?

Actually not a problem with it but whatever they abuse its law for the freedom of religion to respect. That is what I actually meant.

These things have been happening for much longer than we've even had a public school system. They're not the result of how things are now--They've been going on for forever.

Teresh, there you are WRONG. It is far, far worse nowadays in the public schools than it was before 1960s especially before 1900s .. speaking of its magnitudes. Gangs, drugs, tatoos, rapes, etc that it didn't even existed in the public schools in general and not as frequently in the pre-1960s and way before especially.

I don't know where the heck you get your say or whatever. Only I can tell that you have no idea what it's like in the old days because you are still a teenage, not yet an adult even .. and that you only knew of this world and in this generation.

Anybody, agree with me about the crimes at public schools that got far, far worse than way in the past? I'm sure many more do agree. That's so too obvious, right?

God doesn't "allow" people to do things. People do things because they have free will. JFK was shot because Lee Harvey Oswald, for whatever reason, chose to kill him.

This is what I really think so .. not a fact or that you and I can prove, however. You can't say other way, either. There are stories in the Bible and extra sources that God do allow it happen or not to allow, eventually. God is Omniocsient and that He does control things. You seem not knowing the Bible especially God enough.

Beside this, why or how cam that do you think it's Lee Harvey Oswald that was the one that assassinated JFK? We really had no absolute proof, am I right?

Assuming that the Bible is 100% true and to be taken literally, why did God "allow" Cain to kill Abel? By your definition, God would only allow it as punishment for Abel's crimes. According to the Bible, Abel had never committed any crimes.

Well, have you have had a proof that Abel didn't commit any crimes? Nope. Not even the Bible stating anything about it, too. God didn't say anything about their criminal acts or sins except of Cain's murder. If I am wrong, prove it to us.

Ask yourself, why didn't God stop Cain before murdering Abel? That's another thing to consider. We never know, really. Do you?

You have no idea what you're talking about... You know nothing about politics or about your own religion. Go get educated. Now.

There you are rude again .. that's twice in a week or so! Ye naughty!

Don't assume that you know it all here. Because you really don't. We don't either.

Beside that what have I done to you before those two of your immature insults? None. So therefore I ask you once more to stop it here for the chrissake.

 

[Teresh]

Maybe so. I really said that they wanted the word "God" omitted from the Pledge of Flag. I don't know as if they did omit it yet. Did it?

One court ruled the "under God" phrasing unconstitutional, but a higher court overruled it out on procedural matters on the grounds that the person who was suing the government had no basis to make the case as he was representing an estranged daughter who didn't live with him anyway.

Teresh, there you are WRONG. It is far, far worse nowadays in the public schools than it was before 1960s especially before 1900s .. speaking of its magnitudes. Gangs, drugs, tatoos, rapes, etc that it didn't even existed in the public schools in general and not as frequently in the pre-1960s and way before especially.

You really just have no concept of history... The world wasn't somehow magically better before.

Only I can tell that you have no idea what it's like in the old days because you are still a teenage, not yet an adult even .. and that you only knew of this world and in this generation.

Actually, I am an adult. Sorry to break it to you.

Anybody, agree with me about the crimes at public schools that got far, far worse than way in the past? I'm sure many more do agree. That's so too obvious, right?

It's only obvious if you make assumptions and don't actually do any research. If you know what you're talking about, you'd know that things were not just euphorically better in the past. They weren't good then, and they aren't great now either.

God is Omniocsient and that He does control things. You seem not knowing the Bible especially God enough.

I don't know what kind of God you worship, but I worship a God that doesn't hate people and doesn't play with them like puppets. My God doesn't treat human beings like toy soldiers. He lets them set their own future through the choices they make.

God's Plan is shaped by humans... Humans

Beside this, why or how cam that do you think it's Lee Harvey Oswald that was the one that assassinated JFK? We really had no absolute proof, am I right?

Well, we never have absolute proof of anything. The evidence that Lee Harvey Oswald did it is pretty strong. But unless God came down and spelled it out to us, we wouldn't absolutely know for sure.

Ask yourself, why didn't God stop Cain before murdering Abel? That's another thing to consider. We never know, really. Do you?

I don't actually think Abel ever really existed. I think the story is not intended to be interpreted as literal fact--I think that the story is a metaphor for the evil that exists in all people. Why did God not stop Cain from killing Abel? Because Cain killed Abel by his own free will. God does not prevent people from sinning because God wants people to actively choose to do the right thing.

Beside that what have I done to you before those two of your immature insults? None. So therefore I ask you once more to stop it here for the chrissake.

It's immature to call you on the fact that you have no idea what you're talking about? I really don't care if you don't like what I have to say. When you say things that are incorrect and clearly are based on flagrant disregard for fact, I'm inclined to tell you to go do research and learn about it (and using *real* sources, as opposed to Christian websites like answersingenesis) before you post about it.

I'm not saying this because I want you to feel bad, I'm saying this is that you can't convince people to agree with you, you can't even attempt to persuade them by putting forth an argument based entirely on fallacies.

 

[deafdyke]

Morriagan you rock! Prohibiting religious exercisies from the public spehere is the thing to do.....NOT b/c our lawmakers hate christianity, but b/c our schools and government should be religion NEUTRAL. Web...you've bought into how the Bibles and School Prayer would be a wonderful, wonderful thing, but how would YOU like it if your children were forced to read the sacred writings and recite the prayers of a religion that you didn't believe in. Government should be NEUTRAL towards religion, so that it can be inclusive towards ALL religions and favor no particualr relgions.

 

[MorriganTait]

Morrigan you rock! Prohibiting religious exercisies from the public spehere is the thing to do.....NOT b/c our lawmakers hate christianity, but b/c our schools and government should be religion NEUTRAL.

I am glad someone finally got it. I think Web has me on ignore.

 

[MorriganTait]

http://www.ffrf.org/nontracts/schoolprayer.php

Why Should Schools Be Neutral?

Our public schools are for all children, whether Catholic, Baptist, Quaker, atheist, Buddhist, Jewish, agnostic. The schools are supported by all taxpayers, and therefore should be free of religious observances and coercion. It is the sacred duty of parents and churches to instill religious beliefs, free from government dictation. Institutionalizing prayers in public schools usurps the rights of parents.

School prayer proponents mistake government neutrality toward religion as hostility. The record shows that religious beliefs have flourished in this country not in spite of but because of the constitutional separation of church and state.

Can't Students Pray in Public Schools Now?

Individual, silent, personal prayer never has and never could be outlawed in public schools. The courts have declared government-fostered prayers unconstitutional - those led, required, sanctioned, scheduled or suggested by officials.

It is dishonest to call any prayer "voluntary" that is encouraged or required by a public official or legislature. By definition, if the government suggests that students pray, whether by penning the prayer, asking them to vote whether to pray or setting aside time to pray, it is endorsing and promoting that prayer. It is coercive for schools to schedule worship as an official part of the school day, school sports or activities, or to use prayer to formalize graduation ceremonies. Such prayers are more "mandatory" than "voluntary."

Haven't Public Schools Always Had Prayer?

At the time the U.S. Supreme Court issued its 1962 and 1963 decrees against school-sponsored prayers and bible-reading, it is estimated religious observances were unknown in about half of the nation's public schools.

Horace Mann, the father of our public school system, championed the elimination of sectarianism from American schools, largely accomplished by the 1840's. Bible reading, prayers or hymns in public schools were absent from most public schools by the end of the 19th century, after Catholic or minority-religion immigrants objected to Protestant bias in public schools.

Until the 20th century, only Massachusetts required bible-reading in the schools, in a statute passed by the virulently anti-Catholic Know Nothing Party in the 1850's. Only after 1913 did eleven other states make prayers or bible reading compulsory. A number of other states outlawed such practices by judicial or administrative decree, and half a dozen state supreme courts overruled devotionals in public schools.

As early as the 1850's, the Superintendent of Schools of New York State ordered that prayers could no longer be required as part of public school activities. The Cincinnati Board of Education resolved in 1869 that "religious instruction and the reading of religious books, including the Holy Bible, was prohibited in the common schools of Cincinnati."

Presidents Ulysses S. Grant and Theodore Roosevelt spoke up for what Roosevelt called "absolutely nonsectarian public schools." Roosevelt added that it is "not our business to have the Protestant Bible or the Catholic Vulgate or the Talmud read in these schools."

For nearly half a century, the United States Supreme Court, consistent with this nation's history of secular schools, has ruled against religious indoctrination through schools (McCollum v. Board of Education, 1948), prayers and devotionals in public schools (Engel v. Vitale, 1962) and prayers and bible-reading (Abington School District v. Schempp, 1963), right up through the 1992 Weisman decision against prayers at public school commencements and Santa Fe v. Doe (2000) barring student-led prayers at public school events .

 

[web730]

I am glad someone finally got it. I think Web has me on ignore.

Really, I didn't ignore your part. I do understand the big reason why the people and the government insist to have the Church and State be seperated due to many reasons that you just explained. I agree and understand that.

However, I do wish that Church and State to be inseperated in a way. It would do more good in the past but certainly not in 20th and 21th century due to the mix of the many different religions that we Americans all practice .. so while that these kids go to same public school(s) so that would create more problems. Yeah. That is too impossible. So I may concur that it would be still no good idea to undo it, anyway.

 

[web730]

One court ruled the "under God" phrasing unconstitutional, but a higher court overruled it out on procedural matters on the grounds that the person who was suing the government had no basis to make the case as he was representing an estranged daughter who didn't live with him anyway.

Hmm. I do recall that now.

You really just have no concept of history... The world wasn't somehow magically better before.

I really meant that the crimes and sins rocketed in times especially 1960s to 2000s, comparing with the times before. That's still too obvious. I'm actually very surprised that you didn't even noticed or acknowledged that. You need to take a hard look at the past to compare in general. I'm looking for the source to prove.

Actually, I am an adult. Sorry to break it to you.

Ah, there you got me. I kept thinking the age 19 as teenage age, but it's actually an adult age (18+). Still barely an adult.

It's only obvious if you make assumptions and don't actually do any research. If you know what you're talking about, you'd know that things were not just euphorically better in the past. They weren't good then, and they aren't great now either.

Yes, there has been done in the old past, however, but much less than we see these days in our times.

I don't know what kind of God you worship, but I worship a God that doesn't hate people and doesn't play with them like puppets. My God doesn't treat human beings like toy soldiers. He lets them set their own future through the choices they make.

Yes, you're basically correct. It's our wills to do good or bad. We all know that. I really meant that God can interfere our affairs in times whenever He needs to. He can. But not by puppeting humans all the times, no. lol

By the way, you should know who I worship.

Well, we never have absolute proof of anything. The evidence that Lee Harvey Oswald did it is pretty strong. But unless God came down and spelled it out to us, we wouldn't absolutely know for sure.

Fair enough.

I don't actually think Abel ever really existed. I think the story is not intended to be interpreted as literal fact--I think that the story is a metaphor for the evil that exists in all people...

Well, Abel did exist so was Caine .. and all that in the Genesis. If you don't believe Abel existed, therefore you don't believe his God. How can you take it as illerate and yet believe in his God?

Say if it was illerate as a purpose, then it would be meaningless for God to say such things, really .. only if you understand me meant.

Why did God not stop Cain from killing Abel? Because Cain killed Abel by his own free will. God does not prevent people from sinning because God wants people to actively choose to do the right thing.

Yes, you're right that Caine actually did murder on his own will. And God didn't interfere (to stop it from happening) on Cain's murder part because He had plans ahead already and knew it forehand, already.

It's immature to call you on the fact that you have no idea what you're talking about? I really don't care if you don't like what I have to say. When you say things that are incorrect and clearly are based on flagrant disregard for fact, I'm inclined to tell you to go do research and learn about it (and using *real* sources, as opposed to Christian websites like answersingenesis) before you post about it.

I'm not saying this because I want you to feel bad, I'm saying this is that you can't convince people to agree with you, you can't even attempt to persuade them by putting forth an argument based entirely on fallacies.

Yes, it was rather immature that you did. Admit it.

You meant that you don't believe or trust the answeringenesis.com sources? Why is it so? Did you research it throughout? I doubt so. You even didn't do your part regarding to posting *real* sources, either .. just so little.

I don't attempt to persuade users here to believe me. It's entirely up to them to believe or not. That is the entire issue for the most. I knew it would be no use to force them to believe me or you, really.

 

[Dennis S.]

Did anyone bother to note that several parts of the "email forward" are false and made up? The speech itself is true, but the speech wasn't delivered to Congress, it was presented to a few members of a subcommittee on Crime. It was definitely not a SPECIAL COMMITTEE.

http://www.snopes.com/inboxer/outrage/scott.htm

VERY FEW people heard this speech, and neither is it important nor supressed by the media. The media was never involved, and neither does the message have anything special in it beyond maybe the person saying it had his daughter murdered at Columbine.

 

[Teresh]

Well, Abel did exist so was Caine .. and all that in the Genesis. If you don't believe Abel existed, therefore you don't believe his God. How can you take it as illerate and yet believe in his God?

"Illiterate" isn't the right word for what I think you're trying to say. But I'm pretty sure I understood what you meant. You're trying to say that if I don't believe in the story of Cain and Abel as written in the Bible, how can I believe in God, right? The answer to that question is that I don't interpret everything in the Bible (or the Tanakh) as solid fact. I don't read the Bible and say "OK, this is all literally true." I instead read it and examine the metaphors used and interpret it on a level more about meaning than diehard acceptance for facts. The first few chapters in Genesis, what did they *mean*? I don't take everything in the Tanakh as absolute fact, I ask OK, what is the book trying to say, on a higher level? Read between the lines.

I'm not Catholic, but would you agree that the Catholic Church worship's the God of Cain and Abel? If yes, you might be interested to know that the Church has this way of interpreting the first four chapters of Genesis. It doesn't believe the Bible starts reciting facts until Genesis 5 and the story of Abraham.

You meant that you don't believe or trust the answeringenesis.com sources?

Of course not.

Why is it so?

It's a religious-based site which writes such that you would be willing to believe what it says if you don't know much about the things it's talking about. What is written there, however, has little basis on fact--The "scientists" they sometimes cite do not follow the scientific method and are therefore not scientists at all. Sometimes they cite other articles from what I would consider a legitimate source. The problem is that those citations typically take the original text completely out of context and play a game of trying to change the original meaning by hoping the reader will not read the source text. Worse, they sometimes have flagrant disregard for fact by saying things like Sir Isaac Newton did not agree with the theory of evolution. Um, hello? He died 80 years before Darwin was born? He would not have been aware of the theory of evolution because the theory did not exist yet. I wouldn't consider something that good academic writing. When I read such essays I expect to see good academic writing. Essays which have a goal to convince you of something typically don't adhere to this rule because they can't.

Did you research it throughout? I doubt so. You even didn't do your part regarding to posting *real* sources, either .. just so little.

Yes I did research it out. Apparently more than you did, because if you had done a more thorough job of it checking its sources you would know that the site is largely just speculation, assumptions, religious dogma and really everything other than scientific documentation. The sources cited are illegit or take the source's words out of context. I do cite when requested or when I feel it is necessary. You choose to ignore these citations because they don't agree with you.

 

[MorriganTait]

However, I do wish that Church and State to be inseperated in a way. It would do more good in the past but certainly not in 20th and 21th century due to the mix of the many different religions that we Americans all practice .. so while that these kids go to same public school(s) so that would create more problems. Yeah. That is too impossible. So I may concur that it would be still no good idea to undo it, anyway.

I don't think it's the mix of different kinds of people in schools with different religions that cause the problem. If anything, it's intolerance that causes the problem. The way I practice Christianity is probably a lot different from how you do it, so please remember, when you talk about bringing religion back into schools and the public sphere, you may just be inviting people who practice the way I do to decide how everyone else is going to do it, and I don't think you'd like that much.

If you want to live in a country where one singular God concept dominates public and private life, try Iran. They have it down to a science there.