'Christian state' author defends position

Yup, I'm the guy that drafted the "Christian state" resolution. Allow me to point out a couple of details not getting any notice: it's a DRAFT! Drafts are opening remarks for a subject that is to be DISCUSSED, not immediately publicized. Unfortunately, some individuals' knees immediately jerked for whatever personal reasons they might have. They released the DRAFT, cursed against it and melodramatically tied it to Adolf Hitler. HITLER?! Guaranteed to get the resultant response.

Now, why would I submit such a resolution? Certainly not because I enjoy getting beaten up. Naturally I don't agree with the editor's judgment of "lack of education", "shockingly stupid", "preposterous", "psychological in nature", "emotional problems or actual psychological afflictions", "ill-conceived". That's a lot of insult packed into three short paragraphs and not worthy of a publication called a NEWSpaper.

Every other day we discover anti-Christian activity throughout society: schools teaching Islam, but Christianity not allowed; employees ordered not to offer "Merry Christmas"; crosses ordered removed; Christian-based holidays renamed to remove any such association (while keeping the time off from work); schools holding Muslim-dress day; students taught to memorize the "five pillars of Islam"; many other examples that only come to light when someone gets brave enough to fight one. No other religion in this country is so clearly under attack. Only rarely are corrections made through legal means, but that's like trying to sponge up water running from a tap without turning off the tap first.

My resolution was intended to turn off that tap by raising Christianity to the SAME favored status that political correctness bestows on all other religions and by recalling the words of the nation's founders. It specifically states that it "is not to be interpreted as restricting the free exercise of any other religion." Separation of church and state? That's not the problem. We need the separation of state and church.

Of course I knew my resolution would not fly as written -- it wasn't intended to. The standard procedure (at a meeting begun with a prayer and pledge to "one nation under God") is to submit a draft, the KCRCC discusses it, any changes are made and THEN voted on, up or down. I am less offended by its defeat than by the unethical tactics and publicity -- all over a DRAFT meant for discussion of a clear problem that continues to grow and spread. It was shot down without one word of discussion. That's not the way a democracy is supposed to work.

HANS NEUMANN

Spirit Lake