Mother Teresa Stamps See Objections

Remove all ads!

I take issue with this as well. Not all atheists who vigorously lobby for the maintenance of a strong separation between church and state are hate-filled bigots. Hell, most of them aren't. In fact, not everyone who lobbies vigorously to maintain a strong separation between church in state is even an atheist. Chandos, for example, believes in maintaining a strong separation between Church and state -- and he's Christian.

 

Please note, I didn't say that all those who advocate a separation between church and state are hate filled bigots, either. I was referring to the troublemakers who merely want to be a pain in the ass.

I myself advocate the separation of church and state with regards to serious issues. But this sort of relatively minor stuff, well, I think that some of the people complaining might have a little hate in their souls. It's a possibility. Though I again admit that in the absence of other evidence, I would be hesitant to slap that label on them.

 

I agree, this is silly.

They ought to concern themselves with more important issues, like proselytising in the military and so forth.

 

While that is certainly true, I do not think that maintaining a separation between Church and State is in fact their big problem with this. (Yes, that's what they say it is, but I don't think that's the whole of it.) They would have a point if the only stamps you could purchase had religious figures on them, and even then it would be a small point. (It's a stamp for Pete's Sake! You aren't even going to keep it - the whole point of a stamp is that you send it to someone else). But the point remains that the USPS makes all different kinds of stamps, and they are willing to sell any of them to you, and they all currently cost 44 cents each.

To me, arguing against the existence of stamps with religious figures on them is like arguing against museums having religious artwork in them. What's the point? No one's making you use those particular stamps, or even look at them. The post office I go to usually offers me two different choices.

So my question is this: If the government is not making you use the stamps, if it is offering to sell you non-religious stamps at the same location for the same price, how is separation between church and state being compromised? I don't see how a stamp of Mother Theresa could be viewed as the US government advocating Christianity, as Mother Theresa certainly qualifies as a humanitarian and historical figure, in addition to a religious one. In this sense, I can see how one can come to the conclusion that this group is just looking to make a problem where one doesn't really exist.

 

Crucis, reconsider this thought. Atheism is simply the belief that there are no gods (as opposed to agnosticism which is the lack of belief in anything). Most atheists that I know are perfectly rational, calm, and respectful people. I have long, intelligent, and fun debates with them, and we're friends. There are some that are just bigoted pieces of trash like you described, but they can be found in any group. Mormons have them, Baptists have them, atheists have them, liberals have them, conservatives have them, even Chucky Cheese employees have them. If you believe there are no gods, you're an atheist, and thankfully one of the more rational in your beliefs. If you are unconvinced either way, you're an agnostic (and most people wouldn't call you an atheist).

I'm guessing it's a mix of hate and fear, but like you I'd be careful slapping a label on anyone. I do see issues like this as somewhat important, just because it's a precedent and a symptom, but I think the standard should not be whether the person/group is related to religion, but whether the action portrayed/associated is. For example, Mother Teresa, though a famous nun, is famous for helping the needy, not for proselytizing or anything. Sure, she's a nun, and her faith may well be inseperable from her actions, but that shouldn't automatically discount her. To do so is an unfair ruling against religions.

Amen to that!

 

I switched to "Gratz!" a while ago. If I get a "wtf, dude?" face back at me, I'll just point at their hand or whatever they sneezed on and continue: "Yeah, did you win anything? An alien perhaps?"

As for Mother Theresa on stamps. Come on, it's not like they're making her the new national idol of worship or anything. She's not replacing the American Eagle, Superbowl or even Britney Spears for that matter.

 

Yes, it does. I don't believe for a second that the world is nothing but shades of gray. I believe that that view point exists for one reason only ... to allow people to engage in evil while making the excuse that they're not evil. This shades of gray argument is nothing but a smokescreen used by evil people to poison the hearts and minds of good people by convincing them that there is no Good and Evil.

 

Crucis, that 'shades of gray' arguement works great for concerns of good and evil, but not so much for whether budget cuts or healthcare reform are the best way to go for our country.

 

I know the difference between agnostic and atheist.

However, I refuse to be in any way associated with those atheists who are indeed the hate-filled anti-religious bigots... and because of that, I refuse to call myself an athiest. I call myself a "non-theist", and have for many, many years.

---------- Added 0 hours, 3 minutes and 7 seconds later... ----------

The problem, Aldeth, is that the people who are whining about this want to totally and completely remove all religion from the government and then from society. And to that end, simply offering alternative stamps does not accomplish their goal.

 

There is no good and evil.

 

Which is why I find their arguement without merit.

 

Hey, now, their agenda has nothing whatsoever to do with the merit of their argument. Their argument is that Mother Theresa's principal achievements are associated with religious undertakings or beliefs. There is a rule against putting people like that on a stamp -- and that is the post office's rule, not theirs. Put simply, the issue to be hashed out is whether or not Mother Theresa's principal achievements are associated with religious undertakings or beliefs -- and have nothing to do with what ulterior motives the Freedom From Religion Foundation may or may not have. Their motives simply do not matter.

If, on the other hand, you are trying to argue that the post office should change its own bylaws, I don't have a lot to say. I think the rule is silly, too.

 

Drew,

I suppose I can sum up my thoughts in two principle points:

1. The rule is definitely silly. Especially considering they make stamps of the nativity scene during Christmas time, which is a religious event, featuring religious people, it seems like they don't always follow their own rules.

2. While it cannot be argued that Mother Teresa was a religious person (she was a nun afterall), most of her humanitarian efforts took place in regions that were not predominantly Christian, and many of those she helped were not Christian. I will concede that her foundation did found missions all over the world, so there was definitely some proselytizing going on, but I do not see her exclusively as a religious figure.

 

I'm only curious if this same group protested the Islam stamp?

 

The rule in question regarding mother Teresa only applies to people. Special occasion and holiday stamps follow a different set of rules. This actually makes some sense, since it doesn't hurt anyone even a little to put out stamps for Christmas, Kwanzaa, Eid, Passover, Diwali, etc. Putting, say, John Paul II* on a commemorative stamp will, on the other hand, cause a lot of problems. Where religious leaders are concerned, the government really only has two options -- it can either include all comers or refuse them. It can't cherry-pick. I for one would rather not see the likes of L Ron Hubbard or the Ayatollah on a commemorative stamp, so I think that the spirit of the rule is good, even if the wording itself is somewhat flawed.

* So mentioned because he was both an inarguably good man and inarguably religious figure who we can all likely agree wouldn't be acceptable for inclusion under the current bylaws of the USPS.


EDIT: I can't believe I missed this. I honestly can't disagree with this one more, Crusis.

Splitting the world into polar opposites causes people to judge statements not by their merit, but the affiliation of the speaker. This polarization allows the small minded of both political extremes to heed only the words of their chosen representatives while simultaneously discounting all arguments and evidence presented by "the opposition" without so much as a cursory glance. It causes the ignorant to assume conclusions without checking the facts. It causes the gullible to be manipulated by cynics to believe nonsense by exploiting an irrational distrust and fear of people with differing political views. It is, in fact, the very enemy of reason.

 

Honestly, Drew, I don't really believe having two polar opposites is at all necessary for this to happen. I've seen plenty of cases where it happens with three or more groups, and cases where the opposing groups are not at all opposites, but just happen to disagree. It comes down to how vehemently the people support their own rightness and everyone else's wrongness.

 

Sure, but splitting the world into polar opposites guarantees it. When you go labeling people who see the world differently than you do as "evil," you guarantee ignorance, gridlock and unrest. A black and white worldview is acceptable in a five year old, but an adult should know better. It's one thing to label genocide as evil, but quite another to argue the same about insurance reform and the people who support it. One is obvious. The other is as immature as it is shockingly stupid.

 

I am perfectly fine with Mother Theresa on a stamp. I do believe in Church-State separation, but as others have said, Mother Theresa's work certainly transcended the purely religious. To be quite honest, I'd probably be ok with John Paul II too, although I see little reason for him to be on US stamps.

IMO separation of church and state means that one's religious life is simply irrelevant to their civic life. It does means that membership of a certain religion makes does not make you more suited or qualified for any civic authority or rewards, but it does not mean it makes you any less qualified, either. I think that group was overreacting.