Chapter 4.—That the Worshippers of the Gods Never Received from Them Any Healthy Moral Precepts, and that in Celebrating Their Worship All Sorts of Impurities Were Practiced.A search on the HHS website for the term "illegitimacy" turned up 14 hits - none from 2010 and only one each from 2009 and 2008. A search on the term "diversity" turned up 736 hits, 48 from 2010.
First of all, we would ask why their gods* took no steps to improve the morals of their worshippers. That the true God should neglect those who did not seek His help, that was but justice; but why did those gods, from whose worship ungrateful men are now complaining that they are prohibited, issue no laws which might have guided their devotees to a virtuous life? Surely it was but just, that such care as men showed to the worship of the gods, the gods on their part should have to the conduct of men. But, it is replied, it is by his own will a man goes astray. Who denies it? But none the less was it incumbent on these gods, who were men’s guardians, to publish in plain terms the laws of a good life, and not to conceal them from their worshippers. It was their part to send prophets to reach and convict such as broke these laws, and publicly to proclaim the punishments which await evil-doers, and the rewards which may be looked for by those that do well. Did ever the walls of any of their temples echo to any such warning voice? I myself, when I was a young man, used sometimes to go to the sacrilegious entertainments and spectacles; I saw the priests raving in religious excitement, and heard the choristers...
"We would ask why their gods took no steps to improve the morals of their worshippers."
* - Well, gods or government.
2 comments:
I wonder if the "Illegitimacy Reduction Bonus" would have worked better if they had paid it directly to individuals on welfare who avoided having children out of wedlock, instead of giving it as a lump payment to the state with the greatest reduction in illegitimate births?
In any case, I don't think it was very well publicized, seeing as how Michigan evidently won it at least four times, and yet this is the first I ever heard of it.
Michigan may have started with an unfair advantage by having a monstrously high rate to begin with. There are ways to game these things, you know.
;-)
Post a Comment