Some Freethinking Thoughts

There are a ton of weekly or semi-regular podcasts and I only listen to a few. I have watched/listened to Gay USA for over fifteen years. Strict Scrutiny Podcast provides Supreme Court analysis. I listened to a few discussions from both SCOTUSBlog and High School SCOTUS. 

And, Freedom From Religion Foundation has one too. I can go on, but will not. My discussion here is focused on FFRF. The most recent podcast on Free Thought Radio had two extended clips from an actress talking about giving a secular invocation [the local government then stopped having invocations!] and involving a lawsuit where you had to swear to God to register to vote.  

The updated form still includes the wording, but it also has a box that allows registrants to opt out of the religious portion of the oath "because of a sincerely held belief." Applicants still must "swear or affirm" to requirements including being a U.S. citizen; being eligible to vote; and not being affiliated with groups that advocate the overthrow of the government.

An article summarizes the case.  The opt-out is tricky since it provides a way to avoid controversy in more than one way. Some people would be against the oath because their theistic religion prohibits oaths. The usual gospel verses can be cited here.   But, the oath should not be there anyway.  It is a form of religious establishment.  The least wrong thing to do is "swear or affirm," the first part basically implying "so help me God."

Doing a search of the guy involved, I found a discussion of testing the idea that you might need to have a religion to be happy.  The idea is that religion has been shown to bring happiness and satisfaction.  But, what seems to be at issue here is a wider belief structure and sense of community:

In an interview with Religion News Service, he said while atheism can give people as strong a sense of identity as religion can for believers, and may help with their mental well-being, the challenge for them is "think consciously and seriously about where they will find community — and organize accordingly[.]"

FFRF promotes secular thought ("freedom from religion").  I have voiced my opinion that the key thing for me is freethinking.  I think religion per se is not necessarily bad.  The term is open-ended at any rate, just as "Christian" does not mean "conservative evangelical."  It is quite possible for a person to have some sort of "religion" while also not believing in or accepting the existence of ["belief" itself is a weighted word] heavenly beings or whatnot. 

There is a lot of vague talk of "belief" or "I believe in spirituality, not religion."  And so on.  This -- as I have repeatedly noted -- also pops up in abortion cases, including references to "conscience," even if VP Harris summarized this way in one of the multiple meetings being held addressing Dobbs:

Let the woman make that decision with her doctor, her loved ones, her pastor, her priest, her rabbi.  But the government should not be doing that.  

Yes, part of liberty is the autonomy to make such choices oneself.