Dear George,

The ancient Greeks called the square root of two irrational. Although they could create it with a ruler and compass they could not place it in their number system which only allowed for whole numbers and fractions with whole numbers in the numerator and denominator. They proved that it could not be expressed as a fraction.

Irrational in the Greek sense meant an entity which exists but cannot be explained.

However, I have no reason to accept the existence of either an afterlife or a divinity. Therefore, as far as I am concerned, they do not need to be explained since there is no evidence that they exist. We can call that arational.

Dear George,

My apologies - I'm going to repeat some of
what I've written in the past (a tendency I have).
However, I think its still relevant today:

For many years it was widely felt that as science
progressively provided rational explanations for the
mysteries of the universe, religion would have less
and less of a role to play and would eventually
disappear, unmasked as nothing more than superstition.
But there are still gaps in our understanding that
science can never fill. On the ultimately important
questions - of the meaning and purpose of life and
the nature of morality. Few citizens of modern
societies would utterly deny the possibility of some
higher power in the universe, some supernatural,
transcendental realm that lies beyond the
boundaries of ordinary experience, and in this fundamental
sense religion is probably here to stay.

The fact that sociocultural evolution has generally meant
secularisation in the past, and is becoming even more
relevant today, does not mean that this must necessarily
continue to be so in the future. What is most likely is
that there will be a growing religious diversity in the
future, reflecting the increasing individualism and
diversity of societies.

Particularly in times of uncertainty and rapid social
change, people in the future may look, as they have done
in the past, to religious values to stabilise and revitalise
their culture. It may well be the case, in fact, that the
need for religion will eventually reassert itself most
powerfully in precisely those societies that have become
the most industrialised, rationalised, and materialistic.
I'm thinking of what's currently happening in the US
with the Religious Right becoming such a strong force there.

Dear Foxy,

The Star Spangled Banner contains the words: “And this be our motto: "In God is our trust."”

This was not the motto of the US when the anthem was written. It was ‘e pluribus unum’ (One out of many)

The pledge of allegiance when I went to school in the US was “I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, one nation, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.”

During the Cold War in the 1950s under Eisenhower efforts were made to distance the US from the ‘godless’ communists.

The US motto became “In God we trust”, and the pledge became “I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.”

There have been efforts to restore the original wording of the pledge and eliminate ‘under God’. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals supported a law suit which eliminated ‘under God’. The Supreme Court restored it. Obama in his inaugural speech said ‘we are a nation of Christians, Muslims, Jews, Hindus and unbelievers. That was the first time any president in a speech made a reference to unbelievers. Hopefully if other justices get appointed to the Supreme Court the pledge will be restored.

The US Constitution does not mention God or Jesus. The Federalist Papers which express the philosophy behind the US Constitution in all of its mentions of religion call it a divisive force. However, those who wrote the Constitution were almost all Deists influenced by the Enlightenment. The country as a whole was much more religious. Part of the current religiosity in the US reflects the broadening of the suffrage.

In my opinion the current rise of the religious right is because the great unwashed, the superstitious part of the population, are voting, and their views have little in common with the enlightened group of thoughtful men who wrote the US Constitution. There is a de facto alliance between the religious right, and such corporations as those of the Koch brothers who don't want their environmental destruction interfered with.

Hi PAUL1405...

You mention 'funerals' in one of your contributions on this Topic ? There's something about a funeral that I find quite unsettling, similarly as I do the 'trappings' associated with funerals ? The concept of death is not the issue, it's the 'ritual and panoply' encompassing it that I don't particularly like, why exactly I don't know ? I've had plenty of exposure to death, both at work and when I was in the Army, and generally speaking I cope with it like most do, in similar situations, so it's not death so much, I really don't know ?

I got a job early one morning (about 0415-0430) a reported 'bust' at a small suburban funeral director's place triggered by an alarm. Attended there, and met the authorised key holder outside. Long story short, as 'senior member' I was 'one-out' and had determined there had been no illegal entry, so I asked the key holder to check the office and work areas downstairs, and I'd check upstairs.

Beside a small Chapel, there was only a store room. The store room contained about twenty or so new coffins, standing-up on there ends ? I'll admit, even though I'd turned on the lights, I found both the silence and all these coffins quite unnerving, and I don't know why ? Naturally, I never mentioned my unease to anybody, least of all, those at work ?

Dear David F.,

Thank You. You've told me things I did not know
about the US.

I had always assumed that there was
an implicit cultural assumption that Americans
should be religious - mot necessarily by attending
church or synagogue, but at least by expressing a
belief in God and in religious principles.

As far as I can remember - religion in the US is
an element in oaths of office, party conventions,
court-room procedures, and indeed nearly all
formal public occasions. Even the Boy Scouts give
a "God and country" award, a phrse that implies,
to say the least, a compatibility of interest
between the two. Many of the nation's secular
symbols also have a sacred quality - the flag, the
eagle, the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, the
Statue of Liberty, "America the Beautiful,"
"The Star-Spangled Banner," Washington, Jefferson,
and Lincoln. Political leaders must always pay
at least lip-service to religious belief; in fact
every presidential inaugural address except one
(Washington's second) makes mention of God - but
only rhetorically, at the beginning or end of the
speech.

John F. Kennedy's inaugural, for example, captures the
idea that America's social order and historical
mission are specifically santioned by God:

"With a good conscience our only sure reward, with
history, the finasl judge of our deeds, let us
go forth to lead the land we love, asking His blessing
and His help, but knowing that here on earth God's work
must truly be our own."

Such sentiments are not allied to any specific faith or
political program, they are sufficiently broad to be
acceptable to almost anyone.

The current political involvement of religious organisations
presents a complicated picture, for each group tends to
regard its own political activity as legitimate, but
other groups' activities in favour of contrasting goals as
unjustified interference. Some religious leaders apparently
have effectively told people who to vote for, others have
merely implied that they should not vote for candidates who
favour certain policies, such as abortion.

Abortion and school prayer appear to be two issues that
do seem likely to endure.

Foxy,

We need to give the dying permission to go through the inevitable stages of death. We need to support and listen and ask if there is anything we can do for them, and genuinely mean it.

It is trite for me to observe that reaching for God could be part of that process, the 'Bargaining' [5 stages of loss, Elizabeth Kubler-Ross]. Whether the person found God for that or another reason, really doesn't matter.

Elizabeth Kubler-Ross died a bit over ten years ago. How did the the wonderful human who revolutionised the way we understand dying, experience hospital and later, die herself? See here,

http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Expert-On-Death-Faces-Her-Own-Death-Kubler-Ross-2837216.php