Attacked for his beliefs
Published: Wednesday, October 1, 2003 at 6:01 a.m.
Last Modified: Wednesday, October 1, 2003 at 12:56 a.m.
I object to the Sept. 6 column by Horance G. Davis. I found it to be extremely offensive and inaccurate with a number of logical fallacies, including ad hominem (attacking the person) and ad populum (appeal to the people).
Davis' comparison between Count Leopold's "ethnic cleansing" of the church and Judge Moore's Ten Commandments monument is very broad and has little relevance.
Davis said, "The esteemed American political leader Thomas Jefferson came up with the essential terminology when he articulated the need for a sharp separation of church and state." Although it is true that the term "separation of church and state" came from a letter that Thomas Jefferson wrote to the Danbury Baptists in 1802, when read in content it is evident that "separation of church and state" was meant to protect the church from the state - not the state from the church.
Therefore we can see that Davis' article was not so much about the problems of mixing church and state, but more about attacking Judge Moore for his beliefs.
Reader comments posted to this article may be published in our print edition. All rights reserved. This copyrighted material may not be re-published without permission. Links are encouraged.
Comments are currently unavailable on this article