Adopting state religion in schools would strengthen society from ground up

To the Editor:

Many of the non-believing members of the Yale community are often the first to criticize the concept of a state religion and attack it on groundless bases. What many members of the community fail to realize is that a state religion is the most sensible decision a society can make to protect its most vulnerable members — children.

Children growing up in a home without religion are being denied the tool that can show them to love each other as equals. Studies by religious non-profits have consistently shown that there is an absence of love in non-religious households. The same studies show that many children growing up in ‘non-religious’ households do not see each other as equals and thus physically and verbally attack each other to assert their dominance.

This violent need to become dominant is the very problem that is currently destroying society from within — much more effectively than any terrorist ever could.

When children feel dominant they eventually see their parents as equals. The children then feel wronged by their parents for not being treated as the equals they think themselves to be. That is when the problems start. In their infantile delusion of self-deification, the children commence to play God. At this stage they are violent creatures with fits of rage so powerful that it may require armed police officers simply to calm their tempers. I suggest that a state-mandated religious program taught and implemented to the letter in all schools, detention centers, prisons and government offices would help solve the problems of delinquency and disobedience almost immediately.

Students from religious homes perform better in school than children from homes that identify themselves as ‘non-religious’. To understand the problem of high crime rates, under-performing schools and pregnant teens is to understand the problem of Godlessness.

These three problems are addressed and confronted early in nearly all deeply religious homes, yet they often go unnoticed by those who think of nothing but themselves while the rest of society is dragged down by their carelessness. Present statistics prove that state-sponsored religion works: but the best evidence of all is history.

In 1492, Spain made Catholicism the state religion. That same year Spain became the wealthiest nation in the world and the first country with a transatlantic empire. Many nations of Europe followed the example of Spain and instituted a state religion of their own. Soon after, Europe entered an era of enlightenment, exploration and relative internal peace, which allowed it to produce some of humanity’s greatest thinkers. The need to maintain a transatlantic empire created a need for faster ships, which would be met centuries later by the steam engine and the industrial revolution.

We are lucky to have a president who is so committed to progress and the concept of unifying the confused masses. As it is written in scripture, those who stop believing in their leader in turn corrupt leaders into losing mental clarity.

If our leaders lose mental clarity because we are overburdening them with cosmically unimportant non-events, then who will lead us?

José Abrego

Nov. 13

Abrego is a junior in Ezra Stiles College.

Comments

  • Anonymous

    just when you thought the ydn couldn't publish something more outrageous, it does.

  • Anonymous

    I suggest Mr. Abrego take a few more history classes--or, read the newspaper. I live in Texas, smack in the middle of the Bible belt, and we have the highest teen pregnancy rate in the nation, to take only one of the metrics he cites. The Enlightenment was characterized by an emerging belief in human reason, not in blind faith. Sure, a state religion might clearly delineate the power structure Mr. Abrego is hoping to achieve, with religious prelates at the top and the rest of us below with our mouths taped shut, but I hardly see that as an improvement over "we the people."

  • Anonymous

    Wow. Wow. You just called 1492 Spain a good thing.

  • Anonymous

    So adhering to the constitution is "groundless," but "religious non-profits" and the fifteenth century Spanish empire have all of the answers?

    God, I hope we adopt a state religion quickly so we can begin colonizing "inferior" (for the Bible tells us so) peoples!

  • Anonymous

    Three words: The Spanish Inquisition

  • Anonymous

    His dubious and unsupported claims notwithstanding (Absence of love in non-religious households? What the hell does that mean?), Mr. Abrego does raise at least one valid point. No one can deny that religion is a positive force in some people's lives. Robbing children of this potentially beneficial opportunity is just as bad and close-minded as indoctrinating them into a specific form of religion. Atheism is just as much a religion as Christianity, Islam, or scientology. Based on my experience (unfortunately I can't vaguely cite a religious non-profit group study to back up my statement), I think it's more common for someone who was raised in a religious home to reject his/her parents' religion than vice versa. I am one of the deserters. It appears, however, that most of my atheist friends who were taught from an early age that religion is irrational and/or evil never venture out to the religious camp.

  • Anonymous

    so, we adopt Christianity as a state religion, what does that make the rest of us, who are Muslims, Buddhists, Hindus, atheists, etc.?

  • Anonymous

    1492 happens to be the year that Jews were expelled from Spain. Please, Mr. Abrego, give me a few days' notice when our own new state religion takes effect so I can start packing my bags.

  • Anonymous

    come on guys, this editorial is almost certainly a joke. and assuming it is a joke, why did it get printed?

  • Anonymous

    10:28 a.m.: 600 people died during the Spanish Inquisition's 350 year history. By comparison, atheist regimes of the 20th century (Stalin, Pol Pot, Mao) murdered hundreds of millions of people. Some perspective here would help.

  • Anonymous

    I will not respond to Mr. "Abrego" - not listed on Yale Phonebook, I might note; his piece is self-evidently ludicrous and genuinely intellectually insulting.

    I instead request that the editorial board of the Yale Daily News think long and hard before they publish another poorly-considered, poorly-written piece of editorial flamebait. I will bite this once because after the immigration piece, the Linux/Mac/Windows piece, and this extraordinary straw man, I can no longer consider the YDN to be a competent, praiseworthy paper. Please choose editorials (and articles) more carefully and sensibly in future, and remember that on a slow news day, publishing limited content is better than printing schlock like this. Isn't Yale a sufficiently vibrant place that the YDN can be relevant without resorting to puerile provocation?

  • Anonymous

    Drew L, most college newspapers publish ludicrous opinion columns from an extreme left perspective on a regular basis. Is it so wrong for the YDN to also present out of the mainstream pieces from the right as well as the left? This column is not more "shocking" or "flamebait" than a typical column making an argument for, say, socialism, which we see all the time in college newspapers and which you do not appear to have a problem with.

  • Anonymous

    yeah ditto. i tried to look up on this guy on facebook (yale and otherwise) so i knew who to egg tomorrow, and he doesnt seem to exist…this editorial can only be described by three words: "what. the. fuck."

  • Anonymous

    UGH. who is running the editorial board. this is a pisspoor letter and they know it (or i should hope a yalie should know so…)

  • Anonymous

    OK, the problem with this letter is not the content itself (though i do have a problem with it - regardless he should be allowed to ignorantly believe this). the problem was how he argued for it by using baseless points and nonsensical logic. me not knowing how to treat people fairly bc i didnt have religion? youre kidding right?

    arguing for right-wing pts is fine by me if its well argued - in this case, its atrociously written. and as a side note, the socialism editorial was crappy as well. that xiaochen kid needs to stop writing editorials.

  • Anonymous

    This article has no supporting evidence and far reaching statements. It should never have been published. I am extremely disappointed in the YDN editorial staff for allowing such garbage to be published. The newspaper is a reflection of what we stand for as a community, and it has clearly failed. We are intelligent human beings, and the editorials published in the YDN should reflect that.

  • Anonymous

    Is this article for real, or is it just a poorly executed attempt at satire?

  • Anonymous

    "Mr Abrego" isn't a real person (check: there isn't even anyone at Yale by this name); his "opinion" is childish provocation. This is joke, and a poorly concealed one at that. I'm just surprised the YDN allowed it to be printed, as it is obviously fake.

  • Anonymous

    The main problem with this article is that, if you want to make a general argument for a theocracy, you would need a 500-page book (at least) to do so. Most of the author's points could make sense if they were fleshed them out, but as it is there are too many counterpoints to almost every sentence in the column that are not addressed. Well, at least he presents an argument, which is more than we can say for many left-wing columns that do nothing other than calling dissenters "racist", "xenophobic", "homophobic", etc.

  • Anonymous

    I know him. He's not listed for some reason.

  • Anonymous

    "at least he presents an argument"?

    wow. xiaochen presented one a couple weeks ago too. pat him on the back for that yet? who at yale cant make an argument? this kid advocates theocracy for extremely weak reasons, which we can both readily admit can be countered at each step of the way.

    i dont quite understand why that left wing job was inserted into the comment. stop being a partisan hack and acknowledge that that kid, whoever he is, is blithely unaware of his ignorance.

  • Anonymous

    Upon further reflection, I'm going to have to agree and call this one an extremely well-executed troll letter. Had me fooled. YDN should know better, though.

  • Anonymous

    "No one can deny that religion is a positive force in some people's lives."

    Actually plenty of people do deny it and there's some pretty good supporting arguments to support that very assertion.

  • Anonymous

    We do recognize that we can solve all of these many problems elucidated by the columnists very simply. Just follow Xaiochen's advice, his problem is he was too gentle. Let us not tax baby formula, but make it, and babies illegal. Thus we can fix the teen pregnancy rate and we wouldn't have to worry about protecting our children. If we don't have any children then we don't have to worry about immigrants stealing their future jobs, and thus we can allow them to enter at the heart's content. You don't have to worry about any rapidly growing classes when there's no growth, yes? So then we have come to this inevitable conclusion, government mandated sterilization of every citizen, it's just too good an opportunity to pass up.

  • Anonymous

    1. Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition!

    2. Evaluation

    Technical proficiency:
    Flawless mechanics - punctuation and spelling without fault, advanced grammatical structures used with highly effective results. 10.00

    Content and structure:
    Thorough coverage of issue, powerful brevity. 10.00

    Overall tone:
    Believable but subdued. Could do with a smidgen more vitriol. 9.50

    Effect:
    A pleasing number of consequent bait-takers, impressive debate-to-contempt ratio. 9.00

    Style:
    Weak choice of pseudonym. Lukewarm compromise between anonymity and significance. Nevertheless, execution shows considerable panache. 8.00

    Degree of Difficulty:
    Yale Daily News

    Overall score: 9.25
    A superbly executed piece of trolling. Succinct and plausible.