No. I don't think they are...it would depend upon the religion in question, while I'd love to live in a country based on Christianity, I wouldn't like to live in one based on Islam.
On 5/22/2006 12:16:05 PM oldfashioned wrote: No. I don't think they are...it would depend upon the religion in question, while I'd love to live in a country based on Christianity, I wouldn't like to live in one based on Islam.
Very true. That's the problem. There would be too much diversity. It would lead to something like ethnic cleansing and we'd all be unhappy. It'd be like another holocaust.
Nah, true christianity teaches loving your neighbor as yourself, doing good to those that use and abuse you, turning the other cheek...doing unto others as you would have them do to you, not thinking of yourselves more highly than you ought to, serving others. To my way of thinking, the salem witch trials, the inquisitions and others werent examples of true christianity and will someday be judged as such.
So you're the last and final judge of what "true Christianity" is? All those things were a *direct* result of Christian dogma and people believing in their Christian duty.
I agree that certain Christian principles are very relevant in society, but forgiveness and love of humanity are hardly Christian-only concepts. Fact is, experiments between religion and government have always failed, always ethically and eventually politically as well.
I am not the final judge, I believe God Himself is the judge. You never saw Jesus burning a witch at the stake, or boiling an unbeliever in oil. In fact Jesus forgave a woman caught in sin and even forgave those the nailed Him to a cross.
And yet people with the absolute faith in Christian principles have done all those things and more. The fact is it doesnt' really matter *what* the true principles of any religion are, once you have faith in something that is unproven lunacy at worst, you can justify *anything*.
Like the justification that killing unbelievers is the right thing to do because they contaminate other, good Christians, thus it is moral to kill people.
I have faith in God and I consider the bible to be the Written Word of God. But I would never lift my hand to do another harm, simply becasue he or she disagreed with me. Those that do are deceived and ignore the teachings of Christ, whom they claim to follow....but in hindsight, I would say that you are correct that such a form of government would not work in our modern society, too many people think they are justified to shoot abortion docs and burn witches. But, I believe that someday, such a system will be possible and will happen.
How can you hold such a belief though? Governmental progress has usually moved the *other* way, away from theocracy and into progressive, secular government.
My belief is based on the bible. I believe that the bible teaches a thousand year period where the earth will be renewed and ruled by God Himself. That probably labels me as a fanatic, I can accept that. When you consider the faith of our founding fathers and the USA having been based on christian principles, and where we are today, where you can't post the ten commandments in a courthouse or school room, I wouldn't call that any form of progress. In fact I worry that in ten or twenty years, that the USA will be as intolerant to christianity as the old USSR once was.
Like I said, just because Christian principles are humanitarian does not mean that humanitarianism is a Christian concept. The fact that we keep religion out of government, to me, is a sign of progress. Theocracy is not the right answer. You say the USSR was intolerant of Christianity, but what about all those Christian states who were intolerant of everyone else?
The next 10-20 years? Absolutely not, we have freedom of religion in this country, we are built upon it. Just because we intolerate Christian intrusion doens't mean we are persecuting you.
Also, you don't have to preface all your comments with "I believe in the Bible".
Just want to be clear where I am coming from. I believe in freedom of religion, not freedom from religion. I don't believe that a polititian has to divorce him/herself from their religion just becasue they happen to hold public office. And if our government is of the people, by the people, don't christians, with all their beliefs have as much right to participate in the democratic process as anyone else? And it goes deeper, preventing christian intrusion, becomes the intrusion of the state into churches, censoring what pastors can and cannot preach from their pulpits as an example.
The problem with politicians and their belief system is that religion is absolute insanity. A politician needs to have sound reason and facts to back up his position, instead he can simply use his religion to justify insane things like cutting funding for sex educatin or stem cells, all the while claiming "faith", but not fact.
Christians are allowed to participate in government, no one is disputing that, but freedom of religion also means we can't impose religion or religious ideals on other people, we are not all Christians nor are all Christians in agreement.
Also, states do not limit or censor preachers, oldfashioned, unless those churches are recieving government money. I also believe this is wrong, this is why we should tax churches, so they dont' have to meet government standards and have freedom to practice whatever they want.
That's what hate laws do, if a preacher preaches certain issues then that minister can be prosecuted for hate speach. Religion being insanity is a matter of perspective. Passing out condoms to teenagers instead of teaching abstinance and using stem cells from aborted babies is insanity as far as some of us are concerned. But in the interests of peace, I agree to concede the final word to you. Merely expressing my opinion on the subject as I see it...anyway, christians seem to be a minority in this country, so I doubt you will ever have to worry about the USA becoming a theocratic nation. It was nice talking with you.
Christians are not the minority, over 80% of this country identifies themselves as christian, according to the census bearue. And hate laws do not apply to churches, oldfashioned, preaches have never been arrested for giving sermons condmening homosexuals to jail, unless you have some proof of this happening.
It is isanity to believe something for absolutely no reason, this is how we define pyschopaths, if they believe voices in their heads or think some invisible monster is stalking them, they are crazy unless it is part of a religious practice. Handing out condomsn stops STDs, Abstinence Only increases them, therefore it is insane to fund a program that doesn't work.
Also, stem cell research can save millions, yet people have "faith" that cells have souls? give me a freakin' break.
They are doomed to alienate a vast section of the population, which could lead to failure. In response to a few things I've read here: - when the President is making major decisions for our country based on Christianity, Christianity is being forced upon us regardless of how many people believe in it - is it more insane to give high schoolers condoms that will protect them from pregnancy and diseases when they decide to have sex (which let's face it, is quite commonplace), or to push abstainance on them in hopes that they will do the "right thing", leaving them ignorant and defenseless if, god forbid, they don't
Share 
