Religion in Politics

[kmack]

Does religion play too big a role in politics?

[ComradeBadger]

No, it has no relevance in the UK.

[oldagerocker]

As badger said, not in this country. Thank f*ck for that :D

[riomhaire]

I said yes, because USA has loads of nukes and the politics there are completey based on religion from what I hear.

[short recoil]

Religion is the base of politics, it shouldn't be and it's moving away from this.
religion is faith/choice not anything to do with law

[seinfeldrules]

I said yes, because USA has loads of nukes and the politics there are completey based on religion from what I hear.



/me sighs

[gh0st]

I said yes, because USA has loads of nukes and the politics there are completey based on religion from what I hear.
Oh enlightened Europe, you're so foward thinking and smart!

No. Religion does not play too much of a roll. Not here it doesnt. Sadly, it doesnt play MORE of a roll. People have this assumption that religion in politics equals medieval times or some nonesense. I, for one, think it would be nice to see some of the morals associated with religion in politics. What people believe is their own business, so really I feel its up to them.

[kmack]

fyi, I voted yes, because I think that religion influences politics too much, its influence has grown too great, and it is rapidly pushing out opposing viewpoints.

[gh0st]

fyi, I voted yes, because I think that religion influences politics too much, its influence has grown too great, and it is rapidly pushing out opposing viewpoints.
Cite one example of religion pushing out opposing viewpoints.

By the way, I think its pretty funny how you degrade Rush Limbaugh for admitting he has a problem with drugs, and fixing the problem on the air. Thats way more than Slippery Bill Clinton could do ("I smoked but never inhaled").

Ironically, you couldnt prove that Bill O'Reilly sexually abused anyone. Why? OH WAIT IT HASNT BEEN PROVEN. Its just common sense; in America, I dont know what heathen nation you come from, but our people are innocent until proven guilty.

I dont even like them but I think that your sig is just gay.

[The Mullinator]

Unfortunately here in Canada they are starting to be intertwined thanks to the conservative party gaining more power.

[kmack]

Cite one example of religion pushing out opposing viewpoints.

By the way, I think its pretty funny how you degrade Rush Limbaugh for admitting he has a problem with drugs, and fixing the problem on the air. Thats way more than Slippery Bill Clinton could do ("I smoked but never inhaled").

Ironically, you couldnt prove that Bill O'Reilly sexually abused anyone. Why? OH WAIT IT HASNT BEEN PROVEN. Its just common sense; in America, I dont know what heathen nation you come from, but our people are innocent until proven guilty.

I dont even like them but I think that your sig is just gay.

I didn't think I titled this thread "Flame Kmacks Sig".

[gh0st]

I didn't think I titled this thread "Flame Kmacks Sig".
That was one part of my post, you disregarded the part where your "argument" was left in ruin.

[kmack]

Cite one example of religion pushing out opposing viewpoints.



Religion pushes out homosexuals, it pushes out women who choose to have abortions, it pushes out people in favor of the death penalty. When religion becomes involved in politics this is what happens, in an effort to meet the needs of voters who vote based on religion, politicians follow their moral standards, and ignore those that oppose them. It goes both ways, on the conservative side, they are pro-life pushing out the pro choice people but there is also effects on the liberal side of the fence too.

[kmack]

That was one part of my post, you disregarded the part where your "argument" was left in ruin.

ok, let me color code this for you.

Cite one example of religion pushing out opposing viewpoints.

By the way, I think its pretty funny how you degrade Rush Limbaugh for admitting he has a problem with drugs, and fixing the problem on the air. Thats way more than Slippery Bill Clinton could do ("I smoked but never inhaled").

Ironically, you couldnt prove that Bill O'Reilly sexually abused anyone. Why? OH WAIT IT HASNT BEEN PROVEN. Its just common sense; in America, I dont know what heathen nation you come from, but our people are innocent until proven guilty.

I dont even like them but I think that your sig is just gay.

in the red we have you flaming my sig, in the blue is the part dealing with the topic. Which part is small? :smoking:

Can anyone else give some examples of religion pushing out opposing viewpoints?

[T.H.C.138]

religion should be between you and you're god(s) and no one else..simply for the fact of what happens when one faith is challenged by another..

I could honestly care less about voodoo chicken killings..as long as its not in my yard!!keep that crap in your house!!damn feathers everywhere...

let the muslims face mecca,let the jews spin draidles(no offense intended) just don't force your beliefs on others..

which it seems is happening more and more nowadays..damned FCC,putting mosaics on a butt in a 5 year old cartoon(family guy) which is intended for adults anyway

thats my belief and you all better f'ing agree!!!

:cheers:

[Foxtrot]

Religion pushes out homosexuals, it pushes out women who choose to have abortions, it pushes out people in favor of the death penalty. When religion becomes involved in politics this is what happens, in an effort to meet the needs of voters who vote based on religion, politicians follow their moral standards, and ignore those that oppose them. It goes both ways, on the conservative side, they are pro-life pushing out the pro choice people but there is also effects on the liberal side of the fence too.
I agree entirely, morals have no place in the government.

[gh0st]

Religion pushes out homosexuals, it pushes out women who choose to have abortions, it pushes out people in favor of the death penalty. When religion becomes involved in politics this is what happens, in an effort to meet the needs of voters who vote based on religion, politicians follow their moral standards, and ignore those that oppose them. It goes both ways, on the conservative side, they are pro-life pushing out the pro choice people but there is also effects on the liberal side of the fence too.
Ok. You list all these topics in which conservatives (religious people) have viewpoints.

You said that religion pushes out opposing viewpoints. Well liberals push out my right to want to close our borders and secure our nation. All you say here is that religion is somehow "pushing out" women who want to have abortions. Theres still a very strong opposition to it, in fact, its about 50%. So instead of trying to make me out for some idiot and skirting around the question, answer it. How is religion PUSHING OUT OR DIMINISHING OTHERS VIEWPOINTS MORE THAN ATHIEST OR LIBERAL OR WHATEVER VIEWPOINTS. ALL VIEWPOINTS PUSH THE OPPOSING VIEWPOINTS OUT, ITS THE NATURE OF ARGUMENT.

[Datrix]

It's hard to believe some of you don't think religion plays too big of a roll in politics. Look at most countries in the Middle East, their governments are completely controlled by religious beliefs and wasn't George Bush the one who said "God wanted me to become president" and "God told me to go to war with Iraq".

[gh0st]

It's hard to believe some of you don't think religion plays too big of a roll in politics. Look at most countries in the Middle East, their governments are completely controlled by religious beliefs and wasn't George Bush the one who said "God wanted me to become president" and "God told me to go to war with Iraq".
The middle east is an utterly different can of beans. Theocracies abount there, so what are you so surprised at?

"Under god". This country is a christian nation and 70%+ of its inhabitants are christian. By the way, try not to take that quote out of context.

[Datrix]

The middle east is an utterly different can of beans. Theocracies abount there, so what are you so surprised at?
What do you mean it's a different can of beans? We are talking about politics in general, not just in the Western world, and yes even though in the Middle East government in most of the countries has never in history been properly established over religion, I still think it's surprising considering we are in the 21st century.


By the way, try not to take that quote out of context.
Ok, so it's not exactly what he said, but it's close.
Here:
"God told me to strike at al Qaida and I struck them, and then he instructed me to strike at Saddam, which I did..."

[jondy]

Religion isn't based on reason, government is... that's pretty much the short and short of it

Religion isn't the only way to attain values or morality

[Stigmata]

Religion isn't based on reason, government is... that's pretty much the short and short of it

Religion isn't the only way to attain values or moralityThat makes two of us \:D/

Although some religions possess some beneficial moral values, I just can't find it in me to believe that people can actually have a dialogue with God. Yes, you can talk to God whenever the hell you want and he'll [somehow] listen to you [along with the fifty thousand other people who are talking to him at the same time], but it's hard to believe that God would, or could communicate with Bush (or other people in positions of power) without some sort of overt sign towards the general public. There's far too much room for manipulation for personal gain, and false claims. Simply saying "I think God wanted me to blah blah blah" isn't going to cut it.

[The Monkey]

Not here it doesn't and thank god (well...) for that.

The last thing we need is some religious bastard telling us that homosexuality is a sin and that women belong in the kitchen.

[Absinthe]

I agree entirely, morals have no place in the government.

You know that's not what he meant, but you acted on that ridiculous interpretation any way.

Conservative spin in full effect.

[kmack]

Religion isn't based on reason, government is... that's pretty much the short and short of it

Religion isn't the only way to attain values or morality

exactly

[GiaOmerta]

religion should be between you and you're god(s) and no one else..simply for the fact of what happens when one faith is challenged by another..
What if someone's beliefs involve your demise and demise of your beliefs? :)

[Farrowlesparrow]

Like any belief a politician has, it should play a part but not dominate his thinking. He should obviously be considerate of the peoples wishes, but a true leader also resolves to do what he believes is right. Because honestly look at the democratic process. Its ugly and people fight, and you need one person to stand up and tell everyone where to go, otherwise nothing gets done.


Just the word religion has so much stigma attached to it, that I don't like using it anymore. But what people forget is that its simply a system of beliefs.

[GiaOmerta]

What is religion in your eyes?
I'm not a fan of religion. Don't get me wrong. I read my Bible and commune with God through prayer. I fellowship with my spiritial brothers and sisters, but I'm not a fan of religion. Religion was created by man and so is riddled with inperfection and corruption.

[T.H.C.138]

@GiaOmerta about my previous post..

thats the whole "forcing my beliefs upon others thing in effect"

and I heartily agree with your views in your post above this one

@no one/anyone
why should my beliefs have any effect on someone elses?

is it because they fear that they might not be right?

is their faith in the religion of their choice so flimsy that they must kill to prove it to themselves?

I am not a fanatic so I don't understand that kind of thinking,"you believe something different so I must kill you and all like you!! even though you haven't done a damn thing besides have a different faith!"

where I live is pretty diverse culturally, we have places of worship for buddhists,muslims,most forms of christianity,etc.and none of them bother me in the slightest

why can't people see the similarities in the different faiths?

some kind of "heaven",some kind of "hell"..angels,demons..the descriptions of these beings in most religions is pretty similar..

most religions are basically the "golden rule"--"Do unto others as you would have them do unto you",now I know that isn't exactly the fact,but its close

maybe this higher power/being came to the different cultures in a form they could understand/comprehend/accept..

maybe.... :eek: it is the same "god"?

/me runs away

[CptStern]

ok, let me color code this for you.



in the red we have you flaming my sig, in the blue is the part dealing with the topic. Which part is small? :smoking:

Can anyone else give some examples of religion pushing out opposing viewpoints?


yes:

"Love your enemies, and do good, and lend, expecting nothing in return; and your reward will be great, and you will be sons of the Most High." :Luke 6:35


http://store1.yimg.com/I/yhst-5214993647295_1840_8795488

[Foxtrot]

yes:

"Love your enemies, and do good, and lend, expecting nothing in return; and your reward will be great, and you will be sons of the Most High." :Luke 6:35



So? Are you trying to make fun of people for having different beliefs than you?

[Ikerous]

So? Are you trying to make fun of people for having different beliefs than you?
lol... no?

He was pointing out obvious discrepancies in the beliefs of christians that support war...

Unless of course i read it completely wrong :/

[Korgoth]

I'm just glad religious pressure is finally paying off, forget wars, hunger, disease, and all over life affecting problems in our world... The truly conservative have finally reached a milestone!



Bert and Ernie are finally getting seperate rooms.


:)

[baxter]

72% of Americans say the president should have strong religious beliefs
65% say churches should not endorse candidates
51% say churches should express views on political matters
41% say there is too little expression of faith and prayer by political leaders

Taken from this link.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/3658172.stm

[oldagerocker]

72% of Americans say the president should have strong religious beliefs
65% say churches should not endorse candidates
51% say churches should express views on political matters
41% say there is too little expression of faith and prayer by political leaders

Taken from this link.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/3658172.stm


80% of people are idiots.

Taken from experience. :|

Your own belief on what happens after you die and why you're on this planet, should have **** all to do with the running of your country. Religion and religious holy books have no revelence to todays world, politically.

[CptStern]

lol... no?

He was pointing out obvious discrepancies in the beliefs of christians that support war...



:thumbs:

[Foxtrot]

80% of people are idiots.

Taken from experience. :|

Your own belief on what happens after you die and why you're on this planet, should have **** all to do with the running of your country. Religion and religious holy books have no revelence to todays world, politically.
Religion (to many people) isn't just what they think is going to happen when they die. It was how they were raised and generally what kind of beliefs they have (your religion should be a reflection of your beliefs).


I may be a little slow, but I still don't know where you are going with that t-shirt thing. Are you comparing our troops to terrorists?

[OCybrManO]

"Under god". This country is a christian nation and 70%+ of its inhabitants are christian. By the way, try not to take that quote out of context.This country was founded by a mixture of Christians, Atheist, Deists*, etc. The "under god" part was added in 1954... when we were afraid of the "godless" communists. Adding it was just a part of the anti-communist propaganda. It served two main purposes:
• If you showed opposition to it you would be pegged as a communist.
• It helped further entrench our view that we were so much better than the "enemy"... making their victory all the more disgusting.

Claiming that everyone in this country should do what Christians want in terms of morals (and that's a fuzzy idea because you then have to either go with what the majority of Christians believe or dumb it down to only the universal concepts of all forms of Christianity... probably resulting in "Jesus was a nice guy.") because they are the current majority is along the lines of saying that we should only do what white people want. Well, the percentages are almost the same. Hypothetically speaking, if a strict form of Judaism became the majority would you like having to follow all 613 mitzvot (commandments) of the Torah even if you weren't Jewish? That's why religion and government should be separate. It's easy to ignore if you're part of the majority... but think of how it would feel to be on the other side and you might understand.

* Many of the people we refer to as the "founding fathers" were self-proclaimed "Deists." Now, for the uninformed, Deism is a belief that there is a higher being of some sort in some level of control but it has never revealed itself to us. They thought that organized religions were man's creation and wanted no part in them. The "God" they speak of isn't the God you know from Christianity (most obviously because of the number of people that the Christian God and/or his son, biological or adopted, have personally communicated with according to Christian scripture).

[CptStern]

I may be a little slow, but I still don't know where you are going with that t-shirt thing. Are you comparing our troops to terrorists?


? you're kidding right? ....what Ikerous said:


"He was pointing out obvious discrepancies in the beliefs of christians that support war..."

[Foxtrot]

? you're kidding right? ....what Ikerous said:


"He was pointing out obvious discrepancies in the beliefs of christians that support war..."
I still don't see what you are pointing out...those two passages can be interpreted in many many ways, and I am guessing you chose toe view them as "Love the enemy" "Slaughter thy enemy, then tea bag them" right?

[CptStern]

jesus h christ (excuse the pun), k here's it further simplified:


jesus teaches christians to "Love your enemies"


yet some christians support the war in iraq (war = killing enemy)



the point: it's hypocritical

[Ikerous]

jesus h christ (excuse the pun), k here's it further simplified:


jesus teaches christians to "Love your enemies"


yet some christians support the war in iraq (war = killing enemy)



the point: it's hypocritical
I tend to agrea with you here...
But then again, they could be supporting it out of desire to lovingly help the iraqi people (However misguided that may or may not be)

[GiaOmerta]

Stern, that passage refers to personal enemies.
Ex: ACLU

You don't have to hate someone to kill either. Like in war, as a soldier, it's your job to insure the defence of your brothers in arms and overall victory. It's not about hate. The other soldier is trying to do the same thing.

[MilkMan12]

Well I sure hope to God it plays at least some role in politics, otherwise were ****ed lol. All our laws and basis of our own western civilizations morality comes from religion.

Oh and to the making fun of religion thing...its true. How is it making fun if its true. On a side note, I have personally always found Christianity completely contradicting and just plain confusing. OK 3 GODS OR ONE GOD? CAUSE IF ITS ONE THEN PICK ONE GODAMNIT! But thats me not understanding not the religion.

Also Im Jewish with a lot of Christian friends and family, so I dont have complete first hand knowledge of the faith, but I always get great answers from my Christian friends and family when I ask questions about it.

[OCybrManO]

Well I sure hope to God it plays at least some role in politics, otherwise were ****ed lol. All our laws and basis of our own western civilizations morality comes from religion.So, atheists don't have morals? Morality doesn't start from belief in a religion... unless the person is more selfish than usual (to be explained later) and needs an additional reason (ie: heaven/hell) to be moral.

Children naturally learn the "golden rule" through experience and observation. A child starts off perceiving the world as only what they can sense. Then, the child will learn that things exist and are going on while they can not see/hear. The next major milestone (pertaining to this topic) is when the child realizes that everyone else experiences the world in the same way he/she does, and that his/her parents don't know about things they don't sense. This starts a stage where the child will lie frequently and even about inconsequential things to experiment with this newfound knowledge. In fact, studies show that the more intelligent children tend to learn how to lie earlier and do it more often during this phase. Finally, the child grows out of that phase (well, mostly) when he/she starts to grasp the concept that his/her actions have an effect on others, people other than himself/herself have feelings, and that other people can do the same things to him/her. That usually cuts down on a lot of violent and selfish behaviors along with prevarication. This isn't a process only seen in children of religious families or families that live in certain geographical regions. It's a near-universal process that almost every child (excluding some children with mental disorders and those severely lacking in social interaction) goes through in their early years of development. Some will still go against it through learning bad behaviors from observing their own violent families and having no outside sources to learn from... but in a relatively normal environment it's not nearly as likely. Natural morality is selfish (I'll be nice to everyone so that they won't do bad things to me)... religious morality adds another layer of selfishness to the mix (I'll be nice to everyone so that they won't do bad things to me and I'll get a big reward).

[GiaOmerta]

"For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God. Not of works, lest any man should boast."
(I'll be nice to everyone so that they won't do bad things to me and I'll get a big reward).
I know where your coming from, but if the reward you are referring to is eternal life, then "being nice" has nothing to do with it.

[OCybrManO]

I know where your coming from, but if the reward you are referring to is eternal life, then "being nice" has nothing to do with it.In many forms of Christianity/Judaism/Zoroastrianism/etc, if one doesn't repent one's sins one will not get the aforementioned reward. So, yes, the reward is related to the morality (by the religion's definition) of the corresponding religion's followers. There aren't many religions that I know of that say everyone gets rewarded no matter what they do. Most require at least some semblance of morality. Yes, there are additional rules that you'll need to abide by that aren't really morality questions... such as actually believing in the religion and its ideas (ie: there is one true God, Jesus is our savior, the Bible is the word of God, etc) but I never said every aspect of a religion is selfish... just rewards that depend on your actions (and I'd say most religions have some kind of reward for morality).

EDIT:"For I tell you, unless your righteousness exceeds that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven." - Matthew 5:20 RSV

[GiaOmerta]

In many forms of Christianity
Isn't the Jesus the foundation of Christianity, and the Bible His Word?

Ye are the light of the world. A city that is set on an hill cannot be hid.
Neither do men light a candle, and put it under a bushel, but on a candlestick; and it giveth light unto all that are in the house.
Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father which is in heaven.

Good works come naturally.

"For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven."

The Pharisees were corrupt. They too are not righteous of the Kingdom of God. None are.

"For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God"
This includes the Pharisees and the scribes and every member of humanity past, present and future.

For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.
Death as in spiritial death.

But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.
Jesus paid the price for sin. Humanity was unable to atone for sin without a sinless and perfect sacrifice. Why would Jesus have died if good works were required for salvation.

For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.

That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.
For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.


It's all here. The means of salvation. If humanity was capabable of saving itself from sin, Jesus wouldnt have died for humanities sins.

It's not about religion or traditions or any of that. It's about a relationship with Jesus Christ.

[MentalSentinel]

Religion really plays a too big part in politics. It shouldn't even play a part at all.
It only should play a part if everyone believed the same.

I accidentally voted for no though, I misread it.
Here it's pretty normal though (the Netherlands), it DOES play a too big part in countries like the US.

[Razor]

Religion and the state should be kept apart, it only runs into problems when they are allowed to mix, as could be seen in Afghanistan with the Taliban, Iran now, Syria, Egypt, etc, etc, etc and to some extent, America as well. I am just glad that religion doesn't play such a huge role in British politics.

I am not against religion, i am however opposed to religious people imposing their beliefs on me. This is what is happening in America, with a lot of the anti-gay campaigning that the Christian groups are doing. A hardcore and highly vocal Christian group has no right to tell Mr Smith and Mr Doe that they can not get married, unfortunately for a lot of Americans, this is the case.

[Korgoth]

I pray to God everyday that G.W. doesn't get us all killed....


Oh, thats not exactly what the thread is about is it?....

I think religion doesn't really play a huge part in politics, but I think some politicians like to play the religion card to get people to follow them. Or to excuse their actions under certain circumstances. And in reality, these people are probably the least religious, most rich/corrupt group of people the world knows.

I don't trust any man who would say God told him to do something. Most people today are only religious when its convieniant for them. Some only on Sunday, some only because they are of the opiniont that "oh well, if its fake, at least I won't go to hell for not believing" but boy, do they have another thing coming.

[KoreBolteR]

well, politicians always try and kiss religions ass if thats what you mean.

just to get people 'on thier side', just as any other group/class of people.

[CptStern]

I don't trust any man who would say God told him to do something.


amen to that ;)


"He is one of those men God and fate somehow lead to the fore in times of challenge," George Pataki, Introduction of Bush at the Republican National Convention


"If I'd won that election in 1992, my oldest son would not be president of the United States of America," he said. "I think the Lord works in mysterious ways." - George H Bush


"Why is this man in the White House? The majority of America did not vote for him. He's in the White House because God put him there for a time such as this." - Gen. William "Jerry" Boykin


"I think President Bush is God's man at this hour, and I say this with a great sense of humility." - Tim Goeglein, White House official


and from the man himself:

"God told me to strike at al Qaida and I struck them, and then he instructed me to strike at Saddam, which I did, and now I am determined to solve the problem in the Middle East. If you help me I will act, and if not, the elections will come and I will have to focus on them." - George W Bush, speaking to Palestinian Prime Minister Abbas



here's bush praying:


http://images.usatoday.com/news/_photos/2003/04/02-bush.jpg


separation of church and state my arse


here's a good article on the rise of christian fundamentalism in government (http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article5648.htm) ...I suspect some of you wont be able to get past the title of the article ...ignore it and read the article

[Absinthe]

Stern, that passage refers to personal enemies.
Ex: ACLU

What the Hell is the problem some religious folks have with the ACLU? They are not anti-religion, nor anti-Christian, nor anti-anything. They have defended the rights of plenty of Christians. Anybody who views the ACLU as some kind of enemy is simply searching for a foe to justify their righteousness.

"Under god". This country is a christian nation and 70%+ of its inhabitants are christian. By the way, try not to take that quote out of context.

What's your point? Because Christians are a majority, they should have more rights than non-theists or theists of different religions? Sorry, doesn't work that way. The USA also protects the rights of minorities, and the Constitution is an unambiguously secular and godless document. And "under God" hasn't been around as long as you think it has.

[KoreBolteR]

tbh.. all politics leads down to religion in a way...

like cpt said, i think bush fakes that praying stuff.

[CptStern]

tbh.. all politics leads down to religion in a way...

like cpt said, i think bush fakes that praying stuff.


no it's worse than that ...bush actually is a true believer ..he's evangelical and may believe in creationism ..cant remember specifically but I think he's mentioned it

[KoreBolteR]

yeah but hes only born again as a christian to help himself politically.

[Absinthe]

So he's either an evangelical nut or his "strong character" is fake.

I like him more and more every day.

[KoreBolteR]

So he's either an evangelical nut or his "strong character" is fake.

I like him more and more every day.

yeah but that doesnt change his decisions on iraq and afghanistan..

[Absinthe]

yeah but that doesnt change his decisions on iraq and afghanistan..

And you should know very well what my positions on those two things consist of.

[KoreBolteR]

And you should know very well what my positions on those two things consist of.

im just saying that george bush being 'religious' doesnt change much in the war on terror.

[Absinthe]

im just saying that george bush being 'religious' doesnt change much in the war on terror.

It does when he admits to it (read Stern's post).

[CptStern]

sure it does ..read the article I posted


http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article5648.htm

[kirovman]

So why was he 'born again'?

Was his previous incarnation aborted by an Iraqi president?

Still, explains his stance on things.

[KoreBolteR]

i dont understand religious people at all.

[MilkMan12]

So, atheists don't have morals? Morality doesn't start from belief in a religion... unless the person is more selfish than usual (to be explained later) and needs an additional reason (ie: heaven/hell) to be moral.

Children naturally learn the "golden rule" through experience and observation. A child starts off perceiving the world as only what they can sense. Then, the child will learn that things exist and are going on while they can not see/hear. The next major milestone (pertaining to this topic) is when the child realizes that everyone else experiences the world in the same way he/she does, and that his/her parents don't know about things they don't sense. This starts a stage where the child will lie frequently and even about inconsequential things to experiment with this newfound knowledge. In fact, studies show that the more intelligent children tend to learn how to lie earlier and do it more often during this phase. Finally, the child grows out of that phase (well, mostly) when he/she starts to grasp the concept that his/her actions have an effect on others, people other than himself/herself have feelings, and that other people can do the same things to him/her. That usually cuts down on a lot of violent and selfish behaviors along with prevarication. This isn't a process only seen in children of religious families or families that live in certain geographical regions. It's a near-universal process that almost every child (excluding some children with mental disorders and those severely lacking in social interaction) goes through in their early years of development. Some will still go against it through learning bad behaviors from observing their own violent families and having no outside sources to learn from... but in a relatively normal environment it's not nearly as likely. Natural morality is selfish (I'll be nice to everyone so that they won't do bad things to me)... religious morality adds another layer of selfishness to the mix (I'll be nice to everyone so that they won't do bad things to me and I'll get a big reward).

Lmao where did I say atheists have no morals? I said the basis of all morality comes from religion. Your belief in no murder comes from the bible. Whether or not you believe in God makes no difference. There is a seperation in Church and State yet all of our laws stem from things that religion has come up with first.

Also your selfishness comment...do I need to explain to you why if any religion is selfish it would be the belief in no God? If you dont believe in God you believe in yourself, as if YOU are the author of everything (natural) you see. Everything you made, you discovered you started. That is naiive and selfish sorry.

Also your whole reward argument would be awesome if anything you said was plausible or true lol. Learn more about those religions and figure it out for yourself. I know in Judaism your reward for repenting your sins is asking for forgiveness from God and your friends and the people around you. If you dont want forgiveness dont repent. Because thats all your reward COULD be. Saying sorry and making up for what you have done does not redeem yourself at all. You must do it for the sake of others not yourself. In judaism there is no hell, so there really is no reward.

[jondy]

Lmao where did I say atheists have no morals? I said the basis of all morality comes from religion. Your belief in no murder comes from the bible. Whether or not you believe in God makes no difference. There is a seperation in Church and State yet all of our laws stem from things that religion has come up with first.

Also your selfishness comment...do I need to explain to you why if any religion is selfish it would be the belief in no God? If you dont believe in God you believe in yourself, as if YOU are the author of everything (natural) you see. Everything you made, you discovered you started.

The basis of all morality does not come from religion. Society was around before religion was. You really can't get around that. You reckon people didn't give a damn about murdering people before christianity/ hinduism/ islam etc came along? Bullshit.

As for the 'if you don't believe in god you believe in yourself' stuff; you're not talking sense. Ignoring the offensive potential of the supposed prerequisite that without faith in God you're selfish, I'll address the point directly:

You are ignoring society and instead assuming that without religion moral values would not exist. Agreed, to some extent the morals in society derive from religion, but in no way are they founded upon it. This relates to the first point I made.

That is naiive and selfish sorry.

There's really no need for that

[Absinthe]

Lmao where did I say atheists have no morals? I said the basis of all morality comes from religion. Your belief in no murder comes from the bible. Whether or not you believe in God makes no difference. There is a seperation in Church and State yet all of our laws stem from things that religion has come up with first.

1) Bullshit. My distaste for murder was something I had before I could even begin to ponder the actual purpose and meaning of the bible. And some scientists would even argue that rape may not be something we learn to dislike, but something we are naturally disgusted by.

2) I disagree with murder and rape because I believe such actions are destructive forces in this world. I disagree with rape and murder because I care about others. I disagree with rape and murder because I care about justice. I care about rape and murder because I don't want my short time on this planet to be a shitty one.
If the only thing keeping your "morals" in check is threat of force from God, then you aren't really a moral person at all. I'd hate to see what you'd turn into if your God was proven to be non-existent.

3) Even if what you say is true, and religion was the initial impetus for moral guidelines, then I don't see the purpose of it any longer. Great, the Bible told us not to kill. That should be simple enough for us to follow without all the religious strings attached. It's not like such a commandment requires anything else. It makes sense on its own.

Also your selfishness comment...do I need to explain to you why if any religion is selfish it would be the belief in no God? If you dont believe in God you believe in yourself, as if YOU are the author of everything (natural) you see. Everything you made, you discovered you started. That is naiive and selfish sorry.

You have such a bizarre misunderstanding of atheism it's not even funny.

First of all, don't dress up atheism as something it isn't. Atheism, by definition, is the absence of a belief in deities. It's the opposite of theism. Nothing more or less. At no point does there arise a dogma instructing an atheist what he should believe in.

Secondly, your assertion is illogical and frankly quite stupid. I believe that I exist, but I have no idea as to what you're talking about when you say that I believe in myself. Either way, that doesn't mean that I believe I am the author of everything. I didn't make trees. I didn't make grass. I didn't make oxygen. I didn't make the solar system. I didn't make the sun. MilkMan, just what kind of argument are you putting forth?

I don't claim to know what made these things. I know I didn't, and I'm quite certain that man didn't either. But "God did it" is not a fallback position.

Also your whole reward argument would be awesome if anything you said was plausible or true lol. Learn more about those religions and figure it out for yourself. I know in Judaism your reward for repenting your sins is asking for forgiveness from God and your friends and the people around you. If you dont want forgiveness dont repent. Because thats all your reward COULD be. Saying sorry and making up for what you have done does not redeem yourself at all. You must do it for the sake of others not yourself. In judaism there is no hell, so there really is no reward.

Learn more about atheism and don't subject others to your utter misunderstandings.

[KoreBolteR]

you could say that about anyone who believes in god. anyway tell me someone, if god exists and he met a person who didnt believe in him, what would god do to that person? turn him into a slug for 8 million years as punishment?

wait... the bible told us not to kill? thats bs, common sense and a heart told me not to kill anyone. its against my principles. nothing to do with some book written by a group of men who founded christianity.

if there was no bible would people would just grab a kitchen knife and kill anyone whos nearest? no way.

btw i am not an athiest.

i jus keep wondering how people can believe in things and sacrifice thier lives for something they cant prove thats even there?!

[T.H.C.138]

how about it (the bible)was originally intended as a book of moral guidelines and somewhere along the way it got blown way out of proportion? how do we know who really wrote it and why? were we there?

if you truly look at history you will see that it isn't the religion itself that is "bad",but the power that some derive from it is

look at the Mormons for example....Brigham Young was a thug who stole property from people "in the name of God"..sometimes killing the family for the land,making it look as though it was done by "injuns!"..

my great grand father was on the original wagon train to Utah with Brigham Young..I have read parts of his diary..religion is ok I guess but just keep people out of it ;)

[Absinthe]

you could say that about anyone who believes in god. anyway tell me someone, if god exists and he met a person who didnt believe in him, what would god do to that person? turn him into a slug for 8 million years as punishment?

God would do what any omnibenevolent and loving parent would do.

He'd subject them to an eternity in Hell for not believing in him.

(the Christian god would, at least)

[KoreBolteR]

God would do what any omnibenevolent and loving parent would do.

He'd subject them to an eternity in Hell for not believing in him.

(the Christian god would, at least)

how do you know there is a god?
how can you prove he wont forgive us and keep us in heaven?

eh? :naughty:

your theory is based entirely on faith

[ONE MAN CLAN]

No, it has no relevance in the UK.
hey dude, check you pm

[Absinthe]

how do you know there is a god?

I don't. Nor do I believe there to be one. My post was sarcastic.

how can you prove he wont forgive us and keep us in heaven?

If he does do such a thing, then he's not the Christian god depicted in the Bible.

eh? :naughty:

your theory is based entirely on faith

Which is why I personally don't buy any of that stuff.

[T.H.C.138]

anyone recall the story about Abraham? how he had to kill his son in place of a lamb for god? christians like to forget that god once demanded blood sacrifice..

I know Abraham didn't kill his son,but the whole thing of god telling this guy to do it to prove his faith..just seems wrong..like something a cruel child would do

[CptStern]

meh that's before practical jokes were all the rage ...god was just teasing abraham like he teased moses :E

[OCybrManO]

Isn't the Jesus the foundation of Christianity, and the Bible His Word?

Good works come naturally.

The Pharisees were corrupt. They too are not righteous of the Kingdom of God. None are.

This includes the Pharisees and the scribes and every member of humanity past, present and future.

Death as in spiritial death.

Jesus paid the price for sin. Humanity was unable to atone for sin without a sinless and perfect sacrifice. Why would Jesus have died if good works were required for salvation.

It's all here. The means of salvation. If humanity was capabable of saving itself from sin, Jesus wouldnt have died for humanities sins.

It's not about religion or traditions or any of that. It's about a relationship with Jesus Christ.Yeah, everyone sins... and? You still have to ask forgiveness for your sins and you can't truly repent while continuing the sin for which you are asking forgiveness, can you? So, you must actually try to become a moral person. You can't go around breaking commandments and going against "God's will" after you apologize for doing it, right? Wouldn't that be like an insult to God? Just because Jesus died for your sins doesn't mean you have an all-expenses-paid trip to heaven. No, you still have to pull your own weight. You just have someone helping you along the way. It could also be argued that the idea of everyone being a sinner gives people an excuse for doing some bad things... because, hey, they can't help being a sinner, right?

Lmao where did I say atheists have no morals? I said the basis of all morality comes from religion. Your belief in no murder comes from the bible. Whether or not you believe in God makes no difference. There is a seperation in Church and State yet all of our laws stem from things that religion has come up with first.Even when anthropologists study groups of people that have never had contact with anyone remotely connected to a culture that was exposed to the Bible they still have their own set of morals. They still know it's not good to hurt people. You don't have to be told that being hurt is bad... and everyone wants to prevent it. Now, if everyone has a common ground on not wanting to be hurt what do you do about it? That's right, you come together as a group (society) and make an agreement (law) that anyone who harms someone else will be punished. The thought of being harmed for harming someone else is intended to stop people from doing bad things by using their own selfishness. In fact, I'd even go as far as to say that every act involving thought is at least somewhat selfish in one way or another.

Also your selfishness comment...do I need to explain to you why if any religion is selfish it would be the belief in no God? If you dont believe in God you believe in yourself, as if YOU are the author of everything (natural) you see. Everything you made, you discovered you started. That is naiive and selfish sorry.Both are equally selfish. On the whole, atheists do good things so good things will be done for/to them in return while theists follow their religious traditions in order to be saved, forgiven, allowed into heaven, or otherwise rewarded in some way. Both get rewards... one is just more immediate.

Also your whole reward argument would be awesome if anything you said was plausible or true lol. Learn more about those religions and figure it out for yourself. I know in Judaism your reward for repenting your sins is asking for forgiveness from God and your friends and the people around you. If you dont want forgiveness dont repent. Because thats all your reward COULD be. Saying sorry and making up for what you have done does not redeem yourself at all. You must do it for the sake of others not yourself. In judaism there is no hell, so there really is no reward.The Jews are supposedly the chosen people of God. Their 613 mitzvot (many modern Jews follow only the ethical ones... not the ones that have to do with what food is kosher, what kind of clothing one should wear, etc) in the Torah were supposed to be followed out of thankfulness and respect of their relationship with their god. Still, only the very righteous go directly to Gan Eden. The average person descends to a place of punishment and/or purification, generally referred to as Gehinnom. The period of time in Gehinnom does not exceed 12 months, and then the person ascends to take his/her place on Olam Ha-Ba. The World to Come, or Olam Ha-Ba, is when the messiah comes to initiate the perfect world of peace and prosperity. Only the utterly wicked do not ascend at the end of this period. Their souls are punished for the entire 12 months. Various forms of Judaism differ on what happens at the end of those 12 months: some say that the wicked soul is utterly destroyed and ceases to exist while others say that the soul continues to exist in a state of consciousness of remorse. The righteous dead will be brought back to life and given the opportunity to experience the perfected world that their righteousness helped to create. A particularly righteous person will have a greater share in the Olam Ha-Ba than the average person. A person can also lose his share through wicked actions. The wicked dead will not be resurrected.

If you ask me, that seems like a good reason to be at least somewhat moral... well, better than wicked. :E

[kmack]

http://www.halflife2.net/forums/showthread.php?t=78988

this is why i not only think that religion plays too big a role in politics now, but that it will continue to do so until this country is no longer goverend by its citizens, but by the bible.http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/_/id/7235393

[MilkMan12]

Yeah, everyone sins... and? You still have to ask forgiveness for your sins and you can't truly repent while continuing the sin for which you are asking forgiveness, can you? So, you must actually try to become a moral person. You can't go around breaking commandments and going against "God's will" after you apologize for doing it, right? Wouldn't that be like an insult to God? Just because Jesus died for your sins doesn't mean you have an all-expenses-paid trip to heaven. No, you still have to pull your own weight. You just have someone helping you along the way. It could also be argued that the idea of everyone being a sinner gives people an excuse for doing some bad things... because, hey, they can't help being a sinner, right?

Even when anthropologists study groups of people that have never had contact with anyone remotely connected to a culture that was exposed to the Bible they still have their own set of morals. They still know it's not good to hurt people. You don't have to be told that being hurt is bad... and everyone wants to prevent it. Now, if everyone has a common ground on not wanting to be hurt what do you do about it? That's right, you come together as a group (society) and make an agreement (law) that anyone who harms someone else will be punished. The thought of being harmed for harming someone else is intended to stop people from doing bad things by using their own selfishness. In fact, I'd even go as far as to say that every act involving thought is at least somewhat selfish in one way or another.

Both are equally selfish. On the whole, atheists do good things so good things will be done for/to them in return while theists follow their religious traditions in order to be saved, forgiven, allowed into heaven, or otherwise rewarded in some way. Both get rewards... one is just more immediate.

The Jews are supposedly the chosen people of God. Their 613 mitzvot (many modern Jews follow only the ethical ones... not the ones that have to do with what food is kosher, what kind of clothing one should wear, etc) in the Torah were supposed to be followed out of thankfulness and respect of their relationship with their god. Still, only the very righteous go directly to Gan Eden. The average person descends to a place of punishment and/or purification, generally referred to as Gehinnom. The period of time in Gehinnom does not exceed 12 months, and then the person ascends to take his/her place on Olam Ha-Ba. The World to Come, or Olam Ha-Ba, is when the messiah comes to initiate the perfect world of peace and prosperity. Only the utterly wicked do not ascend at the end of this period. Their souls are punished for the entire 12 months. Various forms of Judaism differ on what happens at the end of those 12 months: some say that the wicked soul is utterly destroyed and ceases to exist while others say that the soul continues to exist in a state of consciousness of remorse. The righteous dead will be brought back to life and given the opportunity to experience the perfected world that their righteousness helped to create. A particularly righteous person will have a greater share in the Olam Ha-Ba than the average person. A person can also lose his share through wicked actions. The wicked dead will not be resurrected.

If you ask me, that seems like a good reason to be at least somewhat moral... well, better than wicked. :E


Before I refer to this quote I wanna say i knew I would be killed for saying what I did. I still believe that not believing in God is what I say it is. I dont think they are bad and excuse me for saying what I said before, not ALL morals come from religion. Im done with that.

Thats a great Pshat but thats all it is. Pshat. Pshat is basically the denotation of whatever it is you read this from (its prolly from the Torah or Mishnah, not sure which one) but either way you gotta look at it from a Drash level. God I love that word...Drash. But to tell you the truth, a waiting period of 12 months to go to heaven for all eternity aint that bad lol. So I still dont see skipping the line as a huge reward.

[OCybrManO]

But to tell you the truth, a waiting period of 12 months to go to heaven for all eternity aint that bad lol. So I still dont see skipping the line as a huge reward.If you were talking about what I said and not an interpretive version of it, it's more than just "skipping the line." I said a person of average morality goes through a purification in Gehinnom and has less of a share in the Olam Ha-Ba... while wicked people go through punishment and don't even get in. Basically, it's a spectrum with reward on one end and punishment on the other. If you're great, you get great treatment. If you're mediocre, you get mediocre treatment. If you're terrible, you get terrible treatment. How much do you want it?

Thats a great Pshat but thats all it is. Pshat. Pshat is basically the denotation of whatever it is you read this from (its prolly from the Torah or Mishnah, not sure which one) but either way you gotta look at it from a Drash level.Yeah, yeah... Pshat, Remez, Drash, and Sod. What is thought to be intended to be interpreted rather than read literally depends on the religious views of the person reading the Torah (or any religious scripture). If they don't believe something they are likely to take it as a metaphor so that it no longer contradicts their dogma. That's the easiest method of explaining away discepencies, contradictions, magic, stuff that sounds crazy (in their opinion), etc. People in all kinds of religions have been doing it for thousands of years.

Wait.. how did we get to this point? The last thing I remember is saying many (if not most) religions reward morality... which is true. Somehow, it turned into a discussion of the Jewish afterlife/apocalypse... and then the various way of understanding their scripture. Before this gets any more off-topic I'm going to just leave. Anyway, I have a test on something else in less than half a day and I haven't cracked the book or taken notes.

For the rest of you guys... back on topic... religion in politics... good or bad?

[Tr0n]

meh that's before practical jokes were all the rage ...god was just teasing abraham like he teased moses :EWell if we was made in gods image...then he must have a sense of humor. :D

[baxter]

For the rest of you guys... back on topic... religion in politics... good or bad?


IMO very bad.

http://www.nobeliefs.com/hitler.htm

[CptStern]

Well if we was made in gods image...then he must have a sense of humor. :D


I dont know about you but I dont look like this guy (http://www.buddhamuseum.com/happy-buddha/happy-buddha-mi-li_3994m.jpg) ;)