|
|
Post by ghostision on Jun 14, 2004 22:20:12 GMT -5
Nope, not the Pledge of Allegiance thing, I just couldn't think of another title that would actually fit in the title space. I saw this discussed on The News Hour again, and I was wondering what people thought of it. What do you guys think about the Denver (I think it's Denver, can't really remember) Bishop who said that if you vote for a politician who supports abortion, you'll get excommunicated or something?
I'm non-religious, republican, and fairly neutral on abortion, and I think this is a blatant attempt to control the polls through religion. Plus I don't really see how they would enforce this. Voting is supposed to be private, and they can't go around asking who they voted for, holding the threat of excommunication, that's unconstitutional, I think. And it's stupid. There are so much more issues in the world than abortion, supporting a politician who disagrees on one out of many issues are against the rules now? That's just... I don't like it. What do you think?
|
|
|
|
Post by Kiddo on Jun 14, 2004 22:46:19 GMT -5
Actually, there is no seperation of church and state. It reads, "there shall be no state-established religion." The founders wanted to avoid another church of England decable.
I do agree that it's stupid to use religion to force someone to vote a certain way. However, the state can't do anything about it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Buddy on Jun 15, 2004 9:15:39 GMT -5
What's sad is that people like this, people who are supposedly "experts" on their religon and who supposedly only want what's best for it, don't realize how badly they are distorting said religon.
Meh, I could go on for hours about what I think about this. But instead, I'll let some other people comment. I'll just say this: if any of you think seperation of church and state is a bad idea, just look all the middle eastern countries and tell me if you want to live like that. Mixing church with state is a good thing - as long as it's your religon...
|
|
|
|
Post by seraphengel on Jun 15, 2004 9:51:07 GMT -5
I believe that you should vote on things by your own choice. Poloticians can just as easily lie about their religion as anything. Anyways, I think people for abortion and against it will be judged in time, so I don't see a reason to hate either.
|
|
|
|
Post by Crystal on Jun 15, 2004 10:37:55 GMT -5
Meh, I could go on for hours about what I think about this. But instead, I'll let some other people comment. I'll just say this: if any of you think seperation of church and state is a bad idea, just look all the middle eastern countries and tell me if you want to live like that. Mixing church with state is a good thing - as long as it's your religon... My views usually violently disagree with Buddy's on these sort of issues. But for some reason I'm violently agreeing here. This is probably due to the fact that I just spent about an hour ploughing through what felt like solid steel - my %$@!%^ almighty biased History textbook and the "as long as it's your religion" thing applies to me greatly right now. That thing is so biased the only thing they probably got right was the names and dates. And by golly it ticks me off when they write stuff that extolls the virtues of Islam and quietly undermines Christianity and other religions. I read the one measly page in the entire book they had on Christianity and they couldn't have gotten it less informative if they'd tried. And meanwhile here they are harping on for four or five chapters about how infinitely good Islam is and making me learn all the little details of what they did and who ruled them, blah blah blah. It's like they're trying to convert me - and very blatently at that. And the worst of it is that it's compulsory and playing a big role in my exam marks, which will in turn determine which college I get into. So will I or nil I, I HAVE to memorize and study the thing. At least they could have provided some answers to my homework in the midst of all that blather. I couldn't finish it because I could find nothing in the book and left half the answer places blank. I'm going to get in trouble. And despite how un-Christianlike it may be, I'm hoping the guy who made up this syllabus stays in jail (he was arrested and jailed for sodomy) for a very very long time. Wow, I'm in a bad temper. Anyway, the whole point of this rant is to say: It's stupid to try to make people do stuff by using religion. It just destroys the good name of that religion AND it's followers. Heck am I going to enjoy burning my close to useless History book when my exams are over. |
|
|
|
Post by Shadyy on Jun 15, 2004 10:53:41 GMT -5
You shouldn't mingle politics and religion to much. It's a very stupid thing that bishop said...and there is no way you can be sure of how a certain politician really is or what he thinks.
Meanwhile I don't think the abortion-issue should be decided by religion or politics, it has to do with the girl or woman...this should be a pure private decision of what she thinks is best...
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 15, 2004 11:05:36 GMT -5
Going by dictionary.com's definiton of religion, I don't have one, since I don't believe in a supreme being (don't get me started on why not, you'll become very angry and/or consider me a fool).
So, therefore, I obviously believe in the full seperation of church from any government-related subject (school, courts, Congressional hearings, etc.).
The one problem with the constitution is that it has a defect, in which religious leaders wish to exploit: the fact that it only says that Congress shall neither deny nor admit to the existence of any religion. Just Congress, not state or city leaders, or any of that.
When they removed those religious stones (the ten commandements, wasn't it?) from that school, so many people said stuff like, "Oh, you'll all go to hell! Don't remove the stones! Congress has no power in this!" Well, they're wrong. Since the schools are partially affected by Congress (bills that decide education standards and the like), technically Congress does have power.
But back to the political thing: that's what I see as a major flaw among religions: you disagree on one thing, and you're no longer with that religion. Just like what happend to the Communists and suspected Communists during the Red Scare. It's what's causing the wars in Ireland: minor differences among religions. If they'd all step back and look at the big picture, we're all human, we all share some beliefs and disagree on others, so we're really still the same.
With the "war" between Christians and Muslims, it's the same. They both believe in a supreme being (God, Allah), they both have a core set of principals (many of the ten commandments), so what's all this crap about?
I think one of the reasons I shunned all religion from my life is that I'm sick of all the crap that goes with it. To me, it's not worth it. Religion needs to stay where it belongs: in the minds of people and in the places of worship.#nosmileys
|
|
|
|
Post by Linnen Malfoy on Jun 15, 2004 13:18:10 GMT -5
We acutaly discussed that quote in my english class. However, it was not meant for voters alone, but it's a stab at Kerry. He is quite devoted to his religion, but belives in abortion.
Really, I think religion has come into play a lot in this adminstration and it's okay. I personaly don't like it because I think there is a place for religion, and a place for politics. When you put two of themost volitile ideas together it creates a whole mess of trouble.
Church and state have their own places, and mixing the two does't work because there are so many religions out there no onewill be happy.
Besides, the way that some people are devoted to their poltical party is almost like a religious follow. Some people are simply rabid (and it's frightening).
|
|
|
|
Post by Buddy on Jun 15, 2004 14:30:05 GMT -5
My views usually violently disagree with Buddy's on these sort of issues. But for some reason I'm violently agreeing here. This is probably due to the fact that I just spent about an hour ploughing through what felt like solid steel - my %$@!%^ almighty biased History textbook and the "as long as it's your religion" thing applies to me greatly right now. That thing is so biased the only thing they probably got right was the names and dates. And by golly it ticks me off when they write stuff that extolls the virtues of Islam and quietly undermines Christianity and other religions. I read the one measly page in the entire book they had on Christianity and they couldn't have gotten it less informative if they'd tried. And meanwhile here they are harping on for four or five chapters about how infinitely good Islam is and making me learn all the little details of what they did and who ruled them, blah blah blah. It's like they're trying to convert me - and very blatently at that. And the worst of it is that it's compulsory and playing a big role in my exam marks, which will in turn determine which college I get into. So will I or nil I, I HAVE to memorize and study the thing. At least they could have provided some answers to my homework in the midst of all that blather. I couldn't finish it because I could find nothing in the book and left half the answer places blank. I'm going to get in trouble. And despite how un-Christianlike it may be, I'm hoping the guy who made up this syllabus stays in jail (he was arrested and jailed for sodomy) for a very very long time. Wow, I'm in a bad temper. Anyway, the whole point of this rant is to say: It's stupid to try to make people do stuff by using religion. It just destroys the good name of that religion AND it's followers. Heck am I going to enjoy burning my close to useless History book when my exams are over. Well, I didn't want to bring up Maylaysia (forgive me, as I may have misspelt it) specifically, but yeah, now that you mention it, the whole thing with your history book is what came to mind first for me. That, as well as other things you've told me, are a prime example of what happens when you mix politics and religon together. Unfortunately, some people don't see that. Since a certain stance conforms with their religon and they're belief, they don't really care that it may not quite be what other people believe. They don't understand, or perhaps just don't care, that other people don't believe the same thing. They think that everyone should think the same way, since it's their way. And their way is always right. "There are two things you should never talk about with someone - religon and politics." I don't know who said that phrase, but I like it. Though it makes me wonder: if discussing politics or religon with someone is bad, what can come of combining them both into one? |
|
|
|
Post by enigmaticviolinist on Jun 15, 2004 14:36:59 GMT -5
Buddy, I totally agree about what you said about the distortion of religion. You know, there are many Chrisitians (esp. Afro-Americans in the Southern churches) that are so racially discriminative. They believe that the Caucasians (no offense) go to the "white churches" and the "black" people go to the "black churches" because that's what has been practiced over the years. It really hurts me to hear my distant relatives talk about how "black kids should have black friends" and that hurts me because the majority of my friends aren't "black". Yes, I'm a Christian, but it irks me whenever people believe that voting for a certain person just because they support something morally "wrong" will send you to Hell. The only thing separating the church and state ARE the church and state.
|
|
|
|
Post by resurrectedwarrior on Jun 15, 2004 14:40:50 GMT -5
I'm going to try to make this breif - not because I don't like to debate and argue  , but because I've got to get back to packing my room (We're moving in a week). Concerning ghost's thingy: Nope, but bishop can't really go around asking people what they voted on. And if he did, those people who voted for abortion probably wouldn't be stupid enough to tell him. But here's the thing - to many people, especially those who follow Jesus of Nazareth the Messiah, abortion is nothing more than legalized murder. I'm pretty sure this is the way that priesty-dude feels about it. If all the laws against murder suddenly went out in this country, wouldn't you do everything you could to get those protective laws back in place? The fewers politicians ellected who support abortion, the better the chances of getting a bill passed that would illegalize abortion. In other words - I support the guy's cause. I do, however, think there are better ways of accomplishing his goals. He should appeal to his congregation's hearts, not their fear of excommunication. Buddy's thing: Yes, but I remind you, you only have the rights that you do - to follow any religion (or lack thereof) because of Christianity. If the Founding Fathers had been athiest, I doubt any of us would have been this well-off. (And before you go off, that was not meant to be a slight on you. I doubt the USA would have been a democracy [which, when you get down to it, is seen in the early stages of Israel's history {in other words, it's from the Bible}] - probably would have ended up with a monarchy, and those can mean trouble.) But uhm . . . yeah - Crystal has given us a great example of what happens when religion in the government gets out-of-hand. I will remind the Americans watching this thread, though, there wasn't much (if any) persecution of minor religions when Christianity was the focal-point of American life and government. One may have been looked upon as being strange, and gosh, garley, they may have had to bow their heads during a prayer, but that sure ain't persecution. Strange looks are a normal occurance and one learns to live with them, and showing respect to another religion is not neccessarily awknowledging that religion as being supreme. Okies, I've gotta get back to packing. Oh the joy. |
|
|
|
Post by Buddy on Jun 15, 2004 15:09:39 GMT -5
Yes, but I remind you, you only have the rights that you do - to follow any religion (or lack thereof) because of Christianity. If the Founding Fathers had been athiest, I doubt any of us would have been this well-off. (And before you go off, that was not meant to be a slight on you. I doubt the USA would have been a democracy [which, when you get down to it, is seen in the early stages of Israel's history {in other words, it's from the Bible}] - probably would have ended up with a monarchy, and those can mean trouble.) Our founding fathers didn't decide on a democracy because it was the "Christian thing to do". They did it because they saw the effects of what happened when one group or person was given too much power. |
|
|
|
Post by Princess Ember Mononoke on Jun 15, 2004 15:43:10 GMT -5
For the last time, our founding fathers WEREN'T CHRISTIANS! They were part of the Christian church because it was the only accepted thing to be in those days, but they weren't by any means religious.
- Thomas Paine
-John Adams
-Thomas Jefferson
- James Madison
-Benjamin Franklin
And ever here of the Treaty of Tripoli? It was passed under the John Adams administration, and read in part "The government of the United States is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion." It went to the Senate, and was read aloud to them, and each member recieved a printed copy. This was the 339th time that a recorded vote was required by the Senate, but only the third time a vote was unanimous. The treaty passed with no changes to it.
And Democracy did NOT develop in early Israel. It is a recorded historical fact that it originated in Ancient Greece - PAGAN Greece.
|
|
|
|
Post by Buddy on Jun 15, 2004 16:18:10 GMT -5
For the last time, our founding fathers WEREN'T CHRISTIANS! They were part of the Christian church because it was the only accepted thing to be in those days, but they weren't by any means religious. - Thomas Paine -John Adams -Thomas Jefferson - James Madison -Benjamin Franklin And ever here of the Treaty of Tripoli? It was passed under the John Adams administration, and read in part "The government of the United States is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion." It went to the Senate, and was read aloud to them, and each member recieved a printed copy. This was the 339th time that a recorded vote was required by the Senate, but only the third time a vote was unanimous. The treaty passed with no changes to it. And Democracy did NOT develop in early Israel. It is a recorded historical fact that it originated in Ancient Greece - PAGAN Greece. Ember, I love you.... EDIT: Where did you get all those quotes from? I'd really like to know, in case someone tries to bring up that point again. |
|
|
|
Post by Princess Ember Mononoke on Jun 15, 2004 16:53:07 GMT -5
Ember, I love you.... EDIT: Where did you get all those quotes from? I'd really like to know, in case someone tries to bring up that point again. And... um... thanks, I guess. |
|
