Originally posted by AmauroteSo if the country you reside in became a theocracy you would say the same? Would you say that it is nothing to get exited about?
Just to be clear here - is this nebulous proposal to make Chavez personally head of the church, or the President generally? If it's the latter, I don't think we need get too excited about Venezuela - they'd only be doing what Henry VIII did half a millennium ago.
2 edits
Originally posted by wedgehead2Sure he has done good things for his people, but then again, so did Hitler. Don't get me wrong, I am not attempting to equate Chavez with Hitler. I think that he is geniunly concerned about the plight of poverty stricken people in his country. However, I think there is a more desirable way of going about fixing the situation and a less desirable way of going about it. All I know is that power corrupts and Chavez seems to be adding to the states power in peoples lives when it comes not only to its economic power but also to its religious power over peoples lives. Such power can and will be abused whether it is at the hands of Chavez himself or his predecessors. I say that decentralizing power is the way to go. That way as such power is abused less people are effected. My ideal government would find ways to give people as many rights as possible without adversely effecting their fellow man. I think people have a better idea of what is best for them in their own lives and in the lives of those who live within their community than some pin headed dictator or politician in Washington. Unfortunatly, it appears that power has a way of consolodating to a smaller and smaller group of people over time until only one man seems to be running the show. That would be all well and good if one man would be capable of running the show, however, many have tried but all have failed.
Do you have any other "reliable" sources (😛) to back this claim up?
Also, he is a several times elected leader of his country- the majority of the venzuelan people must think that he's doing the right things.
1 edit
Originally posted by whodeyNo, absolutely not to both questions: what you're seeing here is Erastianism, not theocracy - England didn't become a theocracy when Henry VIII disappropriated the church and gave himself headship and power over benefices. If anything it became more secular. And in Henry's case, it was the Roman Catholic church that he attacked - Chavez isn't touching the Catholics, even if reports are true (I'm sure the Venezuelan government considers as many ridiculous proposals as our own do) this is just a minority sect.
So if the country you reside in became a theocracy you would say the same? Would you say that it is nothing to get exited about?
1 edit
Originally posted by AmauroteI think it is difficult exactly how to ascertain the direction of such actions. Exactly how much control is Chavez attempting to exhibit over the people is the real question and that is something we will not know about until it happens. What frightens me, however, are the possibilites of such influence. As far as I know the people of Venezuala have no laws to protect them against such advances and is what is the most troubling aspect of the whole situation. Its not like they have a constitution garaunteeing them the right to due process of law or right to property or the right to freedom of religion. Exaclty how much force is Big Brother willing to manipulate the people of Venezuala into doing what Big Brother thinks they should be doing I think is the question. Unfortunatly, we will not know until it happens.
No, absolutely not to both questions: what you're seeing here is Erastianism, not theocracy - England didn't become a theocracy when Henry VIII disappropriated the church and gave himself headship and power over benefices. If anything it became more secular. And in Henry's case, it was the Roman Catholic church that he attacked - Chavez isn't touching the C ernment considers as many ridiculous proposals as our own do) this is just a minority sect.
1 edit
Originally posted by whodeyBy Big Brother I assume you mean global capitalism. 😛
I think it is difficult exactly how to ascertain the direction of such actions. Exactly how much control is Chavez attempting to exhibit over the people is the real question and that is something we will not know about until it happens. What frightens me, however, are the possibilites of such influence. As far as I know the people of Venezuala have no laws ...[text shortened]... they should be doing I think is the question. Unfortunatly, we will not know until it happens.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitution_of_Venezuela#Text_and_guiding_doctrines
Originally posted by whodeyI can understand that kind of fear: much as I hate Pinochet and respect what Allende was trying to do in Chile, you have to say the latter was foolish to collude with extra-parliamentary nationalizations the way he did - not because it was immoral, but because it was premature, and bound to polarize the electorate and destabilize more pressing social reforms. Here I think Chavez is probably uninterested in any move anywhere near so ludicrous (mind, bear in mind Prince Phillip is revered as a god in certain places, so this is not as weird as it gets), because whether you love him or hate him you can't deny his popular touch - this story probably reflects less on him than it does the hysteria of his political opponents.
I think it is difficult exactly how to ascertain the direction of such actions. Exactly how much control is Chavez attempting to exhibit over the people is the real question and that is something we will not know about until it happens. What frightens me, however, are the possibilites of such influence. As far as I know the people of Venezuala have no laws ...[text shortened]... they should be doing I think is the question. Unfortunatly, we will not know until it happens.
Originally posted by whodeyYou are, as usual, grossly uninformed and ignorant of the matters you attempt to discuss. In fact, Venezuela has a constitution guaranteeing all the things mentioned + others like a right to health care. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitution_of_Venezuela#Text_and_guiding_doctrines
I think it is difficult exactly how to ascertain the direction of such actions. Exactly how much control is Chavez attempting to exhibit over the people is the real question and that is something we will not know about until it happens. What frightens me, however, are the possibilites of such influence. As far as I know the people of Venezuala have no laws ...[text shortened]... they should be doing I think is the question. Unfortunatly, we will not know until it happens.
Originally posted by no1marauderAnd a Merry Christmas to you as well. I have two points to make. The first is that the current constitution you provided shows that the people have a right to medical care. Did I ever bring up medical care? I believe I discussed such rights as due process of law as we have in the United States and the right to private property as we have in the United States and freedom of religious expression as we have in the United States and the seperation of church and state so that the government cannot endorse a particular religion as we have in the United States. I believe these were the issues I was discussing. Point two is the fact that Venezuala is undergoing a "revolution". So tell me, what typically occurs during a revolution? Do you think the laws and constitution in the United States would remain uneffected if we were to have a revolution? What would you think if you were told that the President of the United States would become an Archbishop?
You are, as usual, grossly uninformed and ignorant of the matters you attempt to discuss. In fact, Venezuela has a constitution guaranteeing all the things mentioned + others like a right to health care. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitution_of_Venezuela#Text_and_guiding_doctrines
He is a power hungry fool. I have a friend from there, who's brother still lives there. As a well-to-do businessman, live sucks there. If you own a large chuck of land, it will be taken from you, and be redistributed amoung the poor. So if you were poor who would you vote for? Is the majority of the populus poor? Yes. So, he gains a majority of the support. But, a majority is not really doing the right thing for the country? And all this is being done at the cost of the middle-class, which you should know will lead to worse poverty.
Originally posted by whodeyAn intentional error in news is called a lie.
Now to be fair, lets not be picking on Fox news. After all, CBS had mud on thier face with Dan Rather's blunders, no? I think any news agency should be suspect of error whether intentional or otherwise. Having said that, I can say I have heard from other news sources that Chavez is deeply religious and promotes the church in governmental programs. Can I t ...[text shortened]... rom people is that this probably is not true. Assuming it is true, however, what do you think?
You will never hear me say that every news source other than Fox is completely factual. I take most news with a grain of salt until it is verified. That said, Fox will report anything that is said to them. It could be some bum on the street and they will say "Sources close to (fill in name) have said..."
Originally posted by Dace AceMy heart bleeds for those unfortunate middle class Venuzualans.
He is a power hungry fool. I have a friend from there, who's brother still lives there. As a well-to-do businessman, live sucks there. If you own a large chuck of land, it will be taken from you, and be redistributed amoung the poor. So if you were poor who would you vote for? Is the majority of the populus poor? Yes. So, he gains a majority of the s ...[text shortened]... s being done at the cost of the middle-class, which you should know will lead to worse poverty.
Originally posted by RedmikeAs you know a soacialist government is just the slow spiral of death for a government. It remove drive or motivation to better oneself, and keeps most on the dole from the oppressive government. Or maybe you can show me a success story?
My heart bleeds for those unfortunate middle class Venuzualans.
Originally posted by whodeyI suggest you try actually reading my posts and the link provided. You are acting like a simpleton as usual.
And a Merry Christmas to you as well. I have two points to make. The first is that the current constitution you provided shows that the people have a right to medical care. Did I ever bring up medical care? I believe I discussed such rights as due process of law as we have in the United States and the right to private property as we have in the United Sta ...[text shortened]... you think if you were told that the President of the United States would become an Archbishop?