Originally posted by gaychessplayerGoogle is a wonderful thing.
I'm ignorant about what the "shariah" is, so I don't know if I'd be happy to live under that or not.
I WOULD be happy to live under the Roman Catholic interperation of God's standards (as I understand them).
Calvin sounds good to me...
vistesd is asking if you'd be happy living under a theocratic Muslim government. Would you? That's based on God's standards.
And if he does ammend the constitution, what does that mean for freedom of religion or even, dare I say it, freedom from religion?
Originally posted by gaychessplayerThe statement Huckabee made not only makes me believe he doesn't give two craps about the first amendment, it makes me wonder if he has even read it.
I care a lot about the first amendment and the democratic process, and I suspect that Mr. Huckabee does as well. Mr. Huckabee never suggested a circumvention of the poltical process in order to change the Constiution. He believes that the "standard" should be God. Everybody gets their standards from somewhere. The Declaration of Independence stat ...[text shortened]... hat God should set the standard. In some sense you seem to be arguing against yourself.
The declaration is not the constitution, nor is it a declaration of the law. The constitution specifically states that there should be no establishment of any religion. Changing the constitution to the standards of any definition of god would violate that clause.
Yes, the constitution is modifiable, but to modify it to establish god's law would be counter to that first amendment. Yes, we could modify it to change this great nation into a theocracy, but that would be against everyone's rights.
The establishment clause is there for a reason. That reason is to prevent the standards of any god from being forced upon our citizens.
You can't want the constitution to reflect god's law AND respect the first amendment's statement of the separation of church and state. The two things are opposites.
Originally posted by scottishinnzChristian nations (e.g. U.S.A. and Western Europe) tend to foster democracies and freedom, while Muslim nations do not. I'm opposed to ANY theocracy, but Christian values produce (relatively) just and prosperous societies. Atheistic communism produces oppression. Given a choice, I'll take the so-called Christian Right over the Muslim Right or Communist Left any time. (Not that those are the only options, thank God.)
Google is a wonderful thing.
vistesd is asking if you'd be happy living under a theocratic Muslim government. Would you? That's based on God's standards.
And if he does ammend the constitution, what does that mean for freedom of religion or even, dare I say it, freedom from religion?
Originally posted by gaychessplayerDo atheist communities tend towards communism? There are plenty of liberals who would not advocate communism, especially for countries as large as the (former) USSR and China. (although personally I don't see why it wouldn't work in smaller communites).
Christian nations (e.g. U.S.A. and Western Europe) tend to foster democracies and freedom, while Muslim nations do not. I'm opposed to ANY theocracy, but Christian values produce (relatively) just and prosperous societies. Atheistic communism produces oppression. Given a choice, I'll take the so-called Christian Right over the Muslim Right or Communist Left any time. (Not that those are the only options, thank God.)
Britain, although founded based on christian beliefs, is pretty much a secular society nowadays. Not that people aren't religious in private but very few people attend churches and Britain is such a melting pot for different cultures that religion isn't really an issue anymore, apart from the odd deranged suicide bomber. I would say the UK is more atheist than people think, and I doubt we'll be giving up democracy anytime soon.
Originally posted by gaychessplayerChristian values? Just? Don't make me laugh.
Christian nations (e.g. U.S.A. and Western Europe) tend to foster democracies and freedom, while Muslim nations do not. I'm opposed to ANY theocracy, but Christian values produce (relatively) just and prosperous societies. Atheistic communism produces oppression. Given a choice, I'll take the so-called Christian Right over the Muslim Right or Communist Left any time. (Not that those are the only options, thank God.)
2000 years of repression of women and just about every minority group you can think of. Attempts to subvert scientific endeavour, if it doesn't tally with your fairy tale.
As for the communist comment, who can tell? It hasn't happened on this planet yet.
Originally posted by FeastboyI believe what he's referring to is the fact that Stalin, for example, was an atheist. Oddly enough, it was only after attending seminary school that he became one.
Do atheist communities tend towards communism? There are plenty of liberals who would not advocate communism, especially for countries as large as the (former) USSR and China. (although personally I don't see why it wouldn't work in smaller communites).
Stalin didn't become evil when he became an atheist.
Hitler wasn't evil because he was an atheist.
When christians do evil things, many christians just say "well, they weren't real christians" as if they somehow don't count.
I am NOT saying christianity makes someone evil either. I am saying that someone's belief in god isn't on its own a determining factor as to their ethics.
Originally posted by scottishinnzUnlike great "secular philosophers" like Plato and Aristotle, Jesus Christ recognized women as fully equal to men. Plato and Aristotle thought that women were virtually sub-human.
Christian values? Just? Don't make me laugh.
2000 years of repression of women and just about every minority group you can think of. Attempts to subvert scientific endeavour, if it doesn't tally with your fairy tale.
As for the communist comment, who can tell? It hasn't happened on this planet yet.
Originally posted by scottishinnzProbably the greatest civil-rights leader of all time was the REVERAND Martin Luther King, Jr. His Christian values at least in part propelled his zeal for racial equality and harmony.
Christian values? Just? Don't make me laugh.
2000 years of repression of women and just about every minority group you can think of...
Originally posted by PsychoPawnI completely agree. There are many evil Christians and many morally exemplery(sic?) atheists.
When christians do evil things, many christians just say "well, they weren't [b]real christians" as if they somehow don't count.
I am NOT saying christianity makes someone evil either. I am saying that someone's belief in god isn't on its own a determining factor as to their ethics.[/b]
However, a Christian qua Christian can be ethically inconsistent, while an atheist qua atheist cannot be ethically inconsistent.
Originally posted by gaychessplayerThe USA is not a Christian nation.
Christian nations (e.g. U.S.A. and Western Europe) tend to foster democracies and freedom, while Muslim nations do not. I'm opposed to ANY theocracy, but Christian values produce (relatively) just and prosperous societies. Atheistic communism produces oppression. Given a choice, I'll take the so-called Christian Right over the Muslim Right or Communist Left any time. (Not that those are the only options, thank God.)
1 edit
Originally posted by PsychoPawnIn logic, that's known as the No True Scotsman fallacy (or in this case, No True Christian).
I believe what he's referring to is the fact that Stalin, for example, was an atheist. Oddly enough, it was only after attending seminary school that he became one.
Stalin didn't become evil when he became an atheist.
Hitler wasn't evil because he was an atheist.
When christians do evil things, many christians just say "well, they weren't r that someone's belief in god isn't on its own a determining factor as to their ethics.
Originally posted by gaychessplayerAnd yet, for 2000 years women have been regarded as the property of men by Christianity, and not allowed to hold church office, for the longest time were allowed no status in society, except that afforded by their menfolk.
Unlike great "secular philosophers" like Plato and Aristotle, Jesus Christ recognized women as fully equal to men. Plato and Aristotle thought that women were virtually sub-human.
And, hey, with a handle like yours, don't you get a little sick being told you are an abomination who's going to spend an eternity in hell. Because that's were YOU'RE going, my friend, make no mistake. Or maybe you like being stoned to death?