Paul Harvey's view....

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
it would be a rather routine exercise to demonstrate that the Bible encourages
subjection to authority rather than a rebellious attitude towards it, for example,

(Romans 13:5) . . .There is therefore compelling reason for you people to be in
subjection, not only on account of that wrath but also on account of your
conscience. . .

(Philip ...[text shortened]... lity, but the inculcation of spiritual concepts and principles, mainly
Christian and biblical.

But you seem to be suggesting that the only source of discipline is a belief in the bible, or that athiest parents are somehow to blame whilst the christian parents are doing a great job.

All we need to teach children and adults is to have respect for themselves and other people, if you are claiming that is not possible without a belief in a supernatural being or a slave like subservience to our political masters, then I could not disagree more.

Paul Harvey has taken the symptoms of what is a complex problem and turned them into a blunt instrument with which to bludgeon secular society, whatever else the US got wrong it's commitment to a subjugation of the religious to the civil powers was spot on.

Egypt, Libya, and Syria are all very devout country's but it has not stopped them spiraling into chaos and inter communal violence, the fact is authority should and must be challenged and the fact that religion has historically aligned itself with authority in part explains why it has lost the hearts and minds of so many people.

Originally posted by kevcvs57
But you seem to be suggesting that the only source of discipline is a belief in the bible, or that athiest parents are somehow to blame whilst the christian parents are doing a great job.

All we need to teach children and adults is to have respect for themselves and other people, if you are claiming that is not possible without a belief in a supernatural itself with authority in part explains why it has lost the hearts and minds of so many people.

I have suggested nothing of the sort, what is this tabloid journalism? we are looking at factors which have led to a degradation of morality, my
assertion being that its due to a lack of spirituality. Atheist parents are equally capable of providing guidance to their children as Christian
parents, Christians simply have a reference, the teachings of Christ where atheists may make reference to some other criteria, unspecified. I
have not mentioned the supernatural, please stick to the script, your projecting values that I have not introduced and had no thought of
introducing. Clearly something is wrong when a teacher cannot teach due to the appalling behaviour of pupils or when you need a gun to go to
school. You keep making the mistake of attempting to make religion, devout or otherwise synonymous with spirituality, even Harvey recognised
and documented the differences in his video. Mostly religions are nothing short of a kind of hollow ritual and have very little sway in the
behaviour of an individual.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
I have suggested nothing of the sort, what is this tabloid journalism? we are looking at factors which have led to a degradation of morality, my
assertion being that its due to a lack of spirituality. Atheist parents are equally capable of providing guidance to their children as Christian
parents, Christians simply have a reference, the teachi ...[text shortened]... short of a kind of hollow ritual and have very little sway in the
behaviour of an individual.

'Spirituality' is such a vague word that you're going to have to to elaborate on what you mean when you use this term in this context.

Just to clarify for you, when you quote from a book that was allegedly inspired by a 'spirit' that exists beyond the physical boundaries of nature, that is the supernatural.

Originally posted by Proper Knob
'Spirituality' is such a vague word that you're going to have to to elaborate on what you mean when you use this term in this context.

Just to clarify for you, when you quote from a book that was allegedly inspired by a 'spirit' that exists beyond the physical boundaries of nature, that is the supernatural.

I think in this particular instance morality is a better definition of the ideas, for Harvey
clearly is talking of a degradation of morality. My assertion is that its due to a lack of
spirituality. What is spirituality? well it can mean in a very broad sense tackling
questions of personal identity and consciousness or more specifically it can also be an
attachment to religious values. In my opinion it differs from philosophical values in that it
endeavours to provide a specific way to act rather than merely attempt to understand the
problem and its constituent parts. On the whole, spirituality can mean different things to
different persons, those who look for it inside themselves through meditation and an
evaluation of the mind and by contrast those who recognise morality in places like
scripture. As a Christian, spirituality is cultivated through considering the example of
Christ and through the application of Biblical principles.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
I think in this particular instance morality is a better definition of the ideas, for Harvey
clearly is talking of a degradation of morality. My assertion is that its due to a lack of
spirituality. What is spirituality? well it can mean in a very broad sense tackling
questions of personal identity and consciousness or more specifically it can ...[text shortened]... through considering the example of
Christ and through the application of Biblical principles.

If you think there has been a degradation of moral values, at what point in our history (and by that i mean society on this little island) were societies morals at their highest?

Originally posted by Proper Knob
If you think there has been a degradation of moral values, at what point in our history (and by that i mean society on this little island) were societies morals at their highest?

Were Adam and Eve British? nah, only kidding, its hard to say. Clearly people are no more
moral or less moral than say in the sixties or even Victorian Times, what has changed is
acceptance of that morality or lack of.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
Were Adam and Eve British? nah, only kidding, its hard to say. Clearly people are no more
moral or less moral than say in the sixties or even Victorian Times, what has changed is
acceptance of that morality or lack of.

You claimed there has been a degeneration of society as a result of moral degradation due to a lack of 'spirituality'? If there has been a loss of these values that implies there was at some point in our history a time when these values were higher, yet you can't name such a period of history? Curious.

Originally posted by Proper Knob
You claimed there has been a degeneration of society as a result of moral degradation due to a lack of 'spirituality'? If there has been a loss of these values that implies there was at some point in our history a time when these values were higher, yet you can't name such a period of history? Curious.

yes i did, although upon further reflection, it appears to me that what has changed is
the acceptance of a lack of morality, due to a lack of spirituality. Clearly this is a
degradation.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
yes i did, although upon further reflection, it appears to me that what has changed is
the acceptance of a lack of morality, due to a lack of spirituality. Clearly this is a
degradation.

You've lost me here -

it appears to me that what has changed is the acceptance of a lack of morality

Can you explain that please?

Originally posted by Proper Knob
You've lost me here -

it appears to me that what has changed is the acceptance of a lack of morality

Can you explain that please?

Yes, lets say in Victorian times people were outwardly more sensitive to immorality (of
course it was a façade for the Victorians were equally is immoral as anyone else) and
to transgress this was deemed as scandalous, yet today such transgression is
perceived as normal. Take for example pornography, it would have been scandalous
for a newsagent in Victorian times to display a newspaper with a lady sprawling on the
cover sporting nothing more than two stars covering her nipples, today, no one cares,
its accepted.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
I have suggested nothing of the sort, what is this tabloid journalism? we are looking at factors which have led to a degradation of morality, my
assertion being that its due to a lack of spirituality. Atheist parents are equally capable of providing guidance to their children as Christian
parents, Christians simply have a reference, the teachi ...[text shortened]... short of a kind of hollow ritual and have very little sway in the
behaviour of an individual.

No we are talking about a supposed breakdown in order and mutual respect within US society, Paul Harvey is asserting that this is due to a decline in the influence of god based authority.

He bemoans the removal of god from areas such as education, the justice system and the white house, the video also has a bash at science as the replacement dogma which has presided over this decline.

You seem to feel the need to backpedal for him and introduce vague'r terms like spirituality, but that is not his issue.

It is an anti secularization rant and a call to reintroduce dogmatic religion into the heart of civil society, and it is based on the false premise that dogmatic religion could cure all these ills whereas anyone who has even glanced at history knows that organised religions do nothing of the sort, they simply act to support the status quo regardless of the objective value of that status quo.

Originally posted by kevcvs57
No we are talking about a supposed breakdown in order and mutual respect within US society, Paul Harvey is asserting that this is due to a decline in the influence of god based authority.

He bemoans the removal of god from areas such as education, the justice system and the white house, the video also has a bash at science as the replacement dogma which they simply act to support the status quo regardless of the objective value of that status quo.

clearly Paul Harvey is just as scathing against religious hypocrisy as he is other ills.
That he cites a decline of 'God based ', authority is you assertion, not his, although I
accept that it can be inferred from the monologue, but so what? You have still failed to
state why such a decline has taken place, and yourself rant about dogma and religion
without actually addressing why these issues are now acceptable.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
yet today such transgression is
perceived as normal

I would not be as gloomy.

Let's just take the example of schools, as you raised it. When I went to school, the following was true:

1) Corporal punishment was acceptable and a routine part of discipline.

2) Bullying was commonplace and went unchecked (sometimes teachers commented that kids 'just had to learn to deal with it' and that those that couldn't just needed to 'grow up and stop being wimps'😉

3) Homophobia and racism were similarly ignored and regularly engaged in by both students and some teachers.

I think all the above practices are immoral.

Today, as I vist the same type of schools to choose one for my son, corporal punishment has gone, there are structured campaigns against bullying, and any form of intolerance on the basis of colour, religious belief, sexual preference etc is expressly forbidden. None of this is set against a backdrop of a religious justification.

So, from my perspective, schools in many ways have become more 'moral' institutions overall over time, not less. Trangression of these basic moral values was therefore more 'normal' and accepted in the past than it is today.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
Yes, lets say in Victorian times people were outwardly more sensitive to immorality (of
course it was a façade for the Victorians were equally is immoral as anyone else) and
to transgress this was deemed as scandalous, yet today such transgression is
perceived as normal. Take for example pornography, it would have been scandalous
for a newsag ...[text shortened]... sporting nothing more than two stars covering her nipples, today, no one cares,
its accepted.

But on the good news front we do frown at pedophilia and child labour, whereas victorians tolerated both, based purely on the class system which in turn was sanctioned by the main organised religions of the day. At the same time many good works were done by individual christians and smaller scale christian organisations to alleviate and improve the lot of the poor.

However there was no golden age, there were times and places in victorian britain when citizens could not leave their houses for fear of gangs of youths roaming the streets intent on robbery and violence, sound familiar?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
Yes, lets say in Victorian times people were outwardly more sensitive to immorality (of
course it was a façade for the Victorians were equally is immoral as anyone else) and
to transgress this was deemed as scandalous, yet today such transgression is
perceived as normal. Take for example pornography, it would have been scandalous
for a newsag ...[text shortened]... sporting nothing more than two stars covering her nipples, today, no one cares,
its accepted.

I'm afraid you've lost me, and i think you may have gotten lost yourself. I don't know what you're trying to debate now Rob!?

If you think that tdoay's society has morally degenerated then you have to show when in the past it has degenerated from. You have yet to do that as far as i can see.