government and religion

[DVK916]

Originally posted by: CSMR

Originally posted by: DVK916
No they should not have a right to coerce someone into attending a religious service.

If anything the government needs to ban the teaching of religion to young children. Their minds are highly impressionable and filling it with religion is only leading to the spread of what has become humanity greatest hindrance ( religion).

If you know what hinders and what helps mankind then you have quite a worked out religion yourself. Not a good one though, because if it is true then knowing it is apparently a hinderance.

Religions involve sky fairy worship. I have no religion. I am an atheist..

 

[1prophet]

I just watched The power of nightmares and in it I saw how politicians used the religious movement in america, with the help of the religious leaders, to obtain power and it ended up corrupting both religion and government.

 

[engineereeyore]

Actually, according to dictionary.com, this is a good definition for religion.

"A cause, principle, or activity pursued with zeal or conscientious devotion."

I see nothing in there about a sky fairy, or the worship of such a being.

As for the actual topic of the thread, I agree with most everyone here. No, neither a judge nor any other political/legal figure should be able to coerse an individual into any form of religious activity for any reason. I also agree that any such individual should be removed from office and never allowed to hold any such office again.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

For the idiots in this thread, evangeliticals would LIKE to see you there, however they don't want your ass dragged in and never have. It has to be your CHOICE. You can be presented with an opportunity, but it is fundimentally impossible for you to be forced to faith. The individual needs to make that choice. It cannot be done corporately.

Find a different terrorist under the bed please.

 

[CSMR]

Originally posted by: DVK916

Originally posted by: CSMR

Originally posted by: DVK916
No they should not have a right to coerce someone into attending a religious service.

If anything the government needs to ban the teaching of religion to young children. Their minds are highly impressionable and filling it with religion is only leading to the spread of what has become humanity greatest hindrance ( religion).

If you know what hinders and what helps mankind then you have quite a worked out religion yourself. Not a good one though, because if it is true then knowing it is apparently a hinderance.

Religions involve sky fairy worship. I have no religion. I am an atheist..

I don't know if you are looking to be insulted, but I would prefer to argue instead.
You believe in an ultimate principle by which you can dinstinguish what is helpful and what hinders humanity and what therefore people need to do. If you call this God you immediately become a theist it seems. So because you choose not to use this word, and so for no substantial reason, you call yourself an atheist and therefore unreligious. (You associate atheism with having no religion evidently.) Then the religious/unreligious distinction is pretty useless because it refers only to a view of semantics.

 

[JEDIYoda]

Originally posted by: JacobJ

Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy
Care to elaborate on that?

No. I think this question is more appropiately addressed in the abstract.

quote:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by: JEDIYoda
whats the underlying reason you are asking?

There is nothing wrong with somebody from government being an example and attending church for what its worth...

Your question sounds silly to me!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

THis is about using government power to coerce someone into going to church...(and yes it happens, and yes it very recently has happened)


ACTUALLY IF THIS IS A QUESTION BEST LEFT IN THE ABSTRACT THEN WE CAN ASSUME YOU HAVE NO PROOF TO BACK UP THIS THREAD?

IN WHICH CASE MAKES THIS THREAD EVEN SILLIER.......

 

[DVK916]

Originally posted by: CSMR

Originally posted by: DVK916

Originally posted by: CSMR

Originally posted by: DVK916
No they should not have a right to coerce someone into attending a religious service.

If anything the government needs to ban the teaching of religion to young children. Their minds are highly impressionable and filling it with religion is only leading to the spread of what has become humanity greatest hindrance ( religion).

If you know what hinders and what helps mankind then you have quite a worked out religion yourself. Not a good one though, because if it is true then knowing it is apparently a hinderance.

Religions involve sky fairy worship. I have no religion. I am an atheist..

I don't know if you are looking to be insulted, but I would prefer to argue instead.
You believe in an ultimate principle by which you can dinstinguish what is helpful and what hinders humanity and what therefore people need to do. If you call this God you immediately become a theist it seems. So because you choose not to use this word, and so for no substantial reason, you call yourself an atheist and therefore unreligious. (You associate atheism with having no religion evidently.) Then the religious/unreligious distinction is pretty useless because it refers only to a view of semantics.

I disagree, a religion requires the beliefs in some deity which can't be proven to exist, a sky fairy if you will. In Christianity this sky fairy is Yahweh, in Islam it is Allah. I have no such beliefs.

My beliefs that religion has been a hindrance on society is a factual one that can be proven. It is not some beliefs with no basis like those of Christianity, Islam, and other religions.

 

[CSMR]

Cut out the "sky fairy" stupidity. How do you know who believes in a "deity" and who does not? What does it mean to believe in a "deity".

 

[DVK916]

Originally posted by: CSMR
Cut out the "sky fairy" stupidity. How do you know who believes in a "deity" and who does not? What does it mean to believe in a "deity".

When they worship some being with no proof for his exsistance.


Are you a christian?

 

[CSMR]

Originally posted by: DVK916

Originally posted by: CSMR
Cut out the "sky fairy" stupidity. How do you know who believes in a "deity" and who does not? What does it mean to believe in a "deity".

When they worship some being with no proof for his exsistance.

Are you a christian?

And when you hold that some things are helful and some things are harmful, is this notion of goodness a "being" and does it "exist" and do you "worship" it? If not, why not?

I am a Christian, but I don't know that I worship any beings, certainly not beings that exist. If I say I worship God, I mean that I believe in God, by which I mean that I believe in an absolute notion of good which stands above the world. As you do it seems when you claim to know what is harmful and what is not. If there is no good there cannot be any helping and any harming.

 

[Dissipate]

The government is a religion. Anyone who thinks otherwise is probably knee deep in this religion.

 

[JacobJ]

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider
For the idiots in this thread, evangeliticals would LIKE to see you there, however they don't want your ass dragged in and never have. It has to be your CHOICE. You can be presented with an opportunity, but it is fundimentally impossible for you to be forced to faith. The individual needs to make that choice. It cannot be done corporately.

Find a different terrorist under the bed please.

I was referring to coercion, which is significantly different than force.

 

[JacobJ]

Originally posted by: JEDIYoda

Originally posted by: JacobJ

Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy
Care to elaborate on that?

No. I think this question is more appropiately addressed in the abstract.

quote:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by: JEDIYoda
whats the underlying reason you are asking?

There is nothing wrong with somebody from government being an example and attending church for what its worth...

Your question sounds silly to me!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

THis is about using government power to coerce someone into going to church...(and yes it happens, and yes it very recently has happened)


ACTUALLY IF THIS IS A QUESTION BEST LEFT IN THE ABSTRACT THEN WE CAN ASSUME YOU HAVE NO PROOF TO BACK UP THIS THREAD?

IN WHICH CASE MAKES THIS THREAD EVEN SILLIER.......

This is a question of philosophy and ethics. If don't believe the the question is based on any feasible sort of reality, then please explain why.

 

[shellofinsanity]

Originally posted by: DVK916
No they should not have a right to coerce someone into attending a religious service.

If anything the government needs to ban the teaching of religion to young children. Their minds are highly impressionable and filling it with religion is only leading to the spread of what has become humanity greatest hindrance ( religion).

I have to disagree, I have attented church sense I was a baby, and am now studing to go into the ministry myself. Realigion is not a hinderance to man, but a guideline for which to live. The morals as humans we belive in are from the bible, and this can not be disproven. Thou shall not commit murder, thou shall not commit adultry, respect thy father and mother, ect. These are the core belifes of this and many other countries. Imagine if you will a world with no realigion ever being taught, were the idea do what feels good is taught. Under this morale idea, if I wanted to kill someone, I could because it felt good. No realigion has it place in our society, even the founding fathers said this. Look at many of the ideas expressed in the constition, they are freedomes the bible says we have. We have freedom to do what we want, because God gave that to us, its called free will and was his design. You can be a man of good morale chacter and enver attened church, but did your parents, or grandparents. The way you are rasied and what you are taught belive it or not, is realigion based. I do not say all must follow what I belive, but you must also understand that in the western part of the world at least Christianty is the reson our laws are written they way they are, and why the morals are diffrent than they are in other nations.

 

[Legend]

Originally posted by: shellofinsanity

Originally posted by: DVK916
No they should not have a right to coerce someone into attending a religious service.

If anything the government needs to ban the teaching of religion to young children. Their minds are highly impressionable and filling it with religion is only leading to the spread of what has become humanity greatest hindrance ( religion).

I have to disagree, I have attented church sense I was a baby, and am now studing to go into the ministry myself. Realigion is not a hinderance to man, but a guideline for which to live. The morals as humans we belive in are from the bible, and this can not be disproven. Thou shall not commit murder, thou shall not commit adultry, respect thy father and mother, ect. These are the core belifes of this and many other countries. Imagine if you will a world with no realigion ever being taught, were the idea do what feels good is taught. Under this morale idea, if I wanted to kill someone, I could because it felt good. No realigion has it place in our society, even the founding fathers said this. Look at many of the ideas expressed in the constition, they are freedomes the bible says we have. We have freedom to do what we want, because God gave that to us, its called free will and was his design. You can be a man of good morale chacter and enver attened church, but did your parents, or grandparents. The way you are rasied and what you are taught belive it or not, is realigion based. I do not say all must follow what I belive, but you must also understand that in the western part of the world at least Christianty is the reson our laws are written they way they are, and why the morals are diffrent than they are in other nations.

Fatal Fallacy: You assume that morals cannot be taught without religion.

Not that religion doesn't work for some people...just you seem to think no religion = feel good immoral lifestyle.

Also, our laws are not based on christianity, at all. American law was founded on Enlightenment liberalism, and based on English common law. English common law has it's roots in Anglo-Saxons (pagan), and Roman law (Greek Polytheism).


And I hope that you personally don't hold back an urge to kill based on fear.

"I have gained this by philosophy: that I do without being commanded what others do only from fear of the law."
--Aristole

 

[shellofinsanity]

It is possible I don't disagree, but you also have to realize that every morale we are taught is biblical and was learned from our parents who learned it from theres. At some point the morale was learned from the bible or a pastor, or some other realigious teacher and has simply been passed down. A belife in noting does not give you a reason to be morale, man is evil by nature and saying that man can be good because he wants to is a contradiction. You must first be taught the morales from somewhere and seeing how 100 years ago everyone went to church, and by the fact that 90% of Americans claim to be Christian and 60% attened church at least once a month, while nearly 95% will attentend for christmas, you can not deny that morality is indeed learned from realgion.

 

[Legend]

Originally posted by: shellofinsanity
It is possible I don't disagree, but you also have to realize that every morale we are taught is biblical and was learned from our parents who learned it from theres. At some point the morale was learned from the bible or a pastor, or some other realigious teacher and has simply been passed down. A belife in noting does not give you a reason to be morale, man is evil by nature and saying that man can be good because he wants to is a contradiction. You must first be taught the morales from somewhere and seeing how 100 years ago everyone went to church, and by the fact that 90% of Americans claim to be Christian and 60% attened church at least once a month, while nearly 95% will attentend for christmas, you can not deny that morality is indeed learned from realgion.

lol, you can't be serious.

 

[Legend]

Again, I'll say:


"Also, our laws are not based on christianity, at all. American law was founded on Enlightenment liberalism, and based on English common law. English common law has it's roots in Anglo-Saxons (pagan), and Roman law (Greek Polytheism)."


Pick up a history book.

 

[shellofinsanity]

I am serious actully, I am a study of history also, its a hobby, and if you want to know ask your mother where she learned the morales she taught you, and where the person who taught her got them from. It all leads back to realigion

 

[JacobJ]

Originally posted by: shellofinsanity
It is possible I don't disagree, but you also have to realize that every morale we are taught is biblical and was learned from our parents who learned it from theres. At some point the morale was learned from the bible or a pastor, or some other realigious teacher and has simply been passed down. A belife in noting does not give you a reason to be morale, man is evil by nature and saying that man can be good because he wants to is a contradiction. You must first be taught the morales from somewhere and seeing how 100 years ago everyone went to church, and by the fact that 90% of Americans claim to be Christian and 60% attened church at least once a month, while nearly 95% will attentend for christmas, you can not deny that morality is indeed learned from realgion.

100 years ago everyone went to church

factually not true.

90% of Americans claim to be Christian

factually not true.

A belife in noting does not give you a reason to be morale.

No one ever mentioned believing in nothing. In fact, it is not humanly possible to have no beliefs. The presumptions in this statement are simply not true.

Do you think it is OK for the government to coerce a person into attending a religious service?

 

[shellofinsanity]

Yes I do actully. And those statics I quoted are true quotes taken by the Assembly's of God.

 

[Legend]

Originally posted by: shellofinsanity
I am serious actully, I am a study of history also, its a hobby, and if you want to know ask your mother where she learned the morales she taught you, and where the person who taught her got them from. It all leads back to realigion

You're a fundamentalist.

I trust history, you know, facts over old wives tales and game of telephone 2000 years in the making.

You think that everyone was living immorally until Christianity set things right. Sorry, that's not what really happened. Rome, China, Greeks, Egyptians, Persians, Indians, etc all had strong law systems before Christianity existed.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_law
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_law
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_law

Read

 

[Legend]

The Bible also isn't a glorious moral book you make it out to be either.

Originally posted by: Exodus: 21
20 When a man strikes his slave, male or female, with a rod and the slave dies under his hand, he shall be punished. 21 But if the slave survives a day or two, he is not to be punished; for the slave is his money.

Any true word of God would speak out against such atrocities.

 

[JEDIYoda]

Originally posted by: JacobJ

Originally posted by: JEDIYoda

Originally posted by: JacobJ

Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy
Care to elaborate on that?

No. I think this question is more appropiately addressed in the abstract.

quote:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by: JEDIYoda
whats the underlying reason you are asking?

There is nothing wrong with somebody from government being an example and attending church for what its worth...

Your question sounds silly to me!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

THis is about using government power to coerce someone into going to church...(and yes it happens, and yes it very recently has happened)


ACTUALLY IF THIS IS A QUESTION BEST LEFT IN THE ABSTRACT THEN WE CAN ASSUME YOU HAVE NO PROOF TO BACK UP THIS THREAD?

IN WHICH CASE MAKES THIS THREAD EVEN SILLIER.......

This is a question of philosophy and ethics. If don't believe the the question is based on any feasible sort of reality, then please explain why.

Again....its a non question as far as I am concerned or its a question poised by somebody who is doing a paper of soemkind and looking for the good folks in these forums to do the paper for him...copy and pasting is not using your own words..

Again this is a very silly thread...

 

[boggsie]

90% of Americans claim to be Christian

factually not true.

closer to 80% according to some research.