|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: do Christians want their values enforced on everyone by law? | |||||||||||||||||||
arachnophilia Member (Idle past 1374 days) Posts: 9069 From: god's waiting room Joined: |
the unfortunate thing about democracy is that if the majority of the people want a theocracy, we have one.
|
|||||||||||||||||||
arachnophilia Member (Idle past 1374 days) Posts: 9069 From: god's waiting room Joined: |
Arach writes: the unfortunate thing about democracy is that if the majority of the people want a theocracy, we have one. LOL. When then does the alleged theocracy get the Bible back in government schools as it was for over a century before the secularists took over? i believe my original statement answered that question: when there is a majority of people who want that.
|
|||||||||||||||||||
arachnophilia Member (Idle past 1374 days) Posts: 9069 From: god's waiting room Joined: |
There never was a theocracy in America, even when church was in government and never can be under the Constitution. that statement does not parse.
That secularist legislators and judge appointees eventually imposed laws forbidding Christian literature, et al in public school cirriculum upon the minority proved that. i think your chronology is mixed up. there had been separation of church and state for a long time before there were public schools. the first real public schools popped up around 1840, and there wasn't even federal regulation until 1980. further, your point is still incredibly wrong. as just about anyone who has been to high school will tell you, there is indeed christian literature on the reading list. just like there is hindu, babylonian, native american, and a myriad other cultures represented. many students read dante's inferno, milton's paradise lost, and even genesis. really. we might even be able to count the the canterbury tales in there, too. the difference is that it's not taught as fact, it's taught as literature. students are left free to believe whatever they wish, and there is certainly no prohibition on christianity. ask any high school prayer group.
That we, the minority campaign for and support implimentation of Biblical values poses no threat. that you wish to force others to comply with your religious beliefs does. just as if muslims wished force your wives you wear veils, it would pose a threat to your beliefs. imposing neutrality is not a threat. imposing bias is. neutrality is not bias. by definition. i really wish the fundamentalist types would just get this simple point through their heads.
If government got too religious for the wishes of the people in a democratic republic all the people need do is rally support for and get the desired change. we shall see tuesday. Edited by arachnophilia, : typo
|
|||||||||||||||||||
arachnophilia Member (Idle past 1374 days) Posts: 9069 From: god's waiting room Joined: |
how many times must this be brought up here?
jefferson went to church a few times, yeah. but he was a deist, not a christian. if you were to actually look for quotes from him, you'd find that he actually had quite a strong distaste for christianity. to try to make any point otherwise is taking something out of context; quote-mining in extreme. Edited by arachnophilia, : typo
|
|||||||||||||||||||
arachnophilia Member (Idle past 1374 days) Posts: 9069 From: god's waiting room Joined: |
What privileges are forbidden you? buzsaw is forbidden the privelege of enforcing his religion.
|
|||||||||||||||||||
arachnophilia Member (Idle past 1374 days) Posts: 9069 From: god's waiting room Joined: |
You people are posting some unreasonable strawmen and I'm not going to needlessly sit here and address it all. clearly, since you aren't addressing this point to a real argument, those must not be strawmen. my point, which you ignored, is that christian literature is indeed taught in schools, and prayer groups are in fact allowed. since this is simply a point of fact, clearly what you are being forbidden is more than simply allowing christians to function as any other group within the public school system. if this is all you are clamoring for, then you are simply under a false impression, and in the process giving everyone else here a false impression of what you're asking for.
My point is the OP and thread title implication that Christians are imposing religion and that theocratic government is threatened upon the nation is false in that Christians perse do not impose laws. i agree, our lawmakers are not good examples of christians. however, they do claim to be christians (all of them, btw, or pretty close to all of them), and the current party in power in all three branches of government strongly plays to (and manipulates) white, christian america. these are christians making laws for christian voters.
We, like secularists, gays, et al all work to elect lawmakers who make the laws most desireable to us. "secularists" is not an organized group. neither is "gays." and secularism does not impose itself on religion; it is saying that the government should not be a religious organization. this allows every religion to operate as it so wishes. neutrality is the opposite of bias, buz. it's not just another bias. having a secular government is not the same as having a government that outlaws religions. but legislating any one religion is like confining all the others by law. and what you are essentially arguing for here, by bringing up "secularists," is that religion should be in government. that is the natural implication of your sentiment. by saying that you are not a member of the group defined by the belief in separation of church and state, you are saying that you do not believe church and state should be separated.
|
|||||||||||||||||||
arachnophilia Member (Idle past 1374 days) Posts: 9069 From: god's waiting room Joined: |
According to the site that he linked, the Capitol building itself was used as a church, for non-denominational services, which Jefferson himself attended. public schools (which are governmental buildings) are regularly used by church groups to this very day. that's the nature of a building for the people. it can be used for anything the people wish to use it for. it does not mean the government is associated with every practice committed within the walls of said building. and when i vote on tuesday, i'm doing so at a church. chances are there are many other people here doing the same.
|
|||||||||||||||||||
arachnophilia Member (Idle past 1374 days) Posts: 9069 From: god's waiting room Joined: |
Neither is Christianity. no, secularism allows for christianity. and every other religion. that's the idea of separation of church and state, to protect the church. not the state.
I don't believe I said secularism imposes itself on religion. I said secularists work towards their interests as do Christians to have imposed laws they support passed by government. your language implies two mutually exclusive groups working towards opposite ends. as a christian, i want to keep religion out of government. is that so hard to understand? the fact that my faith is my decision is something i hold very dear for both religious reasons AND political ones.
|
|||||||||||||||||||
arachnophilia Member (Idle past 1374 days) Posts: 9069 From: god's waiting room Joined: |
Well then, my friend, don't complain when we Christians get our preachers preaching at regular church services in Congress and use the military bands to do the music. congress is no longer an open and public building, that serves that function. and i would be honestly surprised if military bands didn't play christmas carols.
Urge your congressman to throw in some $$ as well to pay the preacher and buy choir robes. it's called "tax exemption."
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024