Muslims promote Sharia law. Why do Christians not promote their law?

Secular. The other two are based on old Bronze or Iron age tribal myths and superstitions.We had the Age of Enlightenment (also called the Age of Reason).Why would we ever want to go backwards?Edited by Coyote, : speeling

That kind of personal liberty is something we've seen in the past -- everyone is free to believe what they want, so long as it agrees with what the Christian bosses believe.Thanks, but no thanks.It took the Reformation and Enlightenment to get rid of those overlords and to actually establish that "personal liberty" you refer to.We're not going back, and we're not going to fall for that sharia nonsense either.

Could you please specify in some detail what would be the nature of the "liberty" we would enjoy under the governance of you and your co-religionists?What would the general populace be forbidden to do?Commanded to do?Who would decide, and on what basis?

You haven't explained what you and your co-religionists would permit and not permit, nor what would be mandatory.Nor have you explained who would decide.Also, I want to know what your ideal theocracy would do about the Constitution, science, those who believe other than you folks do, and atheists.Would you be planning on using the power of the government to enforce your particular brand of religious belief?Give us some details. Your reference back 200 years doesn't answer the question. How do you plan to go forward?

My version of liberty--To begin with, it would be based on rationality, not superstition and old tribal myths.And it would involve leaving other people alone and expecting them to leave me alone. Just because you believe in rubbing blue mud in your naval on alternate Thursdays doesn't mean I have to do so, or that I have to respect that practice. And I will resist any attempts to make me do so.This discussion centers around ridding government of the ability to promote or coerce any and all religious beliefs. Once we get done with that topic we can discuss what manner of secular government we would prefer. That's a whole different thread.Edited by Coyote, : speeling

We are speaking of religious beliefs, not secular matters. But concerning religious beliefs and rationality, here is one opinion:

History does not record anywhere at any time a religion that has any rational basis. Religion is a crutch for people not strong enough to stand up to the unknown without help. But, like dandruff, most people do have a religion and spend time and money on it and seem to derive considerable pleasure from fiddling with it.

​

Robert A. Heinlein, Time Enough for Love

Blue laws.From Wiki:

Bergen County in New Jersey is notable for their blue laws banning the sale of clothing, shoes, furniture, home supplies and appliances on Sundays kept thru county-wide referendum. Paramus in New Jersey have their own blue laws even more strict than the county itself has banning any type of worldly employment on Sundays except necessity items such as food and gasoline.

​

In Texas, for example, blue laws prohibited selling housewares such as pots, pans, and washing machines on Sunday until 1985. In Colorado, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Louisiana, Maine, Minnesota, Missouri, Oklahoma, New Jersey, North Dakota, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin, car dealerships continue to operate under blue-law prohibitions in which an automobile may not be purchased or traded on a Sunday. Maryland permits Sunday automobile sales only in the counties of Prince George's, Montgomery, and Howard; similarly, Michigan restricts Sunday sales to only those counties with a population of less than 130,000. Texas and Utah prohibit car dealerships from operating over consecutive weekend days. In some cases these laws were created or retained with the support of those whom they affected, to allow them a day off each week without fear of their competitors still being open.

Any time a religious group gets to be near a majority they feel they can force their beliefs on everyone else.Look at the Texas schoolbook controversy, where creationists keep stacking the board that approves new texts so they can force their religious beliefs on everyone else.Also, in Kansas and some southern states the legislatures keep addressing teaching creationism in schools. Thankfully those bills are rarely passed any longer. But it took litigation to get the Dover School Board to stop promoting creationism in the school system.

A balance by what? By religion, of course! And if that's not promoting religion I don't know what is.And your comment about atheism in science is absurd. Science follows the evidence, and you folks, much to your regret, have been unable to provide any evidence. But not having any evidence doesn't stop you from trying to push your religious beliefs on everyone else. This is a good place to reference the Wedge Document of the Discovery Institute. They too want to push theism on us, and they write in that document, "Design theory promises to reverse the stifling dominance of the materialist worldview, and to replace it with a science consonant with Christian and theistic convictions."Note, this has nothing to do with evidence, but everything to do with forcing science to kowtow to their unevidenced religious beliefs. That this would destroy the scientific method doesn't seem to bother them.Face it, in spite of your denials there are a lot of folks attempting to push religion on the rest of us.And lest you restort to that "balance" nonsense, you should realize that "secularism" (which relies on evidence) is the norm, and unevidenced religious beliefs, myths, superstitions and old-wives-tales, of which there are tens of thousands of different versions, are the contrast.

The differences between various secular and religious governments are not the real focus of this thread.It is a given that there could be a wide range of variation in each, from extremely oppressive dictatorships or theocracies to benign examples of each. That's not the issue.The issue is the promotion of religious law vs. secular law.Many believers seem to feel that their particular religious beliefs should be followed by everyone else, and that these beliefs should be enforced by law. This is particularly true when members of a specific religion approach a majority of any population.See, for example, what is happening in Malasia:

Malaysia's Islamic party is pressing for more areas of law to be dealt with under an Islamic legal code, causing concerns among religious minorities, despite reassurances they would not be affected.

​

There are two Malaysias. One for the Muslim majority - the other for Christians, Hindus, Buddhists and non-Muslims.

​

For example, Malays do not have the freedom to choose their religion. It is written in the constitution that all ethnic Malays must, by definition, be Muslim.

​

More

​

Malaysia's minorities fear Islamic law changes - BBC News

Are you in favor of this kind of nonsense? Because this is what you get when you let religions start enforcing their beliefs using the power of the state.A pox on all your houses!

Looking through your post, this is the only point that seems to be within the topic. Your other points relate more to types of, and practices of, secular governments.I think your use of the term "atheist science classes" says a lot about your views, and informs about most of your posts.In reality, there is no such thing as an "atheist science class." There are only science classes. Science, as you clearly know, is based on evidence. If science finds evidence of deities or the "supernatural" it will follow that evidence. The problem for theists is that no such evidence has been found.But from the tone of your posts, you, like the Discovery Institute, would have science replaced by "design theory," as if that were actually a part of science: In other words, this group and a substantial number of similar-minded folks would destroy science in order to force it to kowtow to their unevidenced beliefs!This is what I oppose.Believe what you want, and rub blue mud into your navel on alternate Thursdays if that is what makes you happy, but don't try to force those beliefs on the rest of us.