Political Crossfire Forums

[Saf]

Why does the "religious right" in America (and similar institutions in other countries) attempt to put their religious beliefs into law? This sounds like judging other human beings where it is only God's business to do so. If abortion and homosexuality are wrong, won't God punish those who sin in the afterlife? It seems that it would be wiser to put the energy that goes into Christian politics into praying for the souls of those who (arguably) sin through abortion, premarital sex, contraception, homosexuality, &tc. Why do Christian politicians think it is their right to put God's law into man's law? I think that this is demeaning to God's law. It suggests that man is a better arbiter of the law than God. Religion and politics should stay totally separated.

[eynon]

Saf wrote: Why does the "religious right" in America (and similar institutions in other countries) attempt to put their religious beliefs into law? This sounds like judging other human beings where it is only God's business to do so. If abortion and homosexuality are wrong, won't God punish those who sin in the afterlife? It seems that it would be wiser to put the energy that goes into Christian politics into praying for the souls of those who (arguably) sin through abortion, premarital sex, contraception, homosexuality, &tc. Why do Christian politicians think it is their right to put God's law into man's law? I think that this is demeaning to God's law. It suggests that man is a better arbiter of the law than God. Religion and politics should stay totally separated.

em.....ok, I kinda see you're point, but here's a question for you, why do you believe the way you do in terms of political issues(I mean really boil it down)?

[eynon]

soldierofchrist wrote: Saf wrote: Why does the "religious right" in America (and similar institutions in other countries) attempt to put their religious beliefs into law? This sounds like judging other human beings where it is only God's business to do so. If abortion and homosexuality are wrong, won't God punish those who sin in the afterlife? It seems that it would be wiser to put the energy that goes into Christian politics into praying for the souls of those who (arguably) sin through abortion, premarital sex, contraception, homosexuality, &tc. Why do Christian politicians think it is their right to put God's law into man's law? I think that this is demeaning to God's law. It suggests that man is a better arbiter of the law than God. Religion and politics should stay totally separated.
That my dear friend, is quite impossible. Religion and politics are so interwoven that they could never be separated. However, I do agree that is wrong to force people to abide by your own chosen set of dogma.

agreed......democracy is all about putting up with stuff....or maybe I should say tolerating stuff....

[joe christian]

Saf wrote: Why does the "religious right" in America (and similar institutions in other countries) attempt to put their religious beliefs into law?
Judeo-Christians and Muslims are commanded by God to live under, and according to, God's Law. Since they are religiously right they also have the right to be politically right and to oppose and resist the secular legislation of the left.

Quote: This sounds like judging other human beings where it is only God's business to do so.
God made it our business also by giving us His laws to live under.

Quote: If abortion and homosexuality are wrong, won't God punish those who sin in the afterlife?
Yes, but He also punishes Judeo-Christians and Muslims in this life who fail to chastize and punish those who perpetually sin and cause death in their midst. Sin is the breaking of God's Law, you know, and those who advocate homosexual and abortion rights are sinning.

Quote: It seems that it would be wiser to put the energy that goes into Christian politics into praying for the souls of those who (arguably) sin through abortion, premarital sex, contraception, homosexuality, &tc.
Prayer and political action work hand in hand.

Quote: Why do Christian politicians think it is their right to put God's law into man's law?
Rather ask why evil men create laws making God's laws null, void and of no account?

Quote: I think that this is demeaning to God's law. It suggests that man is a better arbiter of the law than God.
I think you have it backwards since those who would arbitrarily invent their own secular laws demean the laws of God.

Quote: Religion and politics should stay totally separated.
Politics without religion has no moral philosophy to base its agenda on which satisifies man's need to have an infallible Supreme Being or Ultimate Authority rule over them in terms of social justice though. Secularists make poor judges of humanity.

[joe christian]

soldierofchrist wrote: Saf wrote: Why does the "religious right" in America (and similar institutions in other countries) attempt to put their religious beliefs into law? This sounds like judging other human beings where it is only God's business to do so. If abortion and homosexuality are wrong, won't God punish those who sin in the afterlife? It seems that it would be wiser to put the energy that goes into Christian politics into praying for the souls of those who (arguably) sin through abortion, premarital sex, contraception, homosexuality, &tc. Why do Christian politicians think it is their right to put God's law into man's law? I think that this is demeaning to God's law. It suggests that man is a better arbiter of the law than God. Religion and politics should stay totally separated.
That my dear friend, is quite impossible. Religion and politics are so interwoven that they could never be separated.
One might even say that all politics are a form of civil religion since one has to put one's faith, trust and belief in those we elect to rule over us.

Quote: However, I do agree that is wrong to force people to abide by your own chosen set of dogma.
The sword is given to the civil government for the sole purpose of enforcing political dogma. If force was not necessary to uphold the policies of a civil government, we would not need police or armed forces.

Ultimately, all social groups seek political power in order to establish and defend their chosen way of life and dogma, whether that dogma is religious, socialist, psychological, philosophical, scientific or secular.

[joe christian]

soldierofchrist wrote: joe christian wrote: God made it our business also by giving us His laws to live under.
Quote: Mat 7:1 Judge not, that ye be not judged.
Mat 7:2 For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.
Mat 7:3 And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?
Mat 7:4 Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me pull out the mote out of thine eye; and, behold, a beam [is] in thine own eye?
Mat 7:5 Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye.
Seems to me God intended for the judgement business to be solely His, but continue judging at your own risk...
If God doesn't want Judeo-Christians and Muslims to judge in civil matters, why did He give us His Laws which command us to obey and adminster them?

Seems to me that the secularists are the ones in danger of His Judgment for discarding His Law and that Judeo-Christians will be severely chastized for disregarding and casting it off also.

[Gryff1nd0r]

joe christian wrote: Saf wrote: Why does the "religious right" in America (and similar institutions in other countries) attempt to put their religious beliefs into law?
Judeo-Christians and Muslims are commanded by God to live under, and according to, God's Law. Since they are religiously right they also have the right to be politically right and to oppose and resist the secular legislation of the left.

Actually, no. If God is their chosen leader whose laws they will follow, then that is their individual choice. It is not up to them to make others live under that law also.

Further, secular legislation does not in any way force them to compromise their following of God's law. You don't have to be gay. You don't have to have an abortion.

joe christian wrote:
God made it our business also by giving us His laws to live under.

No, actually he didn't. You show me the verse where God says that it is up to men to make sure that all men follow his law. No, he says that men have freewill, and they will someday face the consequences of their actions.


joe christian wrote: Yes, but He also punishes Judeo-Christians and Muslims in this life who fail to chastize and punish those who perpetually sin and cause death in their midst.

Please post a verse or two. I don't believe that God says we should take it inot our hands to punish or chastize anyone... he actually says to love your enemy, and not to be proud, because you perpetually sin as well.

joe christian wrote: Prayer and political action work hand in hand.

whatever

joe christian wrote: Rather ask why evil men create laws making God's laws null, void and of no account?

Nobody makes God's laws null!!! Man is not supposed to enforce God's law. Man is supposed to have the freewill to follow God's law or not... he isn't supposed to have someone force him to follow God's laws, because that defeats the purpose of God's laws!

One should follow the laws of God out of love and teh desire to please God. If you put a gay man behind bars and don't allow him to practice homosexuality, what have you succeeded in doing? Nothing. because that man is following "God's law" not for the right reasons, but because you made him.

I think that if you do that, God frowns. It isn't your place unless your name happens to be God.

joe christian wrote: I think you have it backwards since those who would arbitrarily invent their own secular laws demean the laws of God.

Secular laws don't demean anything. They are put in place for practical reasons, to help society function. God's laws are there to get you into heaven. Our laws our here to keep society functioning and people alive and as healthy as possible.

joe christian wrote: Politics without religion has no moral philosophy to base its agenda on which satisifies man's need to have an infallible Supreme Being or Ultimate Authority rule over them in terms of social justice though. Secularists make poor judges of humanity.

Not true. It has been demonstrated that religion is a cultural universal. All cultures have some form of religion. Also, many of the laws in these religions are universal as well, and they also serve a practical purpose.

This is indicative of a universal sense of morality. It makes perfect sense that we would have a basic universal sense of morality (one where we value life, generosity, strength, family), because we are highly intelligent social animals, and our sense of morality helps us to function socially better than any animal species alive (notice we have populated the world like roaches, proving our success).

To put it more bluntly, morality is a useful mechanism with Darwinian advantages, just like a lions sharp teeth and a fish's gills. So, morality exists without religion.

One other point... religion doesn't guarentee morality either. Remember that Hitler believed he was fullfilling Gods wishes. What makes your God with his morals better than Hitler's God with his morals?

I'll tell you what... your God appeals to your innate sense of morality, while hitler's does not.

[joe christian]

soldierofchrist wrote: joe christian wrote: If God doesn't want Judeo-Christians and Muslims to judge in civil matters, why did He give us His Laws which command us to obey and adminster them?

Seems to me that the secularists are the ones in danger of His Judgment for discarding His Law and that Judeo-Christians will be severely chastized for disregarding and casting it off also.
Jesus never held a sword to anyone and commanded they follow him. Christianity cannot be forced. In Revelation 3:20, Jesus says, "Here I am! I stand at the door and knock. If anyone hears my voice and opens the door, I will come in and eat with him, and he with me."
That's right. Christ invites all men to live under His Judeo-Christian Kingship and to rule with Him using the Ten Commandments and all the civil laws governing society which His Father gave to Moses.

Disobey any of the Ten Commandments and you disobey God and His Christ, since the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are ONE.

[joe christian]

Gryff1nd0r wrote: joe christian wrote: Judeo-Christians and Muslims are commanded by God to live under, and according to, God's Law. Since they are religiously right they also have the right to be politically right and to oppose and resist the secular legislation of the left.

Actually, no. If God is their chosen leader whose laws they will follow, then that is their individual choice. It is not up to them to make others live under that law also. Further, secular legislation does not in any way force them to compromise their following of God's law. You don't have to be gay. You don't have to have an abortion.
Judeo-Christians and Muslims can do whatever God's Law allows them to do. We can ban abortions and homosexist marriages if we want to.

joe christian wrote: God made it our business also by giving us His laws to live under.
Quote: No, actually he didn't. You show me the verse where God says that it is up to men to make sure that all men follow his law. No, he says that men have freewill, and they will someday face the consequences of their actions.
You obviously discount the Great Commision.

joe christian wrote: Yes, but He also punishes Judeo-Christians and Muslims in this life who fail to chastize and punish those who perpetually sin and cause death in their midst.

Quote: Please post a verse or two. I don't believe that God says we should take it inot our hands to punish or chastize anyone... he actually says to love your enemy, and not to be proud, because you perpetually sin as well.
He says both if you read both the Old and New Testaments. The OT prescribes the punishments, which include the death penalty in more than ten cases.

joe christian wrote: Rather ask why evil men create laws making God's laws null, void and of no account?

Quote: Nobody makes God's laws null!!! Man is not supposed to enforce God's law. Man is supposed to have the freewill to follow God's law or not... he isn't supposed to have someone force him to follow God's laws, because that defeats the purpose of God's laws!
Where is that antinomian view written?

Quote: One should follow the laws of God out of love and teh desire to please God. If you put a gay man behind bars and don't allow him to practice homosexuality, what have you succeeded in doing? Nothing. because that man is following "God's law" not for the right reasons, but because you made him.
Leviticus 18 prescribes the death penalty for sodomy. No need to spend the taxpayers money for life in prison.

Quote: I think that if you do that, God frowns. It isn't your place unless your name happens to be God.
God frowns on the Mosaic law? Why did God give Moses the Law if not to implement it?

Quote: Secular laws don't demean anything. They are put in place for practical reasons, to help society function. God's laws are there to get you into heaven. Our laws our here to keep society functioning and people alive and as healthy as possible.
:lol: That's actually funny. The secular laws of humanists are better than God's laws.

joe christian wrote: Politics without religion has no moral philosophy to base its agenda on which satisifies man's need to have an infallible Supreme Being or Ultimate Authority rule over them in terms of social justice though. Secularists make poor judges of humanity.

Quote: Not true. It has been demonstrated that religion is a cultural universal. All cultures have some form of religion. Also, many of the laws in these religions are universal as well, and they also serve a practical purpose.

This is indicative of a universal sense of morality. It makes perfect sense that we would have a basic universal sense of morality (one where we value life, generosity, strength, family), because we are highly intelligent social animals, and our sense of morality helps us to function socially better than any animal species alive (notice we have populated the world like roaches, proving our success).

To put it more bluntly, morality is a useful mechanism with Darwinian advantages, just like a lions sharp teeth and a fish's gills. So, morality exists without religion.
Hmmm. You must be a theistic evolutionist, referring to Darwin like that.

Quote: One other point... religion doesn't guarentee morality either.
God does though. He even commands man to follow His holy laws in order to guarantee morality and justice in the land.

Quote: Remember that Hitler believed he was fullfilling Gods wishes. What makes your God with his morals better than Hitler's God with his morals?
The God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob was hardly Hitler's god.

Quote: I'll tell you what... your God appeals to your innate sense of morality, while hitler's does not.

If the German people had imposed Judeo-Christianity on the nazis instead of the other way around, there would never have been such a bloody Holocaust in history.

Thanks for your comments.

[Gryff1nd0r]

joe christian wrote: Gryff1nd0r wrote: joe christian wrote: Judeo-Christians and Muslims are commanded by God to live under, and according to, God's Law. Since they are religiously right they also have the right to be politically right and to oppose and resist the secular legislation of the left.

Actually, no. If God is their chosen leader whose laws they will follow, then that is their individual choice. It is not up to them to make others live under that law also. Further, secular legislation does not in any way force them to compromise their following of God's law. You don't have to be gay. You don't have to have an abortion.
Judeo-Christians and Muslims can do whatever God's Law allows them to do. We can ban abortions and homosexist marriages if we want to.

For yourself.

joe christian wrote:
You obviously discount the Great Commision.

explain

joe christian wrote: He says both if you read both the Old and New Testaments. The OT prescribes the punishments, which include the death penalty in more than ten cases.

The Old Testament covanent doesn't apply, for the coming of Christ created a new covanent and the old became obsolete. Jesus does not preach the death penalty. No, he says to love your enemy and not be proud.

being a CHRISTian, one would think you would attempt to follow CHRIST.

joe christian wrote:
Where is that antinomian view written?

You follow God's Laws out of faith, not force. That is why we were given freewill.

joe christian wrote: Quote: One should follow the laws of God out of love and teh desire to please God. If you put a gay man behind bars and don't allow him to practice homosexuality, what have you succeeded in doing? Nothing. because that man is following "God's law" not for the right reasons, but because you made him.
Leviticus 18 prescribes the death penalty for sodomy. No need to spend the taxpayers money for life in prison.

Leviticus. :lol: I suppose you never eat shellfish, or touch a women during her period?

As for that last comment... I'm pretty close to discontinuing this conversation with you, an account of you are ridiculous.

joe christian wrote: Quote: I think that if you do that, God frowns. It isn't your place unless your name happens to be God.
God frowns on the Mosaic law? Why did God give Moses the Law if not to implement it?

As guidence for the people, but that was a much different time. jesus hadn't come to SAVE US FROM OUR SINS!!! We can be saved, thus, you can't kill someone for breaking your law. That need to be saved, not killed, otherwise Jesus died in vain.


joe christian wrote: :lol: That's actually funny. The secular laws of humanists are better than God's laws.

No, it is just that God's laws really don't cover everything needed to run a functioning society. Ever take a course in law? I'm sorry, but we just need more than 10 laws. :roll:

joe christian wrote: joe christian wrote: Politics without religion has no moral philosophy to base its agenda on which satisifies man's need to have an infallible Supreme Being or Ultimate Authority rule over them in terms of social justice though. Secularists make poor judges of humanity.

Quote: Not true. It has been demonstrated that religion is a cultural universal. All cultures have some form of religion. Also, many of the laws in these religions are universal as well, and they also serve a practical purpose.

This is indicative of a universal sense of morality. It makes perfect sense that we would have a basic universal sense of morality (one where we value life, generosity, strength, family), because we are highly intelligent social animals, and our sense of morality helps us to function socially better than any animal species alive (notice we have populated the world like roaches, proving our success).

To put it more bluntly, morality is a useful mechanism with Darwinian advantages, just like a lions sharp teeth and a fish's gills. So, morality exists without religion.
Hmmm. You must be a theistic evolutionist, referring to Darwin like that.

No, I'm not. Way to ignor everything I said and say something meaningless. :roll:

joe christian wrote: Quote: One other point... religion doesn't guarentee morality either.
God does though. He even commands man to follow His holy laws in order to guarantee morality and justice in the land.

No, He doesn't. You mention Muslims and Christians. Well, they have conflicting morals. A Christian must be monogamous, and polygamy is permitted for Muslims. So, who wins?

That is why secular laws should be in place, to prevent this sort of conflict. For the same reason you discount other Gods, they discount your God, and it is impossible to tell for sure who is right.

[connermt]

Saf wrote: Why does the "religious right" in America (and similar institutions in other countries) attempt to put their religious beliefs into law? This sounds like judging other human beings where it is only God's business to do so. If abortion and homosexuality are wrong, won't God punish those who sin in the afterlife? It seems that it would be wiser to put the energy that goes into Christian politics into praying for the souls of those who (arguably) sin through abortion, premarital sex, contraception, homosexuality, &tc. Why do Christian politicians think it is their right to put God's law into man's law? I think that this is demeaning to God's law. It suggests that man is a better arbiter of the law than God. Religion and politics should stay totally separated.

I would imagine that it is because their beliefs are right 100% & should be followed to the 'bettering' of all.
That migth work if:
1) everyone in the country were christian
2) christianity was the only religion in said country
3) everyone could agree on the rules of christianity 100%

[connermt]

joe christian wrote: Saf wrote: Why does the "religious right" in America (and similar institutions in other countries) attempt to put their religious beliefs into law?
Judeo-Christians and Muslims are commanded by God to live under, and according to, God's Law. Since they are religiously right they also have the right to be politically right and to oppose and resist the secular legislation of the left.

Quote: This sounds like judging other human beings where it is only God's business to do so.
God made it our business also by giving us His laws to live under.

Quote: If abortion and homosexuality are wrong, won't God punish those who sin in the afterlife?
Yes, but He also punishes Judeo-Christians and Muslims in this life who fail to chastize and punish those who perpetually sin and cause death in their midst. Sin is the breaking of God's Law, you know, and those who advocate homosexual and abortion rights are sinning.

Quote: It seems that it would be wiser to put the energy that goes into Christian politics into praying for the souls of those who (arguably) sin through abortion, premarital sex, contraception, homosexuality, &tc.
Prayer and political action work hand in hand.

Quote: Why do Christian politicians think it is their right to put God's law into man's law?
Rather ask why evil men create laws making God's laws null, void and of no account?

Quote: I think that this is demeaning to God's law. It suggests that man is a better arbiter of the law than God.
I think you have it backwards since those who would arbitrarily invent their own secular laws demean the laws of God.

Quote: Religion and politics should stay totally separated.
Politics without religion has no moral philosophy to base its agenda on which satisifies man's need to have an infallible Supreme Being or Ultimate Authority rule over them in terms of social justice though. Secularists make poor judges of humanity.


Quote: Since they are religiously right they also have the right to be politically right
Now there is a can o'worms that you probably don't want to open. Two christians, living under the same 'Law of God' can understand that law in2 different ways. To say that you are religiously right (or anyone for that matter) so you therefore have the right to be politically right is one of the problems.
Quote: ..those who advocate homosexual and abortion rights are sinning.
If by advocating you mean supporting, than you are incorrect on both of these statements.
Quote: Rather ask why evil men create laws making God's laws null, void and of no account? Because in a country where exists religious freedom, not everyone believes in God & therefore shouldn't be force to follow his laws. Woudl you like it if you were forced to follow laws of something you don't think exists?
Quote: Religion and politics should stay totally separated. This statement is correct in a country (like the US) where religious freedom is so important.

[Duchifas]

Gryff1nd0r wrote: Secular laws don't demean anything. They are put in place for practical reasons, to help society function. God's laws are there to get you into heaven. Our laws our here to keep society functioning and people alive and as healthy as possible.

That's a highly debatable proposition. I don't see how abortion makes a fetus alive and as healthy as possible.

I also fail to see how euthanasia helps keep people alive.

And with respect to gay "marriage," for example, one could easily argue that it is quite impractical since it tends to work against the notions of reproduction and continuity, which are objectives of any healthy society.

[Todd D.]

I'm sorry joe christian, did you just advocate not only the making sodomy a punishable crime, but one punishable via Capital Punishment?

[connermt]

Duchifas wrote: Gryff1nd0r wrote: Secular laws don't demean anything. They are put in place for practical reasons, to help society function. God's laws are there to get you into heaven. Our laws our here to keep society functioning and people alive and as healthy as possible.

That's a highly debatable proposition. I don't see how abortion makes a fetus alive and as healthy as possible.

I also fail to see how euthanasia helps keep people alive.

And with respect to gay "marriage," for example, one could easily argue that it is quite impractical since it tends to work against the notions of reproduction and continuity, which are objectives of any healthy society.


Quote: And with respect to gay "marriage," for example, one could easily argue that it is quite impractical since it tends to work against the notions of reproduction and continuity, which are objectives of any healthy society.
Are you serious with this statement? Are you playing devil's advocate?

[Duchifas]

connermt wrote: Because in a country where exists religious freedom, not everyone believes in God & therefore shouldn't be force to follow his laws. Woudl you like it if you were forced to follow laws of something you don't think exists?

Quite so. That's why a healthy balance must be maintained. America was not intended (by the founders) to be a theocracy, but at the same time it wasn't intended to be a nation wholly devoid of morality and G-dliness.

In case some have missed it, the source of our rights and freedoms, as acknowldged in the Declaration of Independence, is the Creator.

Signatories of the Declaration of Independence wrote: We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

The founders of our country recognized that G-d is the source of our rights. While that does not mean that America must substitute Leviticus for the U.S. Code, it does mean that America was not intended to be a secular paradise ala contemporary France.

[Duchifas]

connermt wrote: Duchifas wrote: Gryff1nd0r wrote: Secular laws don't demean anything. They are put in place for practical reasons, to help society function. God's laws are there to get you into heaven. Our laws our here to keep society functioning and people alive and as healthy as possible.

That's a highly debatable proposition. I don't see how abortion makes a fetus alive and as healthy as possible.

I also fail to see how euthanasia helps keep people alive.

And with respect to gay "marriage," for example, one could easily argue that it is quite impractical since it tends to work against the notions of reproduction and continuity, which are objectives of any healthy society.


Quote: And with respect to gay "marriage," for example, one could easily argue that it is quite impractical since it tends to work against the notions of reproduction and continuity, which are objectives of any healthy society.
Are you serious with this statement? Are you playing devil's advocate?

100% serious. What seems to be the problem?

[connermt]

Duchifas wrote: connermt wrote: Because in a country where exists religious freedom, not everyone believes in God & therefore shouldn't be force to follow his laws. Woudl you like it if you were forced to follow laws of something you don't think exists?

Quite so. That's why a healthy balance must be maintained. America was not intended (by the founders) to be a theocracy, but at the same time it wasn't intended to be a nation wholly devoid of morality and G-dliness.

In case some have missed it, the source of our rights and freedoms, as acknowldged in the Declaration of Independence, is the Creator.

Signatories of the Declaration of Independence wrote: We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

The founders of our country recognized that G-d is the source of our rights. While that does not mean that America must substitute Leviticus for the U.S. Code, it does mean that America was not intended to be a secular paradise ala contemporary France.

Quote: America was not intended (by the founders) to be a theocracy, but at the same time it wasn't intended to be a nation wholly devoid of morality and G-dliness. While I am not going to totally disagree with this statement, it seems to be an opinion not a fact, unless you can show actual (not inferred) documentation of the founding father's intent.

Quote: Creator Ah the Creator.....Many americans believe in a creator. Creator & God some times aren't interchangable.

Quote: While that does not mean that America must substitute Leviticus for the U.S. Code, it does mean that America was not intended to be a secular paradise ala contemporary France. Agreed with the first part of the statement, not sure I can agree with the 2nd part of the statement. I can't comment on what the 'intent' was personally because I don't have the info to make that decision.

One of this country's 'main-stays' is the right to practice what religion you want basically. But you(we) should not take one religion's views & make that view into law for the entire land, especially when people in that very religion disagree on what the actual & correct religious view is.

[connermt]

Duchifas wrote: connermt wrote: Duchifas wrote: Gryff1nd0r wrote: Secular laws don't demean anything. They are put in place for practical reasons, to help society function. God's laws are there to get you into heaven. Our laws our here to keep society functioning and people alive and as healthy as possible.

That's a highly debatable proposition. I don't see how abortion makes a fetus alive and as healthy as possible.

I also fail to see how euthanasia helps keep people alive.

And with respect to gay "marriage," for example, one could easily argue that it is quite impractical since it tends to work against the notions of reproduction and continuity, which are objectives of any healthy society.


Quote: And with respect to gay "marriage," for example, one could easily argue that it is quite impractical since it tends to work against the notions of reproduction and continuity, which are objectives of any healthy society.
Are you serious with this statement? Are you playing devil's advocate?

100% serious. What seems to be the problem?
Because, if I understood you correctly, that is a statement of someone who seems to be grasping at straws to proove a point.
1) gays can reproduce
2) you don't have to be married to reproduce
3) by this logic it would appear that any couple that can't reproduce should not be able to get married
4) people shouldn't be able to get married if they don't intend to have children
The list can go on
My point is that marriage has NOTHING to do with reproduction. So by saying that gay marriage is impractical because it works against reproduction is wrong.

[Duchifas]

connermt wrote: Quote: The founders of our country recognized that G-d is the source of our rights. While that does not mean that America must substitute Leviticus for the U.S. Code, it does mean that America was not intended to be a secular paradise ala contemporary France.

Quote: America was not intended (by the founders) to be a theocracy, but at the same time it wasn't intended to be a nation wholly devoid of morality and G-dliness. While I am not going to totally disagree with this statement, it seems to be an opinion not a fact, unless you can show actual (not inferred) documentation of the founding father's intent.

When you read the above quote from Declaration of Independence, the Founding Fathers clearly acknowledged that the SOURCE of our rights (i.e., a big part of our legal system) is our Creator. So yes, while it is an inference that they didn't want America to be a G-dless nation, it is a pretty strong one. It doesn't seem plausible that while acknowledging that the source of our rights is the Creator, the Founding Fathers would then fashion a system that has no relation whatsoever for that source.

Quote: Quote: Creator Ah the Creator.....Many americans believe in a creator. Creator & God some times aren't interchangable.

Huh? I highly doubt the accuracy of your statement. While you can always find a few people to disagree with virtually anything, I think that if you asked whether Creator and G-d are the same, an overwhelming majority of Americans would say yes (whether they believe in Him or not).

More importantly, it would be very strange, to say the least, to assume that in 1770s, the Founding Fathers did not mean G-d when they said "Creator." In fact, they use the terms interchangeably in the Declaration of Independence, so your argument is rather baseless counter-factual:

The sentence right above the one I quoted:

Quote: When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

connermt wrote: Quote: While that does not mean that America must substitute Leviticus for the U.S. Code, it does mean that America was not intended to be a secular paradise ala contemporary France. Agreed with the first part of the statement, not sure I can agree with the 2nd part of the statement. I can't comment on what the 'intent' was personally because I don't have the info to make that decision.

Ok. So do you have the info to make the decision to DISagree then? :lol:

Quote: One of this country's 'main-stays' is the right to practice what religion you want basically.

Yes. With many qualifications, but that's not too relevant here.

Quote: But you(we) should not take one religion's views & make that view into law for the entire land, especially when people in that very religion disagree on what the actual & correct religious view is.

"Thou shalt not murder."

Shall we strike murder/manslaughter from our statutes because we should not impose religious views (this is one is straight out of the Ten Commandments) on others? Maybe someone doesn't believe in the Ten Commandments. Why are we forcing it on him?