Should religion influence government?

This is split from another thread.

We should remember what theocracies are like: countries like Iran and 1990's Afghanistan, 1000AD Europe. Wars between differences of religion us government such as the crusades. Let not forget the burning of heretics or the wonderfully horrific quotes of polices the bibles says should be.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Well, just as I answered in the other thread, I do not think that a theocracy or even a close connection between state and religion is a good idea. First, it will limit the tolerance of the people (well, perhaps Buddhism is an exception) and would also provoke disagreements, struggles and wars with countries that have other values and ideas.
Furthermore, a religious government might be less dynamic and not able to develop according to the global/innerpolitical events.

In short, religion and government should not be connected.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

As far as I am concerned religion and government should have never been and should never be anywhere near connected to each other in any way, shape or form.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

no.

 

Well, if God is speaking through Bush, we must have really fucked up. Either that or the man is insane....

Maybe a theocracy wouldn't be so bad for America. Us atheists could form a secret society, corrupt the youth with a culture of drugs and eventually take power in a coup involving devine secrets granted to us from the holy scrolls found in my ocusin Ed's basement.

Jesus helps me trick people.

 

I have save somebody's google post (I would not say it better, so I'll not try):

Since

1) a man can easily take away another's rights; it
happens all the time -- anything from prison
to murder, and since


2) God never shows the slightest inclination to
defend these rights in Person, then


3) it's a difference which makes no difference. Believe
they're God-given if you like, but in practice you
will have whatever rights your society by tradition
grants you. And God will do nothing about it, one
way or another.

I should probably add:


4) the Bible I read is entirely about submission and
obedience to God, and does not in the least support anything like rugged individualism.

5 Slaves, obey your earthly masters with respect and fear, and with sincerity of heart, just as you would obey Christ.
[Ephesians 6]
Religion and the Bible is one of the greatest
sources for moral relativism. If one wants ones actions condoned or have it perceived that they are backed by god, all they have to do is pick up the bible. Kings, dictators, and despots throughout history have killed, stolen, and enslaved after finding a passage in the bible that justified it. You theistic liars want people to believe that your religion is the source of morality and that not believing promotes moral relativism when it's the
opposite that's true. If this country were to be under the control of a religious government we would lose freedom, not gain it.



Religious folks, obey the strongest guy in the pack (like monkey do), no need for meaningless BS, it's all wishful thinking if not outright delusion.

 

Does a better educated American want to point out the failings and lack of virtues of the founding fathers?

"Next will be the other forms of sexual impurities - normallization of pedifilia (which is already a big part of the homosexual culture) and beastiality."

Nope. Its not part of homosexual culture any more than its part of heterosexual culture.


"Our basic concepts of right and wrong come from religion - thou shalt not murder/commit adultery/steal/bear false witness/covet your neighbor."

Except that plenty of other moral codes existed before religion got involved, and the fact that religion has a lock on them jsut now merely indicates the power hunger of religious leaders.

Lets face it, religion will affect politics, as many people will vote for those who most embody their religious beliefs. However these religious minded people should not be permitted to put into place legislation that favours their religion or anything that they want to do that is predicated upon their religion, such as banning homosexuality. Thus I foresee a lot of fighting in the enxt 4 years in the USA.

 

Oh, I suppose it would be impossible to reach the conclusion that murder is bad with simple logic and a bit of foresight?
Why should the laws in the bible be respected anyway, people always say that parts of the bible are wrong while others are right... the laws could well be part of the untrue paragraphs...

Anyway, I think it is great to have a theocratic government that breaks those laws repeatedly without second thoughts...

 

I question how moral and correct following religious scripture as law could be:
http://thewaronfaith.com/bible_quotes.htm
http://www.godlovesgays.com/newtestament.html

 

no. 1. theirs tomany gods/esses. how could you choose one sect 2. what about the peeps who dont' believe in gods/esses

 

If the people of a nation are religious, why not? America is 80% Christian/Jewish.

 

android,

I think some of use porvided some reasoning for why not.

 

Because morals and ethics were so strongly instilled through religion in the past, it was logical at the time to have laws stem from religion. However, in modern times, morals and ethics should have stronger basis than mere religion.
Religion should never come close to government, because it can be so easily used to brainwash people. Like, when Bush says "evil." (He says it so earnestly and eagerly that it makes me itch.)

 

Idealist: "Yes, religion should be seperate from Government."
Realist: "No, religion will never be seperate from Government."

Can a person divorce themselves from something they believe in so strongly and so fundamentally to consider any matters that influence their family and future without being influenced by their beliefs?

I am not religous but I have spent a great deal of time with religious people and have attended church on many occations. Guilty of having quite a hard-line against religion I strived to understand religious people instead of hating them. Being more empathetic I could see the deep impact this phenomenon of religion has on them.

Regardless of how I felt about the existence of God and Creation Theory I realized the feelings and convictions these people live by are meaningful to them and their influence on society cannot be denied. Religious people exists on all stratas of society serving many different roles. You cannot simply discount their opinion because they believe in God, but in some way most of their opinions probably involves influences of God.

The passionately idealistic part of me has ideas, and secularism is definately one of them. But the realist in me doesn't see a society of beings that are capable of objective reasoning.

 

Uhh... you are aware that there are a lot of countries that strongly seperate between religion and government?
That is no idealism. Furthermore, a government should treat every citizen the same, religion does not...

 

The question I proposed is should religion influence government, not if it does or not.

religion basically reduces all moral and ethical issues to "well my god says so" this is not logical reasoning or even acceptable by many modern moral standings, for example if we did things as Jewdao/Christian says then slavery should be legal, women should be limited to making babies and the humble servants of men, killing of infidels, and lets not forget to not do any work on the Sabbath or you will need to be stoned to death! If you wish to disagree then that would require interpreting the scripture differently and that leads to a larger variety for problems in it own right.

Perhaps then we should pick and choose which verses of the bible we should follow, but then on what morals do we bases such decision?

 

I think we could start with the veeeery explicit commandment: YOU SHALL NOT KILL

 

David F.

So then what should we do punish all the homosexuals just because a larger minority of them are pedophiles then heterosexuals?

 

So then the number of pedophiles in homosexual population is irrelevant? Thus guthrie was right in his statement?

 

but it wasn't, you just showed it was in a higher percentage of homosexuals then heterosexuals, buts it is still in the minority for homosexuals which means it not part of the homosexual culture.

I also don't think that slippery slope is quite possible: legal pedophilia would have to allow for something beyond consenting adults.