Close Topic Options

The Christian Right - Page 4

See, you have just proven my point, very clearly. Your contempt for religion shines through, and your statement proves that you DO want to disenfranchise the religious. By defining political concepts as either religious or not, you are able to then deny the political process to those who know that things such as abortion are truly MORAL questions, thus in the purview of religion.

So, throw up a couple of straw man arguments, right? I am speaking about democratic societies, which Muslim culture hates worse than anything else. And you bring up two instances of oppression.

By the way, how many lives could have been saved if they had actually followed the Catholic teachings concerning morality? That is - no sexual relationships outside of marriage! This is the most ridiculous argument you could have come up with to support your assertion that religion is the cause of problems. AIDS is spread, over 99% of the time, through sexual relationships, that is through sexual conduct outside of marriage. Yeah, the Catholic Church stresses that people shouldn't use condoms WITHIN MARRIAGE! It is a far greater sin within the Catholic faith to perform the types of sexual conduct that is common within Africa than to use a condom. So, using your argument, you again show that the prejudice is more important than the reality of the situation, as does your continued use of oppressive Muslim societies in your arguments.

Within Western democratic societies, it is vital that there be a plurality of thought. I may think that some religions are really stupid, and that many liberal philosophies are even more stupid. But they MUST be allowed the right to participate in the public forum of ideas.

When certain groups, people, and philosophies (A) seek to silence others ( B ), it is a clear indication that those in (A) are unable to compete in the marketplace of ideas. They seek to silence ( B ) because they can't get their way. By disenfranchising ( B ), they win. Of course, they have done so by cheating (within a democratic society).

One final note. Let's look at a few societies that successfully suppressed religious thought within the political arena. Some replaced it with atheism, others replaced it with single religions.

Nazi Germany, where Hitler used religion to suppress all others, then basically banned religion within the body politic.

Communist Russia.
Communist China.
Communist Vietnam.
Cambodia.
Saudi Arabia.
Iran.

I understand your "concerns" about religion ruling. However, seeking to silence any individual religion only opens the way to other oppression.

By the way, I speak from experience. My religion was horribly oppressed by what would now be considered "The Christian Right." My great-great grandfather was driven out of Missouri, Ohio, and Illinois, as were his sisters. His sisters, when little girls, had to hide in a cornfield to avoid being beaten, and worse, by mobs of "Christian" men.

That is why I am such a supporter of religious and political plurality. If the "Christian Right" is denied their political voice, then who will be next?

As Martin Niemoller said:

Right Christian The

1) Abortion is not a political issue. It's a medical issue. Governments do not have the right to tell people what they should do with their bodies. You do not have the right to tell someone what they should do with their lives. God doesn't have the right. Bush, Blair or Howard also does not have that right. When you actually go through an abortion, which I sincerely would not wish upon anyone, you will understand.

2) I have no contempt whatsoever of religion or people who follow religion. My mother is a practicing Sikh! My partner's mother is extremely religious. I see a lot of value in religion, I just don't believe any religious beliefs should be forced upon those who do not practice it. It certainly should not influence politics. How would you feel if the major religious lobby in the US was Islam?

Aids is spread through sexual contact within marriages and often it is passed to children through birth. By suggesting that human beings should only have sex within marriage is an extremely outdated and unrealistic opinion. What era are we living in? Do you honestly believe it is natural for two animals to abstain from sexual activity until they are married? It is also one of the worst ways of dealing with a serious illness and would not prevent the disease from spreading. By your logic, the only way to prevent the spread of Aids is to A) stop sex altogether or isolate everyone with the disease and let them die.

The Catholic Church preaches that people should NOT use contraception in any situation. It does this armed with the knowledge that a lot of religious people have a deadly disease called Aids. It is extremely irresponsible. It takes people who believe in a religion with good faith and preaches information that is very dangerous. This is exactly why I do not trust religion to dictate law.

Religion never caused Aids, but by preaching irresponsible behaviour it is contributing to the spread of Aids.

I cannot understand where you hatred of Muslims stems. Do you honestly believe that Muslims don't want democracy? Tell me, what is Indonesia? Have we forgotten that the vast majority of the Muslim world lives in some form of a democracy? Do you also believe that the Koran says it is ok to kill someone if they have committed adultery? Of course it doesn't. But humans have twisted the teachings of the Koran, enshrined it in law and enforced these laws on everyone based on their interpretation of this religion.

I am not at all trying to silence religion as you claim. I am a journalist and a strong champion of freedom of speech and thought. But I also believe in human rights and freedom. I am not against everything religious lobby groups stand for. In fact I will find common ground for the majority of your beliefs. I just shouldn't have my rights effected by any lobby group, whether religious or not.

I agree with you on this. But there is a difference between allowing freedom of thought and forcing your thought on others.

The Christian Right Beliefs Religious General

Arvhic said:

Well, it seems like not every country in the world think a woman's fetus or embryo is part of her body, they take it as a separate being living in the woman's body.

I do not think it has nothing to do with being "outdated". I don't do drugs or drink like going out of style or party...Am I "outdated"? I do not think so, I just do not take part on those activities that the rest considers "modern".

It is NOT natural for two animals to abstain from sexual activity, I guess that's where it resides the difference between us and monkeys or horses, we can develop self-control, don't you think?. I understand about the natural urges but if in your reasoning, it is okay to satisfy those urges, then I am sure you won't mind sleeping with other people besides your partner if the "urges" comes to you that you need to satisfy the urges with other women? Or even more, the morals of one partner only are religiously imposed, not so?. Most animals just "do it" with several partners, why not humans? I do not mean to be disrespectful but make a point where you are saying Christians do not have any right to impose their views on others (which I agree) nevertheless, the "moral" "philosophies" like (cheating, committing murder, suicide, you name it) comes from religion itself.

Edited: LDS_forever on 30th Nov, 2006 - 1:25pm

Page 4 Right Christian The

LDS, my point on abortion is that this decision should be up to the individual, not the church nor the state. Of course I do not personally agree with late termination and we can have a separate debate about what constitutes a human life. But the fact remains, regardless of my beliefs, I do not have the right to tell someone else whether they should bring children into this world if they are unwilling. I think there is a common misconception that people who believe in abortion are blase about it. I have been through this process and I can tell you it was one of the hardest decisions in my life. But the point is, nobody has the right to impose ludicrous laws that prevent people from aborting.

When I say outdated I don't mean practicing a no sex before marriage philosophy is outdated because there are people who believe this and that is fine. What I meant was that it is outdated to expect everyone to practice no sex before marriage. That sort of philosophy was for an era gone by. That doesn't mean there is anything wrong with, it's just unrealistic to expect everyone should do this.

Humans are animals. That's what we are. Sure, we have much larger brains and can control our thoughts with much better effect, but it is a natural urge to mate/ have sex. I am not saying we should all practice forms of polygamy. But you can't stop everyone from having sex. There is nothing wrong with it, it is a natural act.

I also disagree that morals stem from religion. Religion is a source of morals but it is by no means the only source. I never received any of my morals or philosophy through religion, it was passed on to me in my upbringing. I think because we are extremely intelligent animals we are also able to establish right from wrong. And humans have actually lived and had morals before religion was created/enshrined/etc. Morals are a subject of culture and religion is one aspect of culture.

Right Christian The

Maybe you did not receive your morals or philosophy through formal "religion" per se, but the upbringing of those who raised you, I am almost certain they did?

The Christian Right

Tell me, how does AIDS get INTO the marriage? It has to come from one of the members of the marriage having sex outside it. The same for the children who are born with it. In order for the mother to get AIDS, she must either receive it from a straying husband, or have strayed herself, or been raped. All three situations are condemned by the Catholic Church, and the lack of any one of the three situations would have prevented AIDS.

Your summary of how to prevent the spread of AIDS is right on. Complete abstinence outside of marriage, along with strict fidelity within marriage would stop AIDS immediately.

You are right. However, it isn't religion that preaches the irresponsible behavior. If people followed the religious teachings of all major religions, AIDS would never have spread. Once again, your argument backfires by showing that religion has the answer.

But you are telling me that Islam, in politics, is all bad, and must be eliminated. Every time you have brought up a serious objection to religion in public life, you have used Islam. My feelings about Islam should be discussed elsewhere. The discussion here is that you want to stop people in a religious country such as Indonesia from voting according to their beliefs. I don't like much of what is taught in Islam, but if the people in the democratic Muslim country WANT sharia law, then I have no problem with that. I just won't ever live there.

Yes you are trying to silence religion. At least within the political world. You wish to define human rights as excluding religion from the political process. Some of what you define as human rights, I define as clear, premeditated murder. That is what the political process is about - reaching a consensus. And, in a democratic society, that also means that the majority rules. And you are proposing eliminating this basic rule of democracy, by disenfranchising all religious thought that you disagree with.

The Christian Right - Page 4

Yes, I don't believe Islam or any religion should be directly involved in politics. But of course people who believe in religion are involved. Since when have I suggested otherwise? This topic is about religion, not religious people being involved in politics. Have I said anything about people voting based on their beliefs? Find me the comment I made to that effect? How else are people suppose to vote if not for their beliefs? That is the whole point of democracy. But their religious beliefs should REMAIN in the realm of religion and not forced upon others through law. Of course it can be expressed in the political forum, it just should not be the foundation of governance or law.

Well if you believe abortion is murder, then I AM A MURDERER. Tell me, who gave you the high ground on my life? You don't even know me and you are willing to judge something I have been through for very personal reasons based on your religious beliefs. If this is what religious thought brings to the political table, then I can do without it. They should all mind their own business. I know the Christian Right believes in a lot of good, but their lobbying against a MEDICAL procedure called abortion destroys their credibility, IMO. It is alright to hold these beliefs but NOT alright to force others to conscribe in them or be placed at risk through backyard terminations. Nobody has the right to make such decisions for other people. This applies to all political organizations, including governments.

Rather off topic, but... QUOTE Nighthawk said, Your summary of how to prevent the spread of AIDS is right on. Complete abstinence outside of marriage, along with strict fidelity within marriage would stop AIDS immediately. This is starting to get very off topic so I will respond to this one more time only. You remedy for Aids assumes that all humans must practice religion to the strictest letter of law and that not one person with Aids is in any way corruptible. This is not REALITY and I am certain you realize it. Sex is not the only way to spread Aids. It can also be passed through blood. Regardless, if a woman is raped, is it her fault that she is infected with the HIV? What has that got to do with religion? How could religion prevent that crime? If someone has strayed from their partner, contracts the disease but then has sex with their partner without the use of a condom because it would be a sin, then is that the fault of the innocent partner? Could religion have stopped the disease from spreading by preaching responsible sex? With all due respect, your opinion is so far removed from reality that I find it pointless having this debate. People have sex outside of marriage all the time. Single people have sex all the time. Do you realize this? There is nothing wrong with sex outside of marriage, it is a natural act. Do you define sex as unnatural? If safe sex (responsible behaviour) was taught and encouraged at a much younger age in Africa the spread of HIV would be reduced significantly. The same applies to other STDs. This isn't my opinion, it is fact. The Catholic Church may preach responsible behaviour through abstinence and frown upon rape. But it also teaches extremely irresponsible behaviour by demonizing safe sex. It is this last teaching that is causing most of the damage.

LDS, I do not believe that religion is the only source of what society perceives as good moral behaviour. The reason why I say this is because you can take the most religious person, stick them in the worst environment and they will be conditioned to behave badly. Likewise, you can have humans with no exposure to religion or religious thought with good morals. Humans have the ability to understand right from wrong. And, humans lived on this planet well before religion was first recorded, so how do we then explain where their morals came from?

This is starting to get very off topic so I will respond to this one more time only.

You remedy for Aids assumes that all humans must practice religion to the strictest letter of law and that not one person with Aids is in any way corruptible. This is not REALITY and I am certain you realize it. Sex is not the only way to spread Aids. It can also be passed through blood.

Regardless, if a woman is raped, is it her fault that she is infected with the HIV? What has that got to do with religion? How could religion prevent that crime? If someone has strayed from their partner, contracts the disease but then has sex with their partner without the use of a condom because it would be a sin, then is that the fault of the innocent partner? Could religion have stopped the disease from spreading by preaching responsible sex?

With all due respect, your opinion is so far removed from reality that I find it pointless having this debate. People have sex outside of marriage all the time. Single people have sex all the time. Do you realize this? There is nothing wrong with sex outside of marriage, it is a natural act. Do you define sex as unnatural?

If safe sex (responsible behaviour) was taught and encouraged at a much younger age in Africa the spread of HIV would be reduced significantly. The same applies to other STDs. This isn't my opinion, it is fact. The Catholic Church may preach responsible behaviour through abstinence and frown upon rape. But it also teaches extremely irresponsible behaviour by demonizing safe sex. It is this last teaching that is causing most of the damage.

The Christian Right General Religious Beliefs - Page 4

I guess I have been gone to long. I need to clarify my position on the religious right. Do I want to silence them and censor what they say? No. That wasn't what I meant. I want to silence their destructive voice in the government, it has no place. When your goal is to make laws based on one particular religions views, it has no place in government. They aren't trying to make democratic laws, they are trying to make religious laws. That is not acceptable to me. I don't care if their views are different from mine, but their views on religion seek to supplant government, and thats not what this country is founded on.

Second, religious philosophy comes from mans philosophy, not the other way around. We learned as we evolved what we wanted in society and what we didn't want. We incorporated that into our laws and religion. We have progressed further in the last four thousand years, and don't need religion to guide our politics.

Third, lack of belief does not constitute religious belief. I know that is hard for religionists to understand. Atheists do not have a belief. It is the lack of belief, or belief that a god does not exist. It isn't a religious belief any more than you not believing in the easter bunny is a religious belief.

Fourth, there is absolutely nothing about the religious right that deems to make our country more democratic or more free. It does not strive to push equal rights, or allow everyone access to all rights. It seeks to pin down the laws to only allow that which is acceptable to christians and outlaw everything else. The religious right is completely counter intuitive to everything democratic. They fight not to expand freedoms, but restrict peoples rights. Almost everything they stand for and push has to do with restricting what someone can due based on their own biblical beliefs. How does that sound right to anyone? How is that not forcing your beliefs on others? Allowing gay marriage, abortion, or anything else isn't forcing your beliefs on anyone because you don't have to accept it or do it! But if someone else wants to they can. If you ban something, then there isn't even a free choice about it.

You say that religious philosophy and political philosophy go hand in hand, but thats just not true. Most laws are written in such a fashion as to make sure everyone gets the same rights. They are written to protect people from actual harm. If the basis for a law you want passed starts in a religious book, it has no place. Laws should be passed to protect people from viable harm, not from sin, which is what type of laws the religious right caters. If the only reason something is banned is because its a sin, then it doesn't belong in government!

And last but not least, the religious rights leadership. Have you actually looked up the people who represent the religious right to the President and other high ups? They are insane hypocritical hate mongers. The leaders of the religious right form a veritable whos who of crazy far right wingers. Pat Robertson, Jerry Falewell, James Dobson, Gary Baur, Tim LaHaye, Tony Perkins, and Phyllis Schlafly. These people are nuts, claiming such things that Feminism leads women to lead their husbands, kill their children, become lesbians, practice witchcraft, and take down capitalism! These are the people in George Bushes ear. This is the religious right that people follow like mice to the piper, not even remotely aware of who speaks for them in politics. The fact is that I don't think most voters associating themselves with the religious right have any idea what the religious right leaders really stand for.