 |
| Register | Login | |||||
 |
Main
| Memberlist
| Active users
| Calendar
| Chat
| Online users Ranks | FAQ | ACS | Stats | Color Chart | Search | Photo album |
|
| | ||
|
| Register | Login | |||||
|
Main
| Memberlist
| Active users
| Calendar
| Chat
| Online users Ranks | FAQ | ACS | Stats | Color Chart | Search | Photo album |
|
| | ||
| 0 users currently in World Affairs/Debate. |
| Acmlm's Board - I3 Archive - World Affairs/Debate - Church Endorsed Politics |
New poll |  |  |
| Pages: 1 2 3 | Add to favorites | Next newer thread | Next older thread |
| User | Post | ||
Wurl                   Since: 11-17-05 Last post: 6337 days Last view: 6337 days |
| ||
| Church and Politics
Personally, I havea problem when a church exclusively supports one politician or political party and uses church time to do so. I can get over having a few clergy who share alternate political ideologies, but not when they're trained to do so. At the same time, I am reminded of the anti-slavery sermons John Brown gave. That, however, is different in my mind because he was advertised as an abolitionist and not as much as a general preacher. Thoughts? |
|||
|
Sinfjotle Lordly? No, not quite.   Since: 11-17-05 From: Kansas Last post: 6297 days Last view: 6296 days |
| ||
| Church doesn't belong in politics. The ideas the churches try to promote are way out dated.
Refer to Valcion's post if you need clarification. (edited by Dracoon on 03-21-06 03:53 PM) |
|||
geeogree Red Cheep-cheep Since: 11-17-05 Last post: 6310 days Last view: 6295 days |
| ||
| out dated? I think you are thinking of a small number of things that churches (I'm assuming we all are going to talk Christianity) promote.
what about helping your fellow man? or the golden rule? or.... well, there are probably several dozen different things that I could put here that still apply, and may even be more important now than ever |
|||
Skydude Armos Knight  Since: 02-18-06 From: Stanford, CA Last post: 6569 days Last view: 6569 days |
| ||
| Copy/paste the story here. I'm not about to sign up with the nyt for anything. As for church support for politics, well, that depends. If the one political party agrees with things the church supports, well, no reason why the church shouldn't promote that political party. Likewise, if people vote depending on their beliefs, which affect both their voting and their church affiliation, no reason a political party shouldn't look at what they care about. You're elected to serve your constituency, after all.
Now, there are some cases where it can get out of hand, but in general I don't think there's much of a problem with it, if it's done tastefully. |
|||
Valcion Knuckle Joe too much high power man  Since: 11-17-05 Last post: 6295 days Last view: 6295 days |
| ||
| A lot of those can be found in any religion though, and are universal concepts of good.
The ideals that Wurl and Dracoon are talking about, i think, are some of the mroe fucked up ones that people like Pat Robertson and Jack Chick try to promote. |
|||
|
Skydude Armos Knight Since: 02-18-06 From: Stanford, CA Last post: 6569 days Last view: 6569 days |
| ||
| Well, politics or not, you go to the extreme and you'll find nutcases. | |||
|
Sinfjotle Lordly? No, not quite. Since: 11-17-05 From: Kansas Last post: 6297 days Last view: 6296 days |
| ||
| Yeah, but the difference is that those people don't have much of an influence. Any leader of any religion has tons of influence. | |||
|
Skydude Armos Knight Since: 02-18-06 From: Stanford, CA Last post: 6569 days Last view: 6569 days |
| ||
| Michael Moore (sadly) has a lot of influence, he's a nutcase, and he's not the head of any religion that I know of. (edited by Skydude on 03-21-06 03:58 PM) |
|||
|
Sinfjotle Lordly? No, not quite. Since: 11-17-05 From: Kansas Last post: 6297 days Last view: 6296 days |
| ||
| Ok, so does George W. Bush, so did Hitler (I'm in now way comparing Bush's way of runing things to Hitler's), a lot of people have influence, but can you match the entire influence of one of the largest religions. (Please, all Christians stick together except for Catholics who stick with other Catholics.)
Just because one (a few) extremist has (have) (some) influence doesn't mean my point means any less. (edited by Dracoon on 03-21-06 04:06 PM) |
|||
|
Wurl Since: 11-17-05 Last post: 6337 days Last view: 6337 days |
| ||
| Uh, you shouldn't have to sign up for anything to see the story; It was on capitalnews.org...
Edit: The story was taken of CapitalNews, so it forwarded to the subscription NY Times thing. (edited by Wurl on 03-21-06 04:46 PM) |
|||
|
Deleted User Banned    Since: 05-08-06 Last post: None Last view: 6296 days |
| ||
| The church world does try to influence people's minds by speaking of moral issues, but I must ask what is wrong with that? It's good to try to advance America's mindset's to a more moral understanding; instead of the liberal chaos erupting all the time. I'm a hardcore conservative, and I stand against anything unatural or insane. I'm not trying to flame anybody here that's in a more liberal party, and I apologize for maybe sounding like that, but as far as church and politics go; maybe they shouldn't try to justify everything on their own thoughts, but they have good views on things, and that's what should be observed, not that their trying to "rule the world". | |||
|
Sinfjotle Lordly? No, not quite. Since: 11-17-05 From: Kansas Last post: 6297 days Last view: 6296 days |
| ||
| I'm sure no one means to insult the religion of Christianity and Christiant ideas are all right, except that they limit a lot of things that don't harm anyone. When it comes to these issues, you have people forcing their beliefs on others. When that is deemed all right by the majority, why not just take it a step further and allow only Christianity in the country?
That's what I fear from all of what is going on. |
|||
|
Skydude Armos Knight Since: 02-18-06 From: Stanford, CA Last post: 6569 days Last view: 6569 days |
| ||
| If anything, the current situation has us forcing NO religion on anyone. We seem to be heading towards a forced atheism society. | |||
|
Deleted User Banned Since: 05-08-06 Last post: None Last view: 6296 days |
| ||
Originally posted by Skydude That's so true; we've got stupid laws in some states that will put us away if we say "Jesus" in the federal buildings; I thought we were America where we get freedom of speech and we can believe what we want! Our forefathers would be sincerely ashamed of this country right now, I'm proud of being an american, but not of our government! |
|||
|
Sinfjotle Lordly? No, not quite. Since: 11-17-05 From: Kansas Last post: 6297 days Last view: 6296 days |
| ||
| Oh? So why do Kansas schools have to teach Intelligent Design? | |||
Jomb Deddorokku  Since: 12-03-05 From: purgatory Last post: 6298 days Last view: 6298 days |
| ||
| If our founding fathers were all such hard-core christians who would be ashamed of our seperation of church and state, then why did they write it into the constitution? | |||
drjayphd Torosu OW! BURNY!  Since: 11-18-05 From: CT Last post: 6298 days Last view: 6296 days |
| ||
Originally posted by Jomb Because the Theopublicans can't be bothered to do any research and find out that amongst the founding fathers, deism was the main religion. We all know deism's main tenet is "God created the earth and THAT'S ALL HE DID," riiiight? Personally, I'm amazed the born again, SBC, and other factions can agree on anything, although I'm sure that won't last. |
|||
|
Wurl Since: 11-17-05 Last post: 6337 days Last view: 6337 days |
| ||
Originally posted by Skydude A bit over done. America is a fairly pious for an industrialized nation. Frankly I don't care if an individual says "Merry Christmas," "Happy Easter," "Happy Holidays," ect. I do have a problem when government makes a specific religious holiday, prayer or ideal mantadory as part of citizenship. Although the U.S. is hardly a blatant theocracy, churches and politicians have a large impact for eachother. I think in a case where a certain party is training clergy to preach their message is wrong and a potential threat. A while ago, a preacher (in Florida, I think. I'll try to dig up the story) denied service to supporters of the Democratic party. Though I doubt that would become commonplace, there could be similar occurrences. This could lead to things where Republicans try to make people choose between religion (being a "good" Christian) and being a Democrat. They've been using that technique between being a "patriot," or Republican, or a "freedom hater," or a Democrat. My biggest problem with a party training clergy is my fear that it will lead to more demonizing, notably by the Republicans. |
|||
|
Skydude Armos Knight Since: 02-18-06 From: Stanford, CA Last post: 6569 days Last view: 6569 days |
| ||
Originally posted by Jomb This is one of the most often misunderstood parts of the constitution. Speaking of people who don't look at what the founding fathers wrote...or rather, look EXTREMELY SELECTIVELY at it, why don't you go read some more about the subject? The whole point of the "separation of church and state" deal was NOT to "protect" the state from religious influence, as you and all other democrats seem to believe, but rather to protect religions from state influence, as had happened in England. The founding fathers didn't want religion out of everywhere (hence the religious mentions in documents there, despite the fact that they're more deists/masons than christians), they wanted religion to not be shaped by the state. Which is exactly what is HAPPENING as the state is basically telling religion to get out of everything in a number of cases. |
|||
|
Jomb Deddorokku Since: 12-03-05 From: purgatory Last post: 6298 days Last view: 6298 days |
| ||
| If that is true, then why did they not just say seperation of church and state to protect religion? (which makes little sense to me) I read that the reason for the seperation was because they believed that religion had a corrupting influence on government. Look at places like Spain several hundred years ago, that was basically a Catholic version of the Taliban.
Religion should be seperated from Government completely and utterly, in all ways. That said, PEOPLE should be invoolved in government, and they may belong to a religion, but should be acting as people first and members of what-ever church second. (edited by Jomb on 03-22-06 08:49 PM) |
| Pages: 1 2 3 | Add to favorites | Next newer thread | Next older thread |
| Acmlm's Board - I3 Archive - World Affairs/Debate - Church Endorsed Politics |
| |
