Mixing religion and politics

Should it be mixed?

yes	8.3%	[ 2 ]
no	91.7%	[ 22 ]
Total Votes:			[ 24 ]

[Demon Kagerou]

I don't think mixing is realistically avoidable. Mainly because so much of what goes on in politics concerns the function and morality of society, which have tended to come with "religious" undertones for as along as humans have been bothering to care.

It is a classic liberal ideal, and it has always been just that.

[LSD TV]

azulmagia

LSD TV

azulmagia

LSD TV

Sometimes, for example when the patriarch of the Russian Orthodox Church suggested a recount of votes in the recent election, I think that was a beneficial way for the religious institution to use its influence over the people to try to effect political change. Appealing for teaching intelligent design as an alternative to evolution in public schools in America? Not so much.

The difference between "beneficial" religious influence and "harmful" is spurious. It's more like the difference between lead poisoning and cyanide poisoning.

In the two cases I described its not. I'd prefer to examine each instance of the mixing independently and evaluate each one on its own rather than make a blanket statement.

If we include the "good" religion (no such thing BTW), then it's very hard to rationalize keeping the "bad" religion out.

And who judges what's good and bad in that context anyways?

Quote:

No state can function completely independently of commonly held beliefs among its population.

That could justify ANYTHING.

The church in many cultures has been a center for civil society for hundreds of years. I think that if a government is corrupt the church can be one legitimate avenue for the voice of the people. This worked quite well with the solidarity movement in Poland and the establishment of worker unions which partially brought about the end of communism in Europe. I think people should look at what policies different institutions are advocating, not which institutions are doing so.

Someone has to judge, because someone has to make decisions. I think we are all fit to judge equally and should all be heard regardless of our moral beliefs and where we derive those beliefs from whether or not it is based in religion. Furthermore, you asserting that there is no such thing as "good" religion but there is such thing as bad religion is extremely judgmental and thus hypocritical in this context.

[The-Real-Youth]

ripsaw service pack 1

yes, i think religious texts are great guidelines to rule nations by

i mean why did we ever abandon monarchy

or give women rights

Look up the enlightenment, hon. If we included religious texts in every issue, I doubt we would have a democracy(if you live in North America). During the Enlightenment, we started realizing that "God" doesn't choose whos going to rule over you like people with a monarchy believe.

[azulmagia]

LSD TV

The church in many cultures has been a center for civil society for hundreds of years. I think that if a government is corrupt the church can be one legitimate avenue for the voice of the people.

I don't think so. The entire concept of religion - blind faith - is MASSIVELY corrupting in the long run, since it rules our reason.

Quote:

This worked quite well with the solidarity movement in Poland and the establishment of worker unions which partially brought about the end of communism in Europe. I think people should look at what policies different institutions are advocating, not which institutions are doing so.

That isn't that much of a problem, since religious-influenced policies strongly tend to be reactionary.

And Solidarity was NOT a sectarian Catholic organization.

Quote:

Someone has to judge, because someone has to make decisions. I think we are all fit to judge equally and should all be heard regardless of our moral beliefs and where we derive those beliefs from whether or not it is based in religion.

If we're all fit to judge equally, does that include Flat Earthers or racists?

These religiots do want to be heard, but they also seem to figure that because they're advancing their views under a religious shield, we should somehow not criticize what they're trying to impose on the rest of us, and they get really offended when we do. In other words, they're after special exemptions, in more ways than one.

Quote:

Furthermore, you asserting that there is no such thing as "good" religion but there is such thing as bad religion is extremely judgmental and thus hypocritical in this context.

There's no hypocrisy involved. I don't have problems with people judging, as such. I do have a HUGE problem with judgements that are based strictly on superstition - which is what religion is.

[LSD TV]

azulmagia

LSD TV

The church in many cultures has been a center for civil society for hundreds of years. I think that if a government is corrupt the church can be one legitimate avenue for the voice of the people.

I don't think so. The entire concept of religion - blind faith - is MASSIVELY corrupting in the long run, since it rules our reason.

Quote:

This worked quite well with the solidarity movement in Poland and the establishment of worker unions which partially brought about the end of communism in Europe. I think people should look at what policies different institutions are advocating, not which institutions are doing so.

That isn't that much of a problem, since religious-influenced policies strongly tend to be reactionary.

And Solidarity was NOT a sectarian Catholic organization.

Quote:

Someone has to judge, because someone has to make decisions. I think we are all fit to judge equally and should all be heard regardless of our moral beliefs and where we derive those beliefs from whether or not it is based in religion.

If we're all fit to judge equally, does that include Flat Earthers or racists?

These religiots do want to be heard, but they also seem to figure that because they're advancing their views under a religious shield, we should somehow not criticize what they're trying to impose on the rest of us, and they get really offended when we do. In other words, they're after special exemptions, in more ways than one.

Quote:

Furthermore, you asserting that there is no such thing as "good" religion but there is such thing as bad religion is extremely judgmental and thus hypocritical in this context.

There's no hypocrisy involved. I don't have problems with people judging, as such. I do have a HUGE problem with judgements that are based strictly on superstition - which is what religion is.

I already broke up my posts into two small paragraphs, please address it that way because those were two complete thoughts. Thank you. If you do that, I will respond, if not I will consider it a sign that you do not intend to have a civil discussion.

[azulmagia]

LSD TV

I already broke up my posts into two small paragraphs, please address it that way because those were two complete thoughts. Thank you.

Two complete thoughts? I wasn't even counting one in your post. Plenty of sentimentalism, but no real argument.