|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Sep 22, 2009 4:04 pm
quietstorm 2 I often think of the 10 laws/ten commandments, the world would be soooo different if those laws had been handed down and obeyed century after century. Are there any religions that actually follow those laws anymore? So how will no one working on Sunday really make any difference? I'll take the Five Precepts.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Sep 22, 2009 10:37 pm
Or the nine noble virtues. I'm not such a big fan of the no other Gods before me one.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Sep 26, 2009 10:06 pm
By thatlogic, we shoul just enslave a very small minority and make them do all the work in our society. That sounds perfect!
To all those who want their Christian Politicians voting by their faith, I want you to read a book called "A Handmaid's Tale". And everyone else, it happens to be a great read. This topic sorta reminded me of that book.
I thinks that faith has absolutely no ground inside of politics. "Render unto Ceaser what is Ceasar's and render unto God what is God's" eh? Well, I refuse to acknowledge either this or the last president as any sort of "Ceasar" in that sense, but the Constitution on the other hand must govern our government.
While there is a dispute about where the Separation of Church and state arose, I find it to be essential for a healthy government. Render unto thy Constitution what is thy Constitution's... by allowing everyone their right to practice as they choose.
Especially noting how Middle Eastern culture has created Shisha tobacco, banning such a thing as these "new vices" seems incredibly ethnocentric to me. If Christians don't want tattoos, then I suggest not getting them - the rest of us are perfectly happy without you joining our fun.
Then again, if we want to go by the spirit of the bible passage where Jesus met the temple money changers, I guess we should ban religious stores. I find it deplorable to make money off of "franchising faith" in such a way. Churches that set up shop with "Jesus Malls" right next door seem just as disingenuous for this reason.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Sep 27, 2009 12:12 am
ya know, i dunno about any of you, but i'm ALL for Slavery... sweatdrop as long as there are either a.) laws to ensure that Slaves are treated as human equals who just happen to be owned by people or the State, or b.) some form of preventing the abuse of Slaves, it should all be good. smile
even if there isn't, i'd still be a.o.k. with Slavery being legal... ninja
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Sep 27, 2009 7:56 pm
Chieftain Twilight ya know, i dunno about any of you, but i'm ALL for Slavery... sweatdrop as long as there are either a.) laws to ensure that Slaves are treated as human equals who just happen to be owned by people or the State, or b.) some form of preventing the abuse of Slaves, it should all be good. smile even if there isn't, i'd still be a.o.k. with Slavery being legal... ninja As long as you're willing to be a slave, okay. "Treat others the way you want to be treated."
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Sep 27, 2009 8:39 pm
heart The method to the madness...
Religion should represent truth. If truth is God, and God is love, then religion should represent this justly.
The laws of the people should also be just in love, respecting individul freedom and rights.
Love and freedom are never opposing. And never are they imposing. So if someone's religion conflicts with the good of the people... then perhaps they should reconsider their religion.
Though I agree with the laws in place that protect us from imposing religion in America, I can't help but wonder... shouldn't they be on the same page anyway? heart
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Sep 28, 2009 1:21 am
Shiori Miko Chieftain Twilight ya know, i dunno about any of you, but i'm ALL for Slavery... sweatdrop as long as there are either a.) laws to ensure that Slaves are treated as human equals who just happen to be owned by people or the State, or b.) some form of preventing the abuse of Slaves, it should all be good. smile even if there isn't, i'd still be a.o.k. with Slavery being legal... ninja As long as you're willing to be a slave, okay. "Treat others the way you want to be treated." Exactly. But I guess it could be nice to be able to choose my master, that would be fun wink
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Sep 28, 2009 1:23 am
And my answer to the question is simple: NO. We're having too many religions to make this work. Simple as that. However if there is a country where all people are following the same religion and they all agree with the law it provides: sure go on. But utopia doesn't exist.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Oct 16, 2009 7:36 pm
Heck no! Politicians do enough stupid things already, we don't need their interpretation of their religion added in! There's at least a dozen ways to perceive any given verse in a holy book of any sort, and there's a good chance I won't agree with anyone's translation. In the US, church and state are supposed to be divided. Unfortunately, religion is such an important part to a culture that this can't be avoided anyway.
Religious factors in lawmaking just provides way too much room to take away human rights for no good reason, such as "God made Adam and Eve, Not Adam and Steve."
Plus, we might get civil wars with each bill passed as everyone tries to impose their own religious beliefs.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Oct 18, 2009 8:55 am
The poll results shock me, why in the would would anyone want policy makers to legislate in an amoral fashion?
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Oct 18, 2009 10:40 am
Amoral Fashion? And the poll results are 70% NO! and 30% YES! like thats not a shocker.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Oct 18, 2009 12:25 pm
And let them have just another scapegoat in their handy handbag of excuses for not doing things right or bankrupting people? No thanks, then again Canada's government isn't exactly so seduced by religion that its turned into a parade of irrationality.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Oct 18, 2009 3:27 pm
CH1YO The poll results shock me, why in the would would anyone want policy makers to legislate in an amoral fashion? Just because people want laws that exist independently of *one* religion doesn't mean we want "amoral legislation".
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Oct 18, 2009 3:48 pm
PrometheanSet CH1YO The poll results shock me, why in the would would anyone want policy makers to legislate in an amoral fashion? Just because people want laws that exist independently of *one* religion doesn't mean we want "amoral legislation". Making decisions without consulting one's moral compass is amoral.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Oct 20, 2009 1:44 pm
CH1YO PrometheanSet CH1YO The poll results shock me, why in the would would anyone want policy makers to legislate in an amoral fashion? Just because people want laws that exist independently of *one* religion doesn't mean we want "amoral legislation". Making decisions without consulting one's moral compass is amoral. And why do we need a religion to determine our moral compass? Morals are a cultural concern not a religious one. One can be moral and have no religion. By the way, just to make sure, as many people don't know the difference between immoral and amoral, I would like to make certain of your usage before I discuss the post further. When you say amoral do you mean Quote: not involving questions of right or wrong; without moral quality; neither moral nor immoral or do you mean the opposite of moral? This is just for my own clarification, I'm not trying to cause trouble. I've just come accross problems with this before and I want to make sure we're arguing about the same thing.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|