RE: Jesus and Nationalism

RE: Jesus and Nationalism (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

maletpeslave -> RE: Jesus and Nationalism (6/22/2009 5:11:08 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: philosophy quote: ORIGINAL: maletpeslave quote: ORIGINAL: numuncular is there being "one true church" actually important to you? Yes, actually it is very important to me. I feel that a strong universal Church limits nationalistic tendencies and allows Western Civilization a united front against its traditional enemies. .......sounds like you're a fan of theocracy. Would have thought the problems with that form of governence were well-known by now. Funny how I'm accused of that when I reject nationalized churches such as the Church of England.

maletpeslave -> RE: Jesus and Nationalism (6/22/2009 5:12:51 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: OrionTheWolf So are you going to clue us in on who these traditional enemies are? quote: ORIGINAL: maletpeslave Many religions are considered repugnant to many people. Western self hate is a whole other matter. Ask yourself that same question.

pyroaquatic -> RE: Jesus and Nationalism (6/22/2009 5:27:45 PM)
All of this hate and malice is not very love like now is it? Where is the amorous and benevolent nature of the human being?

philosophy -> RE: Jesus and Nationalism (6/22/2009 5:45:53 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: maletpeslave Funny how I'm accused of that when I reject nationalized churches such as the Church of England. ......do you actually understand what theocracy means? Government by religion. Which is what you appeared to support earlier. Do try to keep up.......

philosophy -> RE: Jesus and Nationalism (6/22/2009 5:48:06 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: maletpeslave quote: ORIGINAL: OrionTheWolf So are you going to clue us in on who these traditional enemies are? quote: ORIGINAL: maletpeslave Many religions are considered repugnant to many people. Western self hate is a whole other matter. Ask yourself that same question. ....so, no then.......

slaveluci -> RE: Jesus and Nationalism (6/22/2009 7:01:55 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Sanity You haven't seen any Youtube videos of Jeremiah Wright then? Touche[;)]

slaveluci -> RE: Jesus and Nationalism (6/22/2009 7:04:51 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thishereboi Oh ok. I would invite you to my church were you could meet a whole bunch of them, but your not in Michigan. I have met many in life and they are no different than the ones on the right. They use the same arguments to condem others, they just don't get mentioned as much. For some reason when people start bitching they only mention the right wingers. I guess it is the same logic that says I can't be conservative if I am gay. Like I am supposed to believe anyone on the left loves homosexuals and anyone on the right despises them. It's just not true. I didn't mean to imply left-wingers NEVER do it. I just don't see it as often. That's simply my experience. It's obviously different than yours. Personally, I would not attend a church where this occurred whether they were left or right wingers. That's not why I attend church - to hear about hatred and/or nationalism. For me, church and politics need to remain separate. If I want to hear political views, I'll attend a rally, not a church service. No matter who's doing the condemning, IMHO, it's wrong. Doing it in church doesn't justify it one bit..........luci

Esinn -> RE: Jesus and Nationalism (6/23/2009 11:07:19 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kdsub In America there are religious people in the government or there are political groups that solicit support from religious individuals and groups. But the government does not make policy according to religion. If the majority of legislatures are religious it is just reflecting the make up of the populace. The mores of the populace will be reflected in the policy of the electorate. There is a difference in following the wants and needs of those who elect you and following the demands of a religious text. Our representatives will continue to reflect the make up of our nation…be it religious or at some future time not religious…But all laws will continue to be judged against the constitution not the Bible...Koran... or any other religious text. Butch Although illegal this country does base laws on religion. Consider how recent our elected officials were mentioning Jesus' name in congress. Intelligent Design is still taught in public schools. Schools are forced to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars and thousands of hours defending their right to teach science in the science class room. How about the inability for homosexuals to marry? Do I need to remind you of blue laws in the majority of the states? How about Postal Franking for religious groups? Church exemption from property tax costs tax payers 100 billion dollars a year. Bush simply stopped Stem Cell research to a point where we are years behind other countries. My daughter in her public school is forced to get up every morning during the pledge and place her 'trust' in a God she does not recognize. Money a church receives from donations of members and from financial investments are normally treated as tax-exempt. Recently the state of Indiana gave preferential treatment to motorists wanting the plate that had, "In God We Trust" on it as they were exempt from paying the standard $15-25 fee. On our money what does it say? Many government offices/groups have salaried pastors/rabbi's. It was only recently that prayer was rightfully banned from public schools and women given the opportunity to vote. Do you know what faith-based-initiatives are?(http://www.au.org/issues/faith-based-initiatives/). Consider Roe vs Wade. There are well over 100 such examples. Yes, yes I know I fully understand this is a democracy not a theocracy. But poke your head out of the shell a little. Preferential treatment is offered to theists in this nation. Although absolutely constitutional separation of church and state is a black and blue not black and white issue.

MarsBonfire -> RE: Jesus and Nationalism (6/24/2009 5:18:27 AM)
Interesting discussion. I always love watching people use God (The Imaginary Friend who keeps on giving) to justify whatever atrocity they have planned. Everyone here is trying to mould Jesus' supposed words like clay, getting them to fit their own take on things, instead of simply looking at what he actually (supposedly) said. WWJD? seems to me to be more of an opening line to rationalization, than it is to reference anything specific in the New Testament. It's like being a gamer, and trying to divine "What Would Gary Gygax Do?" as a means of reassuring yourself that the cheat you were about to make would actually be acceptable to your fellows. I'm not particularly religious. I DO believe that there is a God. But somehow, I doubt he/she/it knows anymore about us, than a farmer in Kansas knows or cares about an anthill in a feild somewhere in Japan. (Actually, I think the gulf between us and God is much, much GREATER, but the anology is the best I can come up with that is still understandable in human terms.) I think if we ever came to God's attention, nationalisim would be the least of his worries. Who knows? Perhaps, upon everyone falling to their knees and praising God, the first thought to pop into everyone's minds from God the almighty would be: "Hey! What happened to the dinosaurs? Crap! You turn your back for a second, and the friggin' mammals take over..."

kdsub -> RE: Jesus and Nationalism (6/24/2009 10:05:14 AM)
Hi Esinn It is not illegal to base a law on a teaching of religion…where did you get that…it is only illegal if that law does not meet the requirements of the Constitution. Punishment for murder is a law… it is also a tenet in most religions… it is also a tenet of atheists. Despite what you may think...Jesus is not a dirty word and can be said in Congress…the home… the church…even in vain…lol as I have used it more than a few times. Myself I believe religion should be left to the home, church, and my personal actions and not taught in public schools. But you must remember intelligent design does have its place in common sense and does not pick one particular religion over another. As far as homosexual marriage… there are many non-religious people who do not believe in it as well…but that is not the point… where does a blue law cross the constitution? The point is all the examples you used above are the desires of the majority and will only be changed if they directly conflict with the Constitution. Butch

Politesub53 -> RE: Jesus and Nationalism (6/24/2009 10:06:28 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: maletpeslave Funny how I'm accused of that when I reject nationalized churches such as the Church of England. Funny how you reject nationalised Churches, yet not the Holy Roman Empire.....

Esinn -> RE: Jesus and Nationalism (6/24/2009 10:43:18 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kdsub Hi Esinn It is not illegal to base a law on a teaching of religion…where did you get that…it is only illegal if that law does not meet the requirements of the Constitution. Punishment for murder is a law… it is also a tenet in most religions… it is also a tenet of atheists. Despite what you may think...Jesus is not a dirty word and can be said in Congress…the home… the church…even in vain…lol as I have used it more than a few times. Myself I believe religion should be left to the home, church, and my personal actions and not taught in public schools. But you must remember intelligent design does have its place in common sense and does not pick one particular religion over another. As far as homosexual marriage… there are many non-religious people who do not believe in it as well…but that is not the point… where does a blue law cross the constitution? The point is all the examples you used above are the desires of the majority and will only be changed if they directly conflict with the Constitution. Butch Hi Butch, quote: ORIGINAL: kdsub Hi Esinn It is not illegal to base a law on a teaching of religion…where did you get that…it is only illegal if that law does not meet the requirements of the Constitution. Punishment for murder is a law… it is also a tenet in most religions… it is also a tenet of atheists. Despite what you may think...Jesus is not a dirty word and can be said in Congress…the home… the church…even in vain…lol as I have used it more than a few times. Myself I believe religion should be left to the home, church, and my personal actions and not taught in public schools. But you must remember intelligent design does have its place in common sense and does not pick one particular religion over another. As far as homosexual marriage… there are many non-religious people who do not believe in it as well…but that is not the point… where does a blue law cross the constitution? The point is all the examples you used above are the desires of the majority and will only be changed if they directly conflict with the Constitution. Butch Actually the word, "Jesus" is no longer allowed to be used. I never suggested it was a dirty word. I am not sure I understand what is common sense about assuming an invisible uncreated unfalsifiable being created the known ex-nihlo. Tammy Kitzmiller, et al. v. Dover Area School District demonstrated intelligent design is just another form of creationism. A christian key witness was able to clearly identify he wedge strategy to a Bush appointed christian judge. Intelligent Design is not intended to be all inclusive. In this country it is absolutely illegal to to base laws on religion. Where do I get that? Perhaps you need to read the constitution and the first line of the first amendment. It is not ambiguous like god. quote: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion" How about Jeffersons wall of seperation quote: Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between man and his god, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, and not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their "legislature" should "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," thus building a wall of separation between church and State. Adhering to this expression of the supreme will of the nation in behalf of the rights of conscience, I shall see with sincere satisfaction the progress of those sentiments which tend to restore to man all his natural rights, convinced he has no natural right in opposition to his social duties. Or The Treaty of Tripoli: quote: s the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion; as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquillity, of Mussulmen; and, as the said States never entered into any war, or act of hostility against any Mahometan nation, it is declared by the parties, that no pretext arising from religious opinions, shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries. Sorry this might need edited.

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3]

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.03125