Politics and Religion

[wolfboy]

Politics and religion are the two things that you should never talk about with friends. I consider many of you friends, so let's talk about them. This will be an open place to discuss/debate these two oh-so-contreversial topics. Because they are so controversial, however, I'd like to remind everyone of a couple of tip.it's rules.

5. Posts that are disparaging toward any religion, race, nation, social status, gender, or sexual orientation are strictly forbidden

 

...We also do not allow posts or discussions containing religious references of any kind, and we do not allow any religious text in our users' signatures. The only exception to this rule, is in our Off-Topic Forum, in which moderate and sensible discussion relating to religion is allowed. Everyone is entitled to his or her own opinion, but if your opinion involves the disrespect of others then it shall be deleted.

 

6. Mild, intelligent flaming is allowable.

 

However, pointless harassment aimed at a specific individual or group of people is not acceptable.

 

 

 

Now that the fine print is out of the way, I'll start with myself. I follow a Pagan religion similar to Wicca. I borrowed a lot from Wicca, but I don't follow it wholly enough to consider myself a Wiccan. Many people call themselves Wiccan, and think they can fit any belief under that umbrella, but it doesn't work that way. It would be like saying that I'm Jewish, but I worship on Sunday and eat pork. It just doesn't work.

 

 

 

As for politics, I'm a rare breed. I'm one of the few conservative pagans. I'm a Republican, and while I have some serious issues concerning the Iraq war I am, by and large, a supporter of Bush. He's made mistakes, true, but he's human. I just find it depressing when I hear him speak and remember that he's the leader of the free world.

 

 

 

So, as I said, this is an open discussion, feel free to add your two cents. We can discuss, argue (within reason) and hopefully learn a few things in the process. Just, please, keep it under control. I don't want senseless flaming/spamming to lead to the locking of this thread.

[yomom1919]

I'm Catholic and i lean right. I support the president because, if you smacked any other president besides washington and lincoln into his place during these events, they would preform just as poorly.

 

As for homose(x)ual marriage, I believe it should not be banned because homose(x)uality is not a choice, it is a condition of the brain, and it is, in its true form, uncontrollable.

 

I dont support abortion. We (America) have laws that say you can drop a baby at a poliece station or church no questions asked. Why, would these people rather kill someone who has potential to become great, than have an enlarged stomach for 9 months and take a small drive to the cops to drop the child off. People who receive abortions are extremely selfish, because they do not want to be bothered, and in turn rather kill a person who could be living, breathing, just like us.

[wolfboy]

I'm Catholic and i lean right.

 

Welcome to my little corner of the off-topic forum. Congrats on first post :D

I support the president because, if you smacked any other president besides washington and lincoln into his place during these events, they would preform just as poorly.

 

That's a very good point. Although Lincoln was not the genius history's made him out to be. He was actually a very poor leader, and would probably have been forgotten if not for the war and the asassination.

 

As for homose(x)ual marriage, I believe it should not be banned because homose(x)uality is not a choice, it is a condition of the brain, and it is, in its true form, uncontrollable.

 

True. I've read studies that show that the brain of an alternative-lifestyle man functions the same as that of a woman. It's not true in the reverse, however. (Alternative-lifestyle women do not have the brain function of men.) Odd, yes?

 

I dont support abortion. We (America) have laws that say you can drop a baby at a poliece station or church no questions asked. Why, would these people rather kill someone who has potential to become great, than have an enlarged stomach for 9 months and take a small drive to the cops to drop the child off. People who receive abortions are extremely selfish, because they do not want to be bothered, and in turn rather kill a person who could be living, breathing, just like us.

 

Ooh, now we're really getting into some contraversial stuff. I, too, am against abortion. Very firmly against it. The only case in which I support abortion is if the life of the woman and/or the baby are in danger. However because I don't know the circumstances going on that lead to the ultimate decision, and because I have no control over the lives and choices of other individuals, and because it is (and has been for a while) a legal practice in the United States, I tend to vote pro-choice on the issue.

[pianofrieak2]

I'm a follower of Christ. I lean right although some of Bush's stuff I disagree with. I am conservative almost teetering on civil libertarian if it weren't for the Bible condoning some things. The government's involvement always makes life tougher with more rules, more taxes, and less family involvement. I hate Big Brother. Get the government back in its place!

 

 

 

I am anti-homosexuality, for while one's genetics may cause you to have certain tendencies, you have a choice. It is wrong and God will never give you something you can't handle.

 

 

 

I am anti-abortion, for life begins at conception and murder is wrong.

 

 

 

I hate multi-culturalism, political correctness, and special rights for minorities. Why can't we just hire the best people?

 

 

 

I hate this impression of post-modern beliefs on kids in public schools. I disagree with the forced form of tolerance we preach today. I disagree with the post-modern view of truth and relativism.

 

 

 

I am disappointed with the Christian church today and wish people would start having an actual life change instead of finding more rules to follow. I wish Christians would actually talk to God and hear His voice. I wish Christians would fall in love with Christ. I pray I do more every day. I wish they would love Him with all of their heart, mind, soul, and strength.

 

 

 

I am eagerly awaiting the day of Christ's return.

[wolfboy]

I'm a follower of Christ.

 

Interesting choice of words. Most people would have said "I'm a Christian." Was it intentional?

I lean right although some of Bush's stuff I disagree with.

 

What stuff? The war?

I am conservative almost teetering on civil libertarian if it weren't for the Bible condoning some things.

 

Such as...?

The government's involvement always makes life tougher with more rules, more taxes, and less family involvement. I hate Big Brother. Get the government back in its place!

 

I couldn't agree more. Well said.

 

 

 

I am anti-homosexuality, for while one's genetics may cause you to have certain tendencies, you have a choice. It is wrong and God will never give you something you can't handle.

 

This is also a good point. Even when you don't have a choice, you still have a choice. Dr. Dobson (Focus on the Family) said that it's not a sin to have feelings or desires for the same gender, but it is a sin to act on them. (Paraphrased)

 

 

 

I am anti-abortion, for life begins at conception and murder is wrong.

 

This is gonna be a real touchy subject, and a debate I'm looking forward to.

 

 

 

I hate multi-culturalism, political correctness, and special rights for minorities. Why can't we just hire the best people?

 

Indeed. I saw a comic strip that had two frames. In the first a black man is at a job interview. The hiring person says "I'm sorry Mr. Black, but we won't hire you because of your color." This was before affirmative action. The second frame had the same interviewer, but this time a white man. The interviewer is saying "I'm sorry Mr. White, but we won't hire you because of your color." This was after affirmative action.

 

 

 

I hate this impression of post-modern beliefs on kids in public schools. I disagree with the forced form of tolerance we preach today. I disagree with the post-modern view of truth and relativism.

 

I disagree with you here. I think tolerance is important. I think that different theological views (including Christian, but by no means limited to it) should be taught in public schools.

 

 

 

I am disappointed with the Christian church today

 

So am I. I love the message of Christ, but the message of today's Christians seems far different. With exceptions, of course.

and wish people would start having an actual life change instead of finding more rules to follow.

 

One could have such a change in other religions as well. Buddhism, for example, with it's search for enlightenment can lead to some very positive life changes.

I wish Christians would actually talk to God and hear His voice.

 

Me, too, but not just Christians. I wish that followers of all religions would spend more time praying/speaking/meditating with their deity of choice.

I wish Christians would fall in love with Christ. I pray I do more every day. I wish they would love Him with all of their heart, mind, soul, and strength.

 

Again, I agree, but again I think it should be all religions. To quote Serendipity "It doesn't matter what you have faith in, just that you have faith.

I am eagerly awaiting the day of Christ's return.

 

Until that day comes, may you have a long and happy life. Thanks for sharing your views!

[Death_By_Pod]

What is the purpose of this thread? Is it just state your religion/political view (which is just glorified spam) or is it a discussion (which we have multiple of in this forum)?

[wolfboy]

What is the purpose of this thread? Is it just state your religion/political view (which is just glorified spam) or is it a discussion (which we have multiple of in this forum)?

 

It's both. It's a place to state your religion and political views, and a place to discuss them. I know there are other threads like this, but most of the religion threads are Christian/Atheist and this is one where all religious views can be discussed. There also aren't any threads for both politics and religion, and the two can be very closely related. For example, most Fundamentalist Christians tend to be right wing, where as more tolerant religions lean more toward the left.

 

What this isn't is a place for you to spam the thread by calling it spam. If you think it's spam and feel it should be deleted report it and a mod/admin will make that decision. Please don't post here again if you have nothing to contribute.

[Anesthesia]

I just find it depressing when I hear him speak and remember that he's the leader of the free world.

 

 

 

He's certainly not my leader. So many americans seem to forget that a world exists outside of the borders of the USA. A tad egocentric if you ask me.

[wolfboy]

I just find it depressing when I hear him speak and remember that he's the leader of the free world.

 

 

 

He's certainly not my leader. So many americans seem to forget that a world exists outside of the borders of the USA.

 

True, but the American president has a good deal of power even outside the U.S. Too much, in my opinion. It's bad enough that our government has so much control over American citizens, but when they try controlling other countries, that's going way too far.

[Guest GhostRanger]

I just find it depressing when I hear him speak and remember that he's the leader of the free world.

 

 

 

He's certainly not my leader. So many americans seem to forget that a world exists outside of the borders of the USA. A tad egocentric if you ask me.

 

 

 

"The leader of the free world" is a phrase used to describe the President of the United States of America. It doesn't mean he (or when the day comes, she) is the leader of everyone on Earth.

 

 

 

The President is sometimes referred to as "the leader of the free world," although the usage of this phrase has declined since the end of the Cold War.

 

 

 

And the page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leader_of_the_Free_World redirects to the President of the United States page.

 

 

 

It's kind of like in England when the King was referred to as "the crown" - it's just a nickname for the position.

[Anesthesia]

I don't care whether it is a nickname or not. If it is then it only reinforces my point about being egocentric; for them to assert that either they are the only free country or that their president rules every free country - neither of which is true.

 

 

 

Calling the Queen 'The Crown' makes no assertions about her power, it's simply her position - the only person in the country entitled to wear the crown.

 

 

 

Calling someone the leader of the free world is a different kettle of fish.

[wolfboy]

Ok, maybe I should have worded it differently, but this is not the place to debate semantics. Nor is this the place to argue over the choice of words.

[Nickelliston]

Hi, I'm 15 and very right-wing, I do not believe in god and i think that religion does more harm than good in the world. I am pro-abortion and i think that women should get the right to make up for a mistake as what's the point in bringing up a child that you did not mean to have as you wouldn't truely love them.

[Guest GhostRanger]

I don't care whether it is a nickname or not. If it is then it only reinforces my point about being egocentric; for them to assert that either they are the only free country or that their president rules every free country - neither of which is true.

 

 

 

Short history lesson. There was a point in time where America was considered the only free country where people could migrate to and become successful. "The American dream." America was the free world. That's where the nickname came from.

 

 

 

And as Wikipedia suggests, times have clearly changed and America is not considered that anymore. But nicknames stick... I think you're just reading way into it. :?

 

 

 

(The nickname never suggested the American president rules every free country.)

[Anesthesia]

The topic starter used the phrase, so it can't be really be so antiquated now can it?

 

 

 

The very fact that he used it is enough for me. If you say such a thing now then you're either not thinking about its meaning and implications or you're arrogant.

[Punc]

I'm more likely to go to the anarchist side of the politic debate. We have way to much pointless rules in my opinion.

 

I don't like the right side thou, in my country (Belgium) the right-winged party is pretty rascist and preaches hate. But seeing as the other parties are to scared to actually make a stand, it's a pretty bad situation.

 

 

 

As far as religion goes, I'm atheist, because I force meself to be. I don't go to a church or a moskee, and I don't believe in Jezus Christ as savior of mankind. So it would be hypocrital of me to call upon God when I'm in trouble. I also don't believe in fate, and am a strong believer of free speach, even if it hurts other people. If you can say everything you want, I will atleast know what your stand are, it's better then hiding everything.

 

 

 

I do think there is something bigger thou, I'm just not sure what it is.

[Guest GhostRanger]

The topic starter used the phrase, so it can't be really be so antiquated now can it?

 

 

 

The very fact that he used it is enough for me. If you say such a thing now then you're either not thinking about its meaning and implications or you're arrogant.

 

 

 

Bingo. It doesn't mean anything now. It's just a nickname from before that has stuck. No need to read into it's use because it's said all the time without thinking about it. Nicknames do that...

 

 

 

For instance. I grew up knowing my grandfather as "Red." When I was younger I thought that his name was Red, and then I learned it was just a nickname to describe his red hair. The only thing is, my grandfather had been completely bald since before I even knew him - yet everyone who knew him would call him Red. Why? It was a nickname describing something that was before, and nicknames just stick.

 

 

 

Nicknames aren't anything to be taken "seriously" or "think about their implications," they are just nicknames. Once again, I think you're reading way too into it.

[Anesthesia]

So you're saying that he said it without meaning anything by it? In which case it is bound to annoy/offend people who disagree with it.

 

 

 

I'm quite sure people in India would be offended if I started calling Queen Elizabeth II the Empress of India - it's not true any more and it implies she is their leader when she isn't.

[Guest GhostRanger]

So you're saying that he said it without meaning anything by it? In which case it is bound to annoy/offend people who disagree with it.

 

 

 

I'm quite sure people in India would be offended if I started calling Queen Elizabeth II the Empress of India - it's not true any more and it implies she is their leader when she isn't.

 

 

 

Calling her the Empress of India is a title, not a nickname. Surely you know the difference.

 

 

 

Once again, it doesn't mean anything. It's a dated nickname that has stuck and anyone with common sense shouldn't be offended or annoyed by it. It's just a meaningless nickname.

[wolfboy]

The topic starter used the phrase, so it can't be really be so antiquated now can it?

 

 

 

The very fact that he used it is enough for me. If you say such a thing now then you're either not thinking about its meaning and implications or you're arrogant.

 

It was the former, and I apologize. Now can we please stay on topic?

 

Hi, I'm 15 and very right-wing,

 

Hello. I'm curious. You say you're right wing, then you go on to make some very liberal claims. This seems a bit contradictory to me.

I do not believe in god and i think that religion does more harm than good in the world.

 

All religion? There's good and bad in everything, and I like to think the good generally outweighs the bad. It's just that the bad gets more attention.

I am pro-abortion

 

This is what I was referring to above. This isn't exactly a right-wing viewpoint.

and i think that women should get the right to make up for a mistake as what's the point in bringing up a child that you did not mean to have as you wouldn't truely love them.

 

Adoption is another consideration. The woman wouldn't have to raise a child she doesn't want, but the child wouldn't have to die either.

[Anesthesia]

My point is that to say something that makes such assertions without thinking about it is arrogant. By saying it, whether you think about it or not - whether it is a nickname or not, you imply that either Bush is my leader or that my country is not free.

 

 

 

Calling her the Empress of India is a title, not a nickname. Surely you know the difference.

 

 

 

 

 

Apparently you don't:

 

 

 

It's kind of like in England when the King was referred to as "the crown" - it's just a nickname for the position.

 

 

 

The Crown is the one of the titles of the reigning monarch. You compared calling the president the leader of the free world to calling the king 'the crown'.

 

 

 

It was the former, and I apologize. Now can we please stay on topic?

 

 

 

On topic? This is a topic about politics & religion is it not? So this is on topic.

[Guest GhostRanger]

My point is that to say something that makes such assertions without thinking about it is arrogant. By saying it, whether you think about it or not - whether it is a nickname or not, you imply that either Bush is my leader or that my country is not free.

 

 

 

Or since it's just a nickname that has been used for countless years, you are making the assumption that educated people understand it doesn't have serious implications. Educated people who understand the context of the nickname should understand it doesn't imply either of those things.

[Anesthesia]

So now you are resorting to insulting my intelligence/knowledge? That's low.

[wolfboy]

I'm more likely to go to the anarchist side of the politic debate. We have way to much pointless rules in my opinion.

 

I agree, but I think anarchy is too extreme. Anarchy, by its very nature, would inevitably lead to chaos.

 

I don't like the right side thou, in my country (Belgium) the right-winged party is pretty rascist and preaches hate. But seeing as the other parties are to scared to actually make a stand, it's a pretty bad situation.

 

But down further you say that you support free speech, even if it hurts other people.

 

 

 

As far as religion goes, I'm atheist, because I force meself to be. I don't go to a church or a moskee, and I don't believe in Jezus Christ as savior of mankind. So it would be hypocrital of me to call upon God when I'm in trouble.

 

Why would that be hypocritical? Most Jews don't believe that Christ is the savior of mankind, but they believe in the same God.

I also don't believe in fate,

 

I do believe in fate, but I also believe in free will. I know that sounds contradictory, but it's hard to explain.

and am a strong believer of free speach, even if it hurts other people. If you can say everything you want, I will atleast know what your stand are, it's better then hiding everything.

 

This fits into your anarchal government, and like I said before would lead to chaos. I believe in free speech, but up to a point. Absolute free speech would lead to rioting. Again, chaos.

 

 

 

I do think there is something bigger thou, I'm just not sure what it is.

 

Then why "force" yourself to be an atheist? Why not look into this "something bigger" and find out what it means to you?

[Guest GhostRanger]

So now you are resorting to insulting my intelligence/knowledge? That's low.

 

 

 

I'm not insulting you. I'm sorry if you felt that way. I'm saying that educated people should understand the context of the nickname, and should understand there is no arrogance behind it's use. If you find that statement insulting, I'm sorry - but it's not meant to be. I stand by it.