Politics and religion

I don't care what religion someone is as long as they don't start using it to justify their political stance. --- Fatbass

I would like to hear what yall think about this, now don't bash a specific religion, but I think this is a valid issue. We are all religious, meaning we have a set of core values that we each in turn believe. Atheism and agnostics are religious because they believe what they want for whatever reason. Although we may disagree with particulars we can still accept each other for who we are. So keep this civil, please!

My political stance is what it is BECAUSE of my religion. I firmly believe that the laws of economics, the laws of nature, are the SAME Laws that the Creator is bound to. He can ignore them no more than we can w/o swift and predictable reactions. The more I read the Bible, the Book of Mormon, history books, the writings of the Founders and the writings that motivated them, the more I see consistent themes that are NOT opposed to one another, but that mesh perfectly.

I think that is why I bring up some of my religious values which drives Fatbass nuts. This is why the Constitution is very important. It was inspired by God. When farmers were fighting the British then God played a big part of the Independence of this country.

coyoteslayer wrote:

I think that is why I bring up some of my religious values which drives Fatbass nuts. This is why the Constitution is very important. It was inspired by God. When farmers were fighting the British then God played a big part of the Independence of this country.

Farmers fighting the British...

Seriously though, I think the point of Fatbass's statement is that religion is so central to the formulation of peoples' political stances that we need to accept it and not get so upset when others then bring up the very source that helped one reach the position one is arguing. It can often be impossible not too. Now how it is mentioned is a different issue...

Quote :

Farmers fighting the British...

That is a pretty accurate description of the type of people they were.

coyoteslayer wrote:

Quote :

Farmers fighting the British...

That is a pretty accurate description of the type of people they were.

That is an accurate description of some of them. But you're right, they needed help, so God sent them Scotsmen via Northern Ireland to actually repel the Brits.

I strongly believe Providence played a huge role in the creation of this great nation. However, the Framers were very careful NOT to implement morals into the Constitution. The genius of the Constitution it is centered around the individual NOT the collective. That is what separated the US Constitution with all others before/since 1787.

proutdoors wrote:

I strongly believe Providence played a huge role in the creation of this great nation. However, the Framers were very careful NOT to implement morals into the Constitution. The genius of the Constitution it is centered around the individual NOT the collective. That is what separated the US Constitution with all others before/since 1787.

Because it was meant to be followed by both religious and non-religious folk. You cannot force religion on someone. It's something they need to desire for themselves. If the Framers injected their religious beliefs then it would just cause a lot of problems and the Constitution would become a dead document.

proutdoors wrote:

I strongly believe Providence played a huge role in the creation of this great nation. However, the Framers were very careful NOT to implement morals into the Constitution. The genius of the Constitution it is centered around the individual NOT the collective. That is what separated the US Constitution with all others before/since 1787.

You're punching the ten ring there.

coyoteslayer wrote:

proutdoors wrote:

I strongly believe Providence played a huge role in the creation of this great nation. However, the Framers were very careful NOT to implement morals into the Constitution. The genius of the Constitution it is centered around the individual NOT the collective. That is what separated the US Constitution with all others before/since 1787.

Because it was meant to be followed by both religious and non-religious folk. You cannot force religion on someone. It's something they need to desire for themselves. If the Framers injected their religious beliefs then it would just cause a lot of problems and the Constitution would become a dead document.

Implying a necessity.
Fail.

coyoteslayer wrote:

proutdoors wrote:

I strongly believe Providence played a huge role in the creation of this great nation. However, the Framers were very careful NOT to implement morals into the Constitution. The genius of the Constitution it is centered around the individual NOT the collective. That is what separated the US Constitution with all others before/since 1787.

Because it was meant to be followed by both religious and non-religious folk. You cannot force religion on someone. It's something they need to desire for themselves. If the Framers injected their religious beliefs then it would just cause a lot of problems and the Constitution would become a dead document.

And yet, that is exactly what you advocate. Prohibiting individual vices is 100% injecting religious beliefs on others via the government.

Quote :

And yet, that is exactly what you advocate. Prohibiting individual vices is 100% injecting religious beliefs on others via the government.

As long as their individual choices do not affect other people then I'm perfectly fine with what people do, but when their choices affect the lives of other people then it becomes an issue. Drug users affect the lives of those people around them.

Bart, we are the government. We the people decide what is right and wrong in society. A lot of people vote because of their religious beliefs. Many people voted against gay marriage because of their religious beliefs.

coyoteslayer wrote:

As long as their individual choices do not affect other people then I'm perfectly fine with what people do, but when their choices affect the lives of other people then it becomes an issue. Drug users affect the lives of those people around them.

Bart, we are the government.

When you try and make such distinctions as to what 'affects' others it opens the door to tyranny EVERY TIME. Drug users affect others, true enough, but so do fat people, short people, dumb people, smart people, religious people (not always for the better), tall people, disabled people, basically EVERY type of people affects those around them. To try and legislate which of these types of people are 'good' and which ones should be deemed 'bad' is an intrusion on individual rights/liberties. One cannot be consistent in saying they support agency and at the same time say the want the government to FORCE 'good behavior'. They contradict each other.

coyoteslayer wrote:

Quote :

And yet, that is exactly what you advocate. Prohibiting individual vices is 100% injecting religious beliefs on others via the government.

As long as their individual choices do not affect other people then I'm perfectly fine with what people do, but when their choices affect the lives of other people then it becomes an issue. Drug users affect the lives of those people around them.

Bart, we are the government.

Almost all choices affect other people..... When passing laws based on your own moral and religious beliefs to limit those choices is to tread on the constitution and its original purpose..... everyone being governed by the constitution is going to differ on there beliefs so you cant appease everyone. Under our constitution the majority is supposed to have final say in the laws that we live by.....great in theory but we are to diverse in our thinking for it to work the way it was setup with.. you have to remember that the founding fathers could have not foreseen the future as it is now hence the reason that there is so much controversy. The original founders of this great country had there differences but most of them were cut from the same stock...Most of them were from some part of the united kingdom, most of them believed in God and the Bible, and most of them were tired of being told what to do by the King of England...... Now we are the melting pot of the world, Coyoteslayer you and I both believe in God but we dont agree on much else about religion... If you and I that are both God fearing individuals cant even agree on Gods plan, then how do you expect us to even try to convince an athiest or a muslim or the list goes on and on, that the way we want the govt to run is the right way?

Well you're traveling down a slippery slope if you believe that people should do whatever they want to do. This type of society that you speak of cannot exist in the real world. People still have their agency because we can either choose to do good things or bad things, but people must be willing to accept the consequences for their actions.

Quote :

Coyoteslayer you and I both believe in God but we dont agree on much else about religion... If you and I that are both God fearing individuals cant even agree on Gods plan, then how do you expect us to even try to convince an athiest or a muslim or the list goes on and on, that the way we want the govt to run is the right way?

Our belief in God should be the only thing that matter because we both have a strong foundation because of it. We can listen and respect eachother's points of view even if we totally disagree, but at the end of the day we both want what is best for society and our families.

coyoteslayer wrote:

Well you're traveling down a slippery slope if you believe that people should do whatever they want to do. This type of society that you speak of cannot exist in the real world. People still have their agency because we can either choose to do good things or bad things, but people must be willing to accept the consequences for their actions.

Your right it cant exist in the real world......otherwise its call anarchy.... Im not saying that we shouldn't have laws, I'm stating that it is impossible to have a complete separation of church and state under our constitution because the majority is going to force there moral beliefs and personal agenda that is driven by several things one being ideology on other people...... There are 4 things that people are driven by on this earth... MICE
Money
Ideology
Conscience
Ego

One of those 4 things is the highest for each individual and that's what dictates there political beliefs...

You guys do the exact same thing as parents to your kids. You don't let them do whatever the hell they want to do, but wait.......what about their agency? They still have agency to either obey their parents or get punished. Parents educate their kids on what is right and wrong.

coyoteslayer wrote:

You guys do the exact same thing as parents to your kids. You don't let them do whatever the hell they want to do, but wait.......what about their agency? They still have agency to either obey their parents or get punished. Parents educate their kids on what is right and wrong.

Hence the justified limits put on CHILDREN in a society. Adults do NOT need to be treated as children, that is called TYRANNY!

coyoteslayer wrote:

You guys do the exact same thing as parents to your kids. You don't let them do whatever the hell they want to do, but wait.......what about their agency? They still have agency to either obey their parents or get punished. Parents educate their kids on what is right and wrong.

Wow your missing the point here CS....im not stating my version of right and wrong...Im stating that the way the constitution is set up that religion and moral belief is going to be injected into the laws that are passed......hence its impossible to have separation of church and state especially in a place like Utah that most of the population believes in God......

I get your point and Bart's point. This is why I said.......

We the people decide what is right and wrong in society. A lot of people vote because of their religious beliefs. Many people voted against gay marriage because of their religious beliefs.

Quote :

Hence the justified limits put on CHILDREN in a society. Adults do NOT need to be treated as children, that is called TYRANNY!

The prisions are full of ADULTS that need to be treated like children.

coyoteslayer wrote:

I get your point and Bart's point. This is why I said.......

We the people decide what is right and wrong in society. A lot of people vote because of their religious beliefs. Many people voted against gay marriage because of their religious beliefs.

Your right we really have no argument because you pro and I see things the same way on the religious point of view to a point...the argument is that its unconstitutional because in a sense we are forcing our views on the people that are for same sex marriage and abortion and other topics......the whole point here is that its against the constitution when we pass a law forcing our moral standard on someone else........

Quote :

the whole point here is that its against the constitution when we pass a law forcing our moral standard on someone else........

Well it quite impossible to pass a law without forcing people to vote on their moral standards.

plottrunner wrote:

Your right we really have no argument because you pro and I see things the same way on the religious point of view to a point...the argument is that its unconstitutional because in a sense we are forcing our views on the people that are for same sex marriage and abortion and other topics......the whole point here is that its against the constitution when we pass a law forcing our moral standard on someone else........

I was about to point this out, but Plotty beat me to it. So CS the question remains, how far does religion get intertwined with politics? How far is it appropriate for the government to regulate the morals of society?