separation of church and state/ thoughts

[Lucid1]

The point of Church/State separation isn't that any idea that religious people agree with is wrong; it's that religion shouldn't be the basis for laws. I don't care if people's religion gives them a "bias" against murder or theft, but I care a whole lot about religious people's transphobia and disdain for sex workers when those biases lead them to lobby for laws that affect my life. This isn't "folly" (nice condescension there, btw), this is something everyone should be able to agree on. Laws that affect everyone get to be decided on by everyone, not one ideology. This is a central tenet of democracy and shouldn't be controversial.

You didn't actually answer any of the questions I asked, but ok.

Yup, procreation is a part of a society flourishing (though not necessarily for individual flourishing). Eating is a part of flourishing, too, but that doesn't make vomiting immoral, because sometimes you have something in your stomach that you don't want there. If a person has something in their womb that they don't want there, they have the right to remove it.

Ahh, so you switch from using "mankind" and insert "society" instead in your reply, and then resort to using transphobia and disdain for sex workers as a basis for a position? I never once mentioned god as the reason "why" things are to be considered right and wrong. I simply gave an account of my own involvement in a class full of white, black, asian, gay and lesbian students who were asked to use debate and discussion in determining how to derive laws without any religious context or attachment. We failed to do it. We didn't fall victim to fragmenting into secular/non-secular groups, we fell victim to failure because we couldn't agree on the basis for the laws. We saw a fallacy and contentious point arising out of the application of "majority opinions" and how they would come to disenfranchise those in the minority opinion space. What we did do was look to non-religious sources of ethics and morality when it came to addressing shifts in public opinion over time where laws are concerned, but again we failed to make the distinction in who laws were supposed to apply to. In the end, we approached our professor with the simple conclusion that in matters of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, there should be "no laws" enacted that would prevent the free exercise thereof.

Let me ask you this, why should anyone obey a god? Why does God/the gods have the authority to make laws for humans to obey?

I'll answer your questions now:

Why should anyone obey a god? - Because no one is in a position to tell them they shouldn't. Lack of holding a religious dogma/belief system doesn't elevate someone into an ethically, morally or more enlightened individual over anyone else.

Why does God/the gods have the authority to make laws for humans to obey? - Because this is what the people of the time submitted themselves to. Not saying it is right, or wrong, but the topic of this thread is about the separation of church and state, and more specifically, the constitution, which contains acknowledgements of the aforementioned submission in it's precepts. That's why I said that under our constitution, any belief that we can have true separation of church and state is folly. It wasn't a condescension towards you or anyone else.

Your use of the term "secularists", belief that ethics can only come from religion, and negative attitude towards abortion makes me think you're coming from a conservative religious community. No offense, buddy, but why are you here? Like I'm not telling you to leave, I'm just wondering how you ended up on a cam model forum. Are you here to convert people or what?

Uhh, I think you might want to rethink what you wrote there. That is, after you enlighten yourself with what a secularist is.

 

[Deleted member 37064]

One thing people forget is that religion, in varous forms, has been a part of human life since probably the very beginning. Look at all the different religions, and mythologies over the course of mankind. They all have similar bases: violent and tragic stories, gods controlling man, we're all born of something beyond human, etc.

At its most basic concepts, religion is man's attempting to reason why something is the way it is, and they cannot explain it. As a friend's father once told me in a discussion "Man uses science to explain that which he understands. For everything else, he looks to a divine power beyond ourselves to provide a reason."

 

[SaffronBurke]

Why is it not ok to steal from someone? To kill someone or commit adultery?

It's not OK to steal because that's not your shit. Even animals get pissy about stealing, whether it's food or territory, because that is MY food/territory, go hunt/claim your own, you jerk.

Killing? You don't have consent to end that person's life. Coincidentally, I'm all for assisted suicide, and read stories like this one and go, "I don't see the problem, the dude consented to be cannibalized".

Adultery is silly to include with theft and murder, in my opinion. It's not ILLEGAL to cheat on your spouse. It's a shitty thing to do, because you signed a contract saying (essentially) that you will have sex with only them and nobody else for as long as the contract holds, be that via death or divorce, but it's not illegal. It's just breaking an agreement, which humans take seriously. We quit jobs and evict tenants because of agreements being broken.

 

[n_i_c_u]

I think if we were in a situation where every voice mattered we would be a bit different of a country. Right now after yet another election where majority didn't rule people feel like their voice doesn't matter, so why bother. They don't care about a country that when they do do anything it doesn't fucking matter anyway. If the situation changed where it did then we would see even more people giving a shit and kids would be brought up knowing it mattered and would learn shit a bit better eventually.

You mention kids and being brought up to learn. If there is one thing I would hope this four year presidency teaches the children (and those reaching a voting age) is that to know the system is to rule the system. It seemed like the Democrats lost some key states because of something. Not sure if Clinton (maybe she freaked them out) could have done anything by campaigning in the states that were mostly blue due to the rhetoric used by Trump but she lost three key states (PA, Mich, and Wis). Both candidates aren't really religious, but, Trump changed the vote with making America great again, and adding in stuff that would appeal to religious people. Religious people do vote, and they vote en masse.

If I could do a search for American voters under the age of 24 I am betting that they enjoyed the Clinton concert part of Jay Z and Beyonce but were probably unable to vote due to social media circumstances. Not a great audience to target. Hollywood loves you, but, man, that audience may or may not vote depending on how they feel the next day. I remember being a teen and not giving a shit. I didn't understand why people hated Jimmy Carter (though I do remember waiting in line in the back seat of my dad's car at a gas station to get gas ), didn't understand why they loved Ronald Reagan (and the Iran Contra affair--but he used to use radio fireside chats like Trump uses twitter, but in a smoother more appealing way to the average American. I remember hearing them in the car on the drive to the bus stop), and I was blown away by Bush advancing on Kuwait (first year in college). When Clinton came in I was confused as to why he was acting the way he was with the sex stuff and then we lost tons of jobs to China (sorry if that is Reagan or Bush stuff, but that was when I started to learn about the abandoning of American manufacturing for a cheaper source --communist for so many years but apparently willing to take our jobs). I honestly had no parental figure to help me see what was going on. There was no person that could say "this is why it is today." I eventually found out that most lots of people hated Nixon. Odd. But I only heard it thru word of mouth and had to research...no internet back then.

I eventually got angry angry that the people in charge weren't seeing the situation with the Iraq and WMDs and stuff to the point of even pissing off family members (who won't still talk to me) who worked as government contractors for military uniforms with my views (it's increased business and a bigger paycheck to them). Then the peoples of this country calmed down and we elected Obama for 8 years.

Not much religion in all this but, I truly hope kids and future voters can wade thru all the weird non-sensensical stuff, learn to work the system, and vote. I really don't see the younger majority of kids accepting religion as something they relate to or want to be a participant of, so, as the old religious voters die off, maybe life changes?

 

[Deleted member 37064]

It seemed like the Democrats lost some key states because of something. Not sure if Clinton (maybe she freaked them out) could have done anything by campaigning in the states that were mostly blue due to the rhetoric used by Trump but she lost three key states (PA, Mich, and Wis).

The Democrats lost for a few different reasons, and I know this is going to be unpopular on the forum. But...

1) They promised the nomination to Clinton in 2008 when they gave it to Obama. They were conting on being able to ride to coattails of the first black President with the first female president. If anyone recalls, Clinton absolutely refused to step down as a contender for the running until the absolute last minute. I knew they'd make a deal with her to become Sec of State under Obama, then give her the nod in '16.
2) Benghazi. Active military, veterans, police, etc abhore Clinton for what she did to the men in Benghazi. She left them to die. Therefore, the vast majority of them voted for anyone but Clinton. It could have been Hitler, and they still would have voted for him over her.
3) Private email server investigation from when she was Sec. of State. Dragged on forever. Even to this day...
4) Investigation of Clinton Foundation for improper use of funds
5) DNC email leaks which pointed out that Sanders would not get the nod even if he won and showed that the Democrats are just as crooked as the Republicans.

Among other things...

Religious people do vote, and they vote en masse.

As do teachers, construction workers, pipe-fitters, and countless other union members. Union are notorious for pushing the blue vote. So, they kind of balance each other out...


The problem is that most people fail to comprehend that both major parties are severely corrupt and do not have anyone's best interest in mind. Regardless of if it is a Dem or Repub, we all lose.

 

[Teagan]

You mention kids and being brought up to learn. If there is one thing I would hope this four year presidency teaches the children (and those reaching a voting age) is that to know the system is to rule the system. It seemed like the Democrats lost some key states because of something. Not sure if Clinton (maybe she freaked them out) could have done anything by campaigning in the states that were mostly blue due to the rhetoric used by Trump but she lost three key states (PA, Mich, and Wis). Both candidates aren't really religious, but, Trump changed the vote with making America great again, and adding in stuff that would appeal to religious people. Religious people do vote, and they vote en masse.

If I could do a search for American voters under the age of 24 I am betting that they enjoyed the Clinton concert part of Jay Z and Beyonce but were probably unable to vote due to social media circumstances. Not a great audience to target. Hollywood loves you, but, man, that audience may or may not vote depending on how they feel the next day. I remember being a teen and not giving a shit. I didn't understand why people hated Jimmy Carter (though I do remember waiting in line in the back seat of my dad's car at a gas station to get gas ), didn't understand why they loved Ronald Reagan (and the Iran Contra affair--but he used to use radio fireside chats like Trump uses twitter, but in a smoother more appealing way to the average American. I remember hearing them in the car on the drive to the bus stop), and I was blown away by Bush advancing on Kuwait (first year in college). When Clinton came in I was confused as to why he was acting the way he was with the sex stuff and then we lost tons of jobs to China (sorry if that is Reagan or Bush stuff, but that was when I started to learn about the abandoning of American manufacturing for a cheaper source --communist for so many years but apparently willing to take our jobs). I honestly had no parental figure to help me see what was going on. There was no person that could say "this is why it is today." I eventually found out that most lots of people hated Nixon. Odd. But I only heard it thru word of mouth and had to research...no internet back then.

I eventually got angry angry that the people in charge weren't seeing the situation with the Iraq and WMDs and stuff to the point of even pissing off family members (who won't still talk to me) who worked as government contractors for military uniforms with my views (it's increased business and a bigger paycheck to them). Then the peoples of this country calmed down and we elected Obama for 8 years.

Not much religion in all this but, I truly hope kids and future voters can wade thru all the weird non-sensensical stuff, learn to work the system, and vote. I really don't see the younger majority of kids accepting religion as something they relate to or want to be a participant of, so, as the old religious voters die off, maybe life changes?

Yeah religious people do love voting so they can keep their grasps on things. They know they are actually outnumbered but because they vote they keep a lot of control. I hope too once they die off people will start thinking with their brain instead. Didn't they just say now though that churches can start endorsing candidates? It may be a while before things change when they do stuff like that.

I think the issue with the Beyonce concert was it just wasn't her. She could not capture the cool kids like Obama could. It's just not her or her style. Instead of just sticking to being the good woman who is strong and confident she tried too much sometimes. Pathetically a lot of people look at that kind of woman as cold or a bitch which didn't help. Prejudice never does.

I also had no parental figure to help guide me. I was on my own. My dad I don't think ever cared to vote. My mom would but was so closed off to it she would never tell me, even as a kid, who she voted for or how she felt about anything. I learned jack all from them so I did it myself however I could. I however loved politics so I watched what I could and read a lot. I read the paper and watched TV news. The media was a lot less blatantly bias back then so it was easier. Then the internet came and that made some stuff easier but early internet still was crap lol. I did what I could though to inform myself before I could vote so I knew how to vote for myself. Then when I could vote I did and always have. I've worked the polls as the judge even a few times. Once I could I stuck with it. Though not all kids nor young adults give a damn. My friends never did.



Forceten the reason what you said is unpopular is because it's pretty much bull. Clinton didn't leave people to die. She's not universally hated by first responders or the military. What a joke. Still trying to put all that on her is so ridiculous I can't believe it's still being parroted around. Pretty sure they may have an issue with Hitler too but whatever. The DNC stuff showed they had bias, which they were allowed. They had no obligation to support Sanders who was really not a Dem candidate. That's also not something anyone can blame Clinton for but boy did they try and it worked on idiots for sure.

You forgot in that list one of the big ones. The amount of hateful, homophobic, bigoted, sexist, racist, and awful people who exist today and how far they will go for their hate. Bringing together all the terrible human beings and ones who fall for fear mongering along with jerry-rigging is what worked really. I'm not delusional to think either party gives a damn as a whole, but we all know the party of hate at the end of the day.

 

[Deleted member 37064]

Forceten the reason what you said is unpopular is because it's pretty much bull. Clinton didn't leave people to die. She's not universally hated by first responders or the military. What a joke. Still trying to put all that on her is so ridiculous I can't believe it's still being parroted around. Pretty sure they may have an issue with Hitler too but whatever. The DNC stuff showed they had bias, which they were allowed. They had no obligation to support Sanders who was really not a Dem candidate. That's also not something anyone can blame Clinton for but boy did they try and it worked on idiots for sure.

You forgot in that list one of the big ones. The amount of hateful, homophobic, bigoted, sexist, racist, and awful people who exist today and how far they will go for their hate. Bringing together all the terrible human beings and ones who fall for fear mongering along with jerry-rigging is what worked really. I'm not delusional to think either party gives a damn as a whole, but we all know the party of hate at the end of the day.

If you think only one party, and it's sheeple, are "the party of hate". You're sadly mistaken. They both do it. They, and their media cohorts, use whatever tactics are necessary to control the masses. To cause fighting between the citizens, to distract them from certain things which are coming to light at different times. Both parties have shown they are equally corrupt. The Republicans many times prior to 2016, and the Democrats were shown, yet again, in this latest election.

Like you, I had no parental guidance when it came to voting as neither of my parents voted for different reasons. That being said, my father and his friends were very critical of all aspects of the Gov't. Not just Fed. But, all the way down to local municipalities as well.

I have no allegiance to either party. Never have. Never will. I do my research, using resources and connections wherever I can, to gather info to help make informed decisions. I do this for all candidates, regardless of platform. I have voted across party lines multiple times and will continue to do so based upon whom I feel is the best candidate for the position they are running for.

It appears neither of us are going to change our views. With that, I bid you a good day as I'm done with this topic.

 

[Teagan]

I don't disagree both parties are corrupt. I do however know which one the hate groups support in full force too. Corruption and hate are 2 different things. As it stands today the party of hate is fully one party over the other by a wide ass margin.

 

[Bocefish]

If Illinois files bankruptcy they'd be the first and it's unprecedented though. Of course people get the government they vote for, I already touched on that previously, Illinois is bigger than just Chicago though.

Detroit is in major overhaul status, although they have made it worth investors to at least consider opportunities there.

As far as bankruptcies go... The city of Detroit, Michigan, filed for Chapter 9 bankruptcy on July 18, 2013. It is the largest municipal bankruptcy filing in U.S. history by debt, estimated at $18–20 billion, exceeding Jefferson County, Alabama's $4-billion filing in 2011.[1] Detroit is also the largest city by population in the U.S. history to file for Chapter 9 bankruptcy, more than twice as large as Stockton, California, which filed in 2012. Detroit’s population has declined from a peak of 1.8 million in 1950; in July 2013, The New York Times called the city “home to 700,000 people, as well as to tens of thousands of abandoned buildings, vacant lots and unlit streets.” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Detroit_bankruptcy

ETA: If we could get term limits passed... these bought and paid for corrupt career politicians would be a thing of the past.

 

[dilligaf0]

Catholics aren't alone in being against birth control. Baptists feel the same. As do many off shoots of both religions.

Many states still have stupid no alcohol on Sunday laws. Indiana being one.

And lotteries are still highly debated and restricted. Many are only things like powerball and even that isn't in every state. Gambling really the laws are strict on. Casinos are only allowed certain places like on water a lot of times. Most times in order to get one they have to make huge promises to get them open. Like funding schools. Ultimately it ends up replacing money allocated for those things instead of adding to budgets. It's pretty messed up.

All these things are considered sins by the big religions in the US. It's something a lot of them agree upon so they vote to keep them in. Why anyone feels their religious beliefs should dictate other people's lives I will never get but they love doing it and have no intentions on just shutting up and worrying about themselves.

Don't bash Indiana's contributions to politics!
We've given the country Mike Pence AND Dan Quayle!

Seriously though, I'm sorry for that.

 

[dilligaf0]

As do teachers, construction workers, pipe-fitters, and countless other union members. Union are notorious for pushing the blue vote. So, they kind of balance each other out...

But consider that the unions represent fewer people the ever before, where the religious people's numbers have not decrease by nearly as much.

As far as the whole religious aspect of the original post, the guide being followed is a translation from the original Hebrew scrolls. Many parts of which were omitted from the translation if it contradicted King James religious beliefs.

 

[Teagan]

Detroit is in major overhaul status, although they have made it worth investors to at least consider opportunities there.

As far as bankruptcies go... The city of Detroit, Michigan, filed for Chapter 9 bankruptcy on July 18, 2013. It is the largest municipal bankruptcy filing in U.S. history by debt, estimated at $18–20 billion, exceeding Jefferson County, Alabama's $4-billion filing in 2011.[1] Detroit is also the largest city by population in the U.S. history to file for Chapter 9 bankruptcy, more than twice as large as Stockton, California, which filed in 2012. Detroit’s population has declined from a peak of 1.8 million in 1950; in July 2013, The New York Times called the city “home to 700,000 people, as well as to tens of thousands of abandoned buildings, vacant lots and unlit streets.” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Detroit_bankruptcy

ETA: If we could get term limits passed... these bought and paid for corrupt career politicians would be a thing of the past.

Yeah cities have filed before. Sad but true. States haven't and it'd be hard to predict what would happen if one did. An entire state? Ouch. The shitty taxes passed so more people are going to flood out yet again. Rauner wants terms limits but of course that wasn't in the bill. Wonder why lol.

Don't bash Indiana's contributions to politics!
We've given the country Mike Pence AND Dan Quayle!

Seriously though, I'm sorry for that.

Indiana has some stupid backward ass laws. They also constantly attack womens stuff. I refuse to apologize for Pence. The shit he did was well known and if people ignored those giant red warning flags then that's on them.

 

[Lucid1]

It's not ILLEGAL to cheat on your spouse.

It most certainly is, especially if you're in the armed forces. Our military(all branches), operates under the UCMJ(Uniform Code of Military Justice). The UCMJ is Federal law that was enacted by Congress to govern the conduct and behavior of our service members. What's interesting about this law is this, and I'll quote military.com here:

"There are three distinct elements to the crime of adultery under the UCMJ: First, a Soldier must have had sexual intercourse with someone; Second, the Soldier or their sexual partner was married to someone else at the time; and Third, that under these circumstances, the conduct of the Soldier was to the prejudice of good order and discipline in the armed forces or was of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces.

Notice there is not a mention of the bible, god, or any other religious tenant used to define why it is wrong for a service member to commit adultery. It simply states that if there is prejudice to the good order and discipline, or brings discredit upon the armed forces. So yes, a law can be enacted without religious tenants or principles of theology defining why it's wrong.

 

[Deleted member 37064]

But consider that the unions represent fewer people the ever before, where the religious people's numbers have not decrease by nearly as much.

It most certainly is, especially if you're in the armed forces. Our military(all branches), operates under the UCMJ(Uniform Code of Military Justice). The UCMJ is Federal law that was enacted by Congress to govern the conduct and behavior of our service members. What's interesting about this law is this, and I'll quote military.com here:

"There are three distinct elements to the crime of adultery under the UCMJ: First, a Soldier must have had sexual intercourse with someone; Second, the Soldier or their sexual partner was married to someone else at the time; and Third, that under these circumstances, the conduct of the Soldier was to the prejudice of good order and discipline in the armed forces or was of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces.

Notice there is not a mention of the bible, god, or any other religious tenant used to define why it is wrong for a service member to commit adultery. It simply states that if there is prejudice to the good order and discipline, or brings discredit upon the armed forces. So yes, a law can be enacted without religious tenants or principles of theology defining why it's wrong.

Add t it laws regarding fraternization (relationships) between officers and enlisted or subordinates.

A quick google search of Laws regarding aultery turned up some interesting resources...

2016 MN law on adultery
legalzoom on adultery and abandonment

Also, this article talks about how adultery is slowly losing its criminal status worldwide. However, is still a crime in many places.

 

[SaffronBurke]

It most certainly is, especially if you're in the armed forces. Our military(all branches), operates under the UCMJ(Uniform Code of Military Justice). The UCMJ is Federal law that was enacted by Congress to govern the conduct and behavior of our service members. What's interesting about this law is this, and I'll quote military.com here:

"There are three distinct elements to the crime of adultery under the UCMJ: First, a Soldier must have had sexual intercourse with someone; Second, the Soldier or their sexual partner was married to someone else at the time; and Third, that under these circumstances, the conduct of the Soldier was to the prejudice of good order and discipline in the armed forces or was of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces.

Notice there is not a mention of the bible, god, or any other religious tenant used to define why it is wrong for a service member to commit adultery. It simply states that if there is prejudice to the good order and discipline, or brings discredit upon the armed forces. So yes, a law can be enacted without religious tenants or principles of theology defining why it's wrong.

Ok, let me rephrase my statement:

Outside of some weird-ass military law I've never fucking heard of, it's not illegal to cheat on your spouse.

 

[jolietjake]

But consider that the unions represent fewer people the ever before, where the religious people's numbers have not decrease by nearly as much.

As far as the whole religious aspect of the original post, the guide being followed is a translation from the original Hebrew scrolls. Many parts of which were omitted from the translation if it contradicted King James religious beliefs.

What has happened with religion and politics in the US is the rise of the Religious Right. And that is all conservative and all Republican. And their stated goal is to "bring America back to God" which scares the crap out of me. And I believe if you look at it their numbers are probably rising and have been doing so for a while. Witness the "mega churches" which tend to be non- denominational Christian "bible believing" churches. What they seem to do is give people an external authority complete with a behavioral code to make things simple. It makes it easier to cope with the complexities of the world we live in. And you don't really have to think all that much. Just do what they tell you to do and act happy. "Praise the Lord and hate the liberals."

 

[dilligaf0]

What has happened with religion and politics in the US is the rise of the Religious Right. And that is all conservative and all Republican. And their stated goal is to "bring America back to God" which scares the crap out of me. And I believe if you look at it their numbers are probably rising and have been doing so for a while. Witness the "mega churches" which tend to be non- denominational Christian "bible believing" churches. What they seem to do is give people an external authority complete with a behavioral code to make things simple. It makes it easier to cope with the complexities of the world we live in. And you don't really have to think all that much. Just do what they tell you to do and act happy. "Praise the Lord and hate the liberals."

I think this is true, but many of them don't seem to follow said behavioral code, they just expect everyone else to.

 

[dilligaf0]

Ok, let me rephrase my statement:

Outside of some weird-ass military law I've never fucking heard of, it's not illegal to cheat on your spouse.

I think many states have / had laws making adultery illegal as well as grounds for divorce. That may have changed when so many states adopted the "no-fault divorce" laws.

 

[jolietjake]

I think this is true, but many of them don't seem to follow said behavioral code, they just expect everyone else to.

Many of them seem to be pretty mindless and unconscious to me. Kind of incapable of thinking much through, certainly not much critical thinking. The essential message of the New Testament that they say they base their behavior on is love. And in my view the essence of love is acceptance. I like the quote from Gandhi, "I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ." Seems to fit pretty well. And bringing this back to the church/ state separation issue, we supposedly live in a country that values individual freedom and that seems the best argument for the separation of church and state. I certainly don't want a religious group to dictate behavior to me or anyone else.

 

[dilligaf0]

The fundamental ideal of the separation of church and state was the Government would not require which religion you should follow. The Gov. should not be able to tell you to be Christian instead of Sikh, Buddhist etc..

 

[Deleted member 37064]

Many of them seem to be pretty mindless and unconscious to me. Kind of incapable of thinking much through, certainly not much critical thinking. The essential message of the New Testament that they say they base their behavior on is love. And in my view the essence of love is acceptance.

Your first two sentences are used by many different people in regards to other grops as well.

Like anything, there are good and bad people of every group, organization, etc. Please do not forget that there are some in other special interest groups whom claim peace, love, tolerance, etc. Yet, when you disagree with them on their <insert special interest group> you are a now a target of their hatred and intolerance.