• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Do you support theocracies?

Do you support theocracies?

  • Total voters
    30
Jucon

Jucon

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 9, 2010
Messages
787
Reaction score
222
Location
USA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
Why or why not?

Which ones do you / would you support?
Which are you / would you be against?


Edit: Also, how do you feel theocracies should be dealt with (or not dealt with) by the international community? Feel free to give real or hypothetical situations to explain your view.
 
Last edited:
Are you talking about theocracies that currently exist or the concept of a theocratic government?
 
digsbe said:
Are you talking about theocracies that currently exist or the concept of a theocratic government?
Click to expand...

Both. The concept of and implementation of theocracies.


Personally, I am against almost all theocracies. There are few cases where an entire population holds the same religion. It can easily lead to portions of the population being suppressed or having a lack of voice in their government.
 
Last edited:
A theocracy would be fine if the greater power it was based on was actually around and governing. Otherwise all you have are people who are either lying, or hearing voices, claiming some spiritual source to justify their decisions. Theocracies are, at their heart, based on a lie.

Actually, more often than no, a theocracy is just an aristocracy with slightly different trappings. A priest class that is supreme in a theocracy often comes from a specific subset of the citizenry. Those not born into the special caste seldom find their way into it. It's just one of many systems to ensure that wealth and power stay concentrated among a few people, who then pass it down to their descendants. Inherited, stagnant, hereditary power and wealth. A theocracy is just like a monarchy, or an aristocracy, or American capitalism.
 
No, I think governments should be based on logic, not mysticism. It hasn't seemed to work out all that well in implementation either.
 
Paschendale said:
A theocracy would be fine if the greater power it was based on was actually around and governing. Otherwise all you have are people who are either lying, or hearing voices, claiming some spiritual source to justify their decisions. Theocracies are, at their heart, based on a lie.

Actually, more often than no, a theocracy is just an aristocracy with slightly different trappings. A priest class that is supreme in a theocracy often comes from a specific subset of the citizenry. Those not born into the special caste seldom find their way into it. It's just one of many systems to ensure that wealth and power stay concentrated among a few people, who then pass it down to their descendants. Inherited, stagnant, hereditary power and wealth. A theocracy is just like a monarchy, or an aristocracy, or American capitalism.
Click to expand...

At least you have the balls to Lean: Socialist. Not bad.
 
.... I don't get it...

What do you mean by "supporting"? I don't support anybody's government other than my own. Obviously I don't support my government being a theocracy. However, I don't really have a real opinion about theocracies in countries that I don't live in. Sure, they're ****ty and backwards as ****, but I neither support or oppose them. That's up to the living under them to decide. You question is just a little hard to understand.
 
As this is the season for thinking about "peace on Earth, good will to men"...

Until Jesus of Nazareth returns to the Earth to establish the kingdom of God, I cannot support any theocracy because, being led and administered by men, it will be corrupted and abused by them. A man-made theocracy is a recipe for disaster. Upon Jesus' Second Coming, He will put into place the administration of world government necessary to properly carry out its function and at that time I will happily embrace theocracy as the best form of government. Prior to Christ's divine intervention, however, I will continue to advocate for a constitutional republic as the best form of government yet devised by the minds of men. It best accounts for the present fallen state of the human condition and is best suited to mitigating the exigencies thereof.
 
Blackstone said:
As this is the season for thinking about "peace on Earth, good will to men"...

Until Jesus of Nazareth returns to the Earth to establish the kingdom of God, I cannot support any theocracy because, being led and administered by men, it will be corrupted and abused by them. A man-made theocracy is a recipe for disaster. Upon Jesus' Second Coming, He will put into place the administration of world government necessary to properly carry out its function and at that time I will happily embrace theocracy as the best form of government. Prior to Christ's divine intervention, however, I will continue to advocate for a constitutional republic as the best form of government yet devised by the minds of men. It best accounts for the present fallen state of the human condition and is best suited to mitigating the exigencies thereof.
Click to expand...

Not doubting your guy's return there but any ideas on when he'll get around to establishing that world government? I mean, we're getting a little crowded down here being 7 billion and all.
 
Hatuey said:
Not doubting your guy's return there but any ideas on when he'll get around to establishing that world government? I mean, we're getting a little crowded down here being 7 billion and all.
Click to expand...

LOL - but I can drive for 2 hours through the woods and not see a single soul. . . there's room! If they want to move. :D
 
no vote
again, a fixed poll
I support the people's right to choose for themselves, whatever it be, irregardless of our like or dislike.
 
earthworm said:
no vote
again, a fixed poll
I support the people's right to choose for themselves, whatever it be, irregardless of our like or dislike.
Click to expand...

But unfortunately the right to choose ends with some types of government. A theocracy would be one of those types of government. You might try living in Iran or some similar Middle Eastern country. You might find that their choices are narrowed down significantly for them.
 
Removable Mind said:
But unfortunately the right to choose ends with some types of government. A theocracy would be one of those types of government. You might try living in Iran or some similar Middle Eastern country. You might find that their choices are narrowed down significantly for them.
Click to expand...
No thanks, I have been spoiled rotten.
But people are all different...having never known "freedom", many would not know it if it bit them on their arse. And then they may reject it..
Sure, we think its great, but other may not feel the same way.
Do we really know how the Iranians feel ? ...or the N Koreans ??

BTW, I hope that our nation never becomes a theocracy, or even close. I want things to stay in balance.
 
earthworm said:
No thanks, I have been spoiled rotten.
But people are all different...having never known "freedom", many would not know it if it bit them on their arse. And then they may reject it..
Sure, we think its great, but other may not feel the same way.
Do we really know how the Iranians feel ? ...or the N Koreans ??
Click to expand...

Yes, we do know how they feel: Oppressed and enslaved...with the constant threat of death for even speaking out loud against the ruling regime.
 
I support the idea of a Moralistic Limited Republic; that is the idea of a Government of and for the Moral. This means that there would be requirements to prove one's Moral decency in order to receive the benefits of Citizenship; including voting, holding public office, getting public funds, etc....
 
Tigger said:
I support the idea of a Moralistic Limited Republic; that is the idea of a Government of and for the Moral. This means that there would be requirements to prove one's Moral decency in order to receive the benefits of Citizenship; including voting, holding public office, getting public funds, etc....
Click to expand...

In other words your a dictator at heart.... Your perceived moral standards over the meaning of all others, right?

Define "moral decency" to me, please.
 
Last edited:
Theocracies tend to suppress secular thought and empirical reasoning, so no I do not support them. Democracies are far from perfect but they are leaps and bounds better than religious rule would be. Medieval Europe proved that with abundance. The Divine Right of Kings is behind us and should stay there.
 
Blackstone said:
...
Until Jesus of Nazareth returns to the Earth to establish the kingdom of God, I cannot support any theocracy because, being led and administered by men, it will be corrupted and abused by them. A man-made theocracy is a recipe for disaster. Upon Jesus' Second Coming, He will put into place the administration of world government necessary to properly carry out its function and at that time I will happily embrace theocracy as the best form of government.....
Click to expand...

perhaps the silliest post ever.
 
Removable Mind said:
In other words your a dictator at heart.... Your perceived moral standards over the meaning of all others, right?

Define "moral decency" to me, please.
Click to expand...

I'm an Authoritarian. I have never made any bones about that. I believe that Morality is the highest calling in life. Beyond Religion, Culture, Nationality, Society, Family, etc.... To live an Immoral Life is worse than Death itself.

Moral Decency is very simple.... It is acutally LIVING life by the standards set by A Proper Society. No more paying lip service to the ideals of A Proper Society. . Either you live your life by those rules or you have no place in the Proper Society. You may choose to leave the society completely, live as a second-class resident in the society, or end up facing Punishment when you are found to be living an Immoral Life.

It would take hours (which I don't have) to explain all the tenants of Moral Decency specifically; but as a general overview you may look at the social order of the Middle East or the era of history from the Middle Ages through the American Colonial period. For a limited idea of how this sort of society might work, see Robert Heinlein's "Starship Troopers" world.
 
Last edited:
Tigger said:
I'm an Authoritarian. I have never made any bones about that. I believe that Morality is the highest calling in life. Beyond Religion, Culture, Nationality, Society, Family, etc.... To live an Immoral Life is worse than Death itself.

Moral Decency is very simple.... It is acutally LIVING life by the standards set by the society. No more paying lip service to the ideals of the society. Either you live your life by those rules or you have no place in the society. You may choose to leave the society completely, live as a second-class resident in the society, or end up facing Punishment when you are found to be living an Immoral Life.

It would take hours (which I don't have) to explain all the tenants of Moral Decency specifically; but as a general overview you may look at the social order of the Middle East or the era of history from the Middle Ages through the American Colonial period.
Click to expand...

So in your own words, right now you are living an immoral life. You are not living by the standards society right now is setting. You do not treat women equally, which is a standard by society that is widely held, so by your own definition you are immoral.
 
Your Star said:
So in your own words, right now you are living an immoral life. You are not living by the standards society right now is setting. You do not treat women equally, which is a standard by society that is widely held, so by your own definition you are immoral.
Click to expand...

My apologies. I meant to not "Proper Society" rather than society in general. That has now been corrected. Thank you for pointing it out, and again my apologies for mis-stating it in the first place. Since current American Society has no connection to A Proper Society at all, the rest of your post is immaterial.
 
Generally speaking, I think theocracy is a bad idea.

My primary reason is that governing tends to corrupt the religion. It is best to keep authority-temporal and authority-spiritual as seperate entities.
 
Thunder said:
there is nothing moral about depriving others of freedom.
Click to expand...

You folks who feel that Freedom and Liberty are these great and wonderful things always seem to be the same people who side with Mr. Lincoln and his UnConstitutional invasion, conquering, and anexation of a sovereign nation that came about based on those very ideals. Hmmm.

Freedom and Liberty are only useful within reasonable limitations, Thunder. Just as the Rights of Free Speech and the Bearing of Arms have their limitations, so do Freedom and Liberty need to have theirs. Otherwise you end up with the social anarchy we see in America today.
 
Tigger said:
Freedom and Liberty are only useful within reasonable limitations, Thunder. Just as the Rights of Free Speech and the Bearing of Arms have their limitations, so do Freedom and Liberty need to have theirs. Otherwise you end up with the free society we see in America today.
Click to expand...

edited for accuracy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom