• 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!

Freedom of Religion vs the Mandate to Evolve [W 65]

Which is more crucial

  • Total voters
    40
  • Poll closed .
Van Basten said:
What the hell is this mandate to evolve?
Click to expand...
It's taken from Ikari's response below:

Ikari said:
Evolve or die, there is no try.
Click to expand...

I've been hearing this kind of language quite a bit lately, so I thought I'd make a poll and see where everyone else stands on this idiotic notion.
 
WCH said:
Yep and as long as they have the heavy hand of big government to change reality what we think won't matter much.
Click to expand...
The media too. And let's not forget Hollywood.
 
Dooble said:
I've been hearing this kind of language quite a bit lately, so I thought I'd make a poll and see where everyone else stands on this idiotic notion.
Click to expand...

It's just the way it is. Things evolve. You either evolve, or your left behind. Society changes. We wear mixed fabrics now, we don't stone women for small offenses, we ended slavery. And at each turn there were people fighting the change, they were just bred out over time as the system evolved. And here we have the same thing. We are growing and we are becoming more accepting of homosexuality as we learn that human is human. There are people fighting it now, but they'll be left behind and in a few decades at most people will look back on us now and wonder why there were ever people who rallied against homosexuals.

Just the way of the world. It has nothing to do with religious freedom, the religions are free to express whatever they want. But religion will change as man changes, religion is a reflection of ourselves. And like churches in the days of ol' called for the death of heathens and even lit the fire themselves in some instances, religion will leave behind the barbaric and irrational practices as man and society change.
 
Rainman05 said:
what is "mandate to evolve"? some wierd hippy stuff?
Click to expand...

I suspect that it means the method by which one is forced into not stating what one believes, without paying dire consequences for said action, so it isn't really evolution in the least, but coercion by those in power. If I threaten you with bodily harm or death for not believing what I believe is right, will you really evolve, or will you just keep your mouth shut?
 
Social, intellectual, and political evolution are, I think, unavoidable. Freedom of religion would be more crucial in the sense that it is something that must be protected, especially considering that it has a growing underappreciation and lack of respect in the nation, at the moment.
 
Gardener said:
I think it is trollspeak.

I know not that particular tongue.
Click to expand...
Trollspeak, in your book, is anything that doesn't elicit a sexual tickle.
 
Dooble said:
Who told you to remove the light?
Click to expand...

Actually, lots of religious people don't want to have their beliefs examined or their secrets told. That's why the Vatican just made it a crime to reveal their secrets.
 
Cephus said:
Actually, lots of religious people don't want to have their beliefs examined or their secrets told. That's why the Vatican just made it a crime to reveal their secrets.
Click to expand...
I'm cool with it.
 
Dooble said:
Which is more crucial?
Click to expand...


Some vague notion of exactly how you are using these terms and why you feel they are mutually exclusionary, in other words a little substance to the original post, would help the poll.


As it is I have no interest in voting in something so ill-defined.
 
Dooble said:
Don't you worry, rathi, I'll keep you out of the dark. It's about keeping the light on the gay agenda. ;)
Click to expand...

Why can't we have freedom of religion and gay marriage? Why would we have to choose?
 
Dooble said:
Far as I can tell it's to embrace the notion of same sex marriage. I'm sure there will be more to it as the expression evolves, itself.
Click to expand...


I have never heard someone use that until you did.
 
ChrisL said:
Why can't we have freedom of religion and gay marriage? Why would we have to choose?
Click to expand...
You already have chosen; so has the SC, and many other Americans. Now I've shifted my focus to Ikari's mandate to "evolve, or die". Should religions have the freedom to deny SSM within their own congregations, or should they allow it? The consequences are already in place, right? Or is Ikari just blowing out noxious fumes?
 
Last edited:
Dooble said:
You already have chosen, and so has the SC. Now I've shifted my focus to Ikari's mandate to "evolve, or die". Should religions have the freedom to deny SSM within their own congregations, or should they allow it?
Click to expand...

They have the right to not perform SSM but they will find their congregations dwindling with time and eventually they will adapt or they will wither away to nothingness. No one is forcing anything on them
 
Quag said:
No one is forcing anything on them
Click to expand...
Except the looming threat that if they don't "evolve", they will die. No big deal, right Quag?
 
Dooble said:
Except the looming threat that if they don't "evolve", they will die. No big deal, right Quag?
Click to expand...

Such is life, belief systems change all the time You may never change yours (though experience says that peoples beliefs evolve all the time) but after your death what you believe will not necessarily be carried on by your offspring and neither will their offspring. it is not an attack it, is not an assault it is just reality of life. things change
 
Ikari said:
It's just the way it is. Things evolve. You either evolve, or your left behind. Society changes. We wear mixed fabrics now, we don't stone women for small offenses, we ended slavery. And at each turn there were people fighting the change, they were just bred out over time as the system evolved. And here we have the same thing. We are growing and we are becoming more accepting of homosexuality as we learn that human is human. There are people fighting it now, but they'll be left behind and in a few decades at most people will look back on us now and wonder why there were ever people who rallied against homosexuals.

Just the way of the world. It has nothing to do with religious freedom, the religions are free to express whatever they want. But religion will change as man changes, religion is a reflection of ourselves. And like churches in the days of ol' called for the death of heathens and even lit the fire themselves in some instances, religion will leave behind the barbaric and irrational practices as man and society change.
Click to expand...

Dooble said:
You already have chosen; so has the SC, and many other Americans. Now I've shifted my focus to Ikari's mandate to "evolve, or die". Should religions have the freedom to deny SSM within their own congregations, or should they allow it? The consequences are already in place, right? Or is Ikari just blowing out noxious fumes?
Click to expand...

Is the above post the one you're referring to? I don't see those words contained within his post. I think you misunderstand what his point which I believe is that the world is going to keep on changing and evolving with or without the religious folks. If they choose to continue to view some things the way they do, they will end up being irrelevant.
 
I picked mandate to evolve.

The reason my username is not listed with other voters is that I forgot to log
in before I voted.

All fundamentalist/ultra-orthodox factions of all religions are stupid assholes
and that's all there is to it.

Muslims, Hindus, Jews and Christians are all included. As of this writing the
Muslims are the only ones who are clearly a physical danger, but just to be
even-handed about it, consider that the most conservative Israeli Jews will
not serve in the military! That's right folks, there are about 60,000 able-bodied
fundamentalist Israeli men who think that if God provided for their survival
without military service for ~1800 years, then He always will. I have not been
able to find out how these assholes torture a pacifist reading out of the Old Testament;
at least the NT contains some passages which clearly prescribe non-violence.

I wish there more ways to make life difficult for the fundamentalist-ultra-orthodox.
Unfortunately It sure as hell doesn't look like they are going to evolve out of existence,
and the constitutional protections of Western law make it impossible most forms
of discrimination against them. I guess we will just have to hope that their malevolent
influence does not produce holocaustic results.
 
This thread seems dependent on extreme hyperbole and misconstrued words. I'd be interested to read where the OP got this notion.
 
ChrisL said:
Is the above post the one you're referring to? I don't see those words contained within his post. I think you misunderstand what his point which I believe is that the world is going to keep on changing and evolving with or without the religious folks. If they choose to continue to view some things the way they do, they will end up being irrelevant.
Click to expand...

It was in a different thread:

Ikari said:
What consequences? That bigots and irrational haters are a dying breed and will soon go the way of other racists and idiots? Perhaps, hopefully so.



So was the rule change to permit mixed blends of fabric a form of coercion? Did the cotton industry get to you on that one? What about all the reasons we don't stone women anymore? Coercion? Who got you there? What other conspiracy theory against religion since the depths of mankind's existence do you subscribe to? Just gays? Oh that's a conspiracy, but not all the other reinterpretations, relaxing or forgetting of rules? Those don't count?

Face it, we as a species evolve. We grow up, we learn and we grow and we experience and we bank it all in our collective knowledge. And as we grow we become more accepting of things and we will continue in this manner. And religion, which is a reflection of mankind, will change right along with us. Here's a stat for you. There has NEVER been an infinitely stable religion in the entire history of humanity. It all changes as humans change.

Evolve or die, there is no try.
Click to expand...

That's the full of it, you can follow the link to see exactly what I was responding to. But in the end, this is his misunderstanding. I never once said that churches would be forced to perform SSM. In fact many times in the past and now I have explicitly stated that Churches cannot be forced to perform SSM, they must decide their own practices for themselves. My ultimate point, however, was that everything evolves and now we as a species and society are moving forwards towards the acceptance of the SS community and as we continue to go, more and more are going to learn to accept and live with it. Many churches will start to recognize and perform SSM as religion is a reflection of mankind and as we evolve, so do our religions.

I think Dooble takes considerable offense to the word "evolve" and hasn't given consideration into what it means. The opinions of those like Dooble are dying out and will die in time. I'm not saying he can't hold them or espouse them; but it's a dying sentiment and in time it will be gone. Everything evolves, nothing is static. Static is stagnation, and stagnation is death. Just the way of nature.
 
I think the right is pro for the mandate for all of us to evolve this year. I feel so blessed when they join in the train with the rest of us. Now with their blessing we can finally evolve to the challenging chaotic demands of our environment, for we were stuck waiting their votes for the mandate till now!
 
Ikari said:
It was in a different thread:



That's the full of it, you can follow the link to see exactly what I was responding to. But in the end, this is his misunderstanding. I never once said that churches would be forced to perform SSM. In fact many times in the past and now I have explicitly stated that Churches cannot be forced to perform SSM, they must decide their own practices for themselves. My ultimate point, however, was that everything evolves and now we as a species and society are moving forwards towards the acceptance of the SS community and as we continue to go, more and more are going to learn to accept and live with it. Many churches will start to recognize and perform SSM as religion is a reflection of mankind and as we evolve, so do our religions.

I think Dooble takes considerable offense to the word "evolve" and hasn't given consideration into what it means. The opinions of those like Dooble are dying out and will die in time. I'm not saying he can't hold them or espouse them; but it's a dying sentiment and in time it will be gone. Everything evolves, nothing is static. Static is stagnation, and stagnation is death. Just the way of nature.
Click to expand...

Great post. I agree with most of your post except I don't know if some religions will ever accept SSM.

Anyway, I'm familiar with a lot of your positions, that's why I questioned Dooble about his statement.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom