• 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!

Are Politics and Religion becoming one and the same?

Are Politics and Religion becoming one and the same?

  • Total voters
    28
The Mark

The Mark

Sporadic insanity normal.
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Sep 9, 2005
Messages
34,929
Reaction score
12,324
Location
Pennsylvania
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
Are Politics and Religion becoming one and the same?

By this I mean:

Are political positions and the support they have (in some cases) becoming more belief based than reason based?
 
Last edited:
Unfortanetly yes, they are.
 
The Mark said:
Are Politics and Religion becoming one and the same?

By this I mean:

Are political positions and the support they have (in some cases) becoming influenced more by belief than reason?
Click to expand...

Of course they have been. But they've always been this way, ever since the first religious establishments were used by the nobility to get the peasants to acquiesce to the rulership of the king over them.
 
They arent becoming, they always were.

Human nature is human nature, and whether its Yankee pride or being a Republican the mechanisms behind getting on a bandwagon is the same. People want to belong, they want the world to make sense, they want to be the ones who know while the others are ignorant. Same kind of thing that drives gang recruitment.
 
The Mark said:
Are Politics and Religion becoming one and the same?

By this I mean:

Are political positions and the support they have (in some cases) becoming more belief based than reason based?
Click to expand...

Absolutely. Unfortunately, many people have no rational basis for any of their political beliefs, and resort to posting nothing but TV talking points or dogma about what the government is "supposed" to do.
 
The trend is that Christians tend to be more consevative, but there are exceptions. One of the reasons I am liberal is because Jesus helped people who actually needed it, not the rich.
 
Last edited:
I'd say it's sad that politics and religion are growing apart. The poison of secularism is corroding morality and religion has now become disdained by the government. PC has become increasingly anti-Christian and pro-everythingelse. People who hold political belief's because of religious faith are now being branded as ignorant. Secularism is a good thing, but when it becomes poisoned and it becomes anti-faith then there is where problems start to appear.
 
digsbe said:
I'd say it's sad that politics and religion are growing apart. The poison of secularism is corroding morality and religion has now become disdained by the government. PC has become increasingly anti-Christian and pro-everythingelse. People who hold political belief's because of religious faith are now being branded as ignorant. Secularism is a good thing, but when it becomes poisoned and it becomes anti-faith then there is where problems start to appear.
Click to expand...
Methinks you may have misunderstood my question, given the context I gave it in the OP.

Or you were just presenting your opinion on the positive/negative effects of "secularism". Which would be off topic.
 
megaprogman said:
The trend is that Christians tend to be more consevative, but there are exceptions. One of the reasons I am liberal is because Jesus helped people who actually needed it, not the rich.
Click to expand...

I feel I phrased this badly. He helps everyone, not just the rich. We should follow this example.
 
megaprogman said:
The trend is that Christians tend to be more consevative, but there are exceptions. One of the reasons I am liberal is because Jesus helped people who actually needed it, not the rich.
Click to expand...

There's actually a branch of socialism called "Christian socialism" that's based on that idea.
 
megaprogman said:
I feel I phrased this badly. He helps everyone, not just the rich. We should follow this example.
Click to expand...

no I think a lot of the bible has a lot of very strongly presented pro-proletarian attitudes. Christians should be Communists. But they tend to focus on the 5% of the bible regarding genital conduct rather then the 95% regarding helping people.
 
Yes, a large majority of people allow their religious beliefs to influence or define their political views. This is nothing new though.
 
The Mark said:
Methinks you may have misunderstood my question, given the context I gave it in the OP.

Or you were just presenting your opinion on the positive/negative effects of "secularism". Which would be off topic.
Click to expand...

Maybe so.k
Are political positions and the support they have (in some cases) becoming more belief based than reason based?
Click to expand...
I took this to mean that policy and politics are either being more influenced by religion or less, and I say less and exposed the positive/negative effects of secularism. I am all for secularism, but I am not for the silencing of religion simply on "secular" principals. If the voters have religious faith and they democratically vote regarding their faith based positions, there should be no reason to not accept policy regarding such beliefs.
 
digsbe said:
PC has become increasingly anti-Christian and pro-everythingelse.
Click to expand...

That's not true. I am just as much against Muslims and Jews and Hindus and Scientologists and every other religion infringing on my rights as I am against Christians doing so.
 
new coup for you said:
no I think a lot of the bible has a lot of very strongly presented pro-proletarian attitudes. Christians should be Communists. But they tend to focus on the 5% of the bible regarding genital conduct rather then the 95% regarding helping people.
Click to expand...

I believe, christianity, if properly done would be either socialist or communist, the existance of a government would not really be important. But until human nature changes, its about as likely as any other pie in the sky fantasy like (already mentioned) communism or libertarianism. Any pure philosophy will fail if mere humans try to implement it.
 
Last edited:
samsmart said:
That's not true. I am just as much against Muslims and Jews and Hindus and Scientologists and every other religion infringing on my rights as I am against Christians doing so.
Click to expand...

That may be your opinion, but I am talking about PC in general. It is acceptable to criticize and demean Christians, but minority religions receive special protection because it isn't politically correct to bash them.
 
megaprogman said:
I believe, christianity, if properly done would be either socialist or communist, the existance of a government would not really be important. But until human nature changes, its about as likely as any other pie in the sky fantasy like (already mentioned) communism or libertarianism.
Click to expand...

the original Christian communities were basically hippie communes or kibitzes.
 
new coup for you said:
the original Christian communities were basically hippie communes or kibitzes.
Click to expand...

Not really, true original Christian communities could be described as socialist in nature. Jesus did say to care for the poor and give to the needy and I believe in these ideals. However, is it up to the government to force us or for us as individuals to make that choice? Original Christian communities could be described as "hippie" because they had a new message, but they weren't "hippie" in mentality and were heavily persecuted when they first started emerging.
 
new coup for you said:
the original Christian communities were basically hippie communes or kibitzes.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't go with the word hippy. That is a much different philosophy. However they were communes, that is well documented in the new testament. Probably the only modern institution that we could compare it to would be a convent or monastery.
 
digsbe said:
I took this to mean that policy and politics are either being more influenced by religion or less, and I say less and exposed the positive/negative effects of secularism. I am all for secularism, but I am not for the silencing of religion simply on "secular" principals. If the voters have religious faith and they democratically vote regarding their faith based positions, there should be no reason to not accept policy regarding such beliefs.
Click to expand...
Actually, I wasn't referring to religion at all, except in comparing it to political positions.

Religion is, basically, people who believe something, and follow what they believe because they believe that it will get them something, or because they will lose something if they don't follow what they believe.

Many political positions are, increasingly (IMO), becoming the same...Based upon belief...Or they always have been, according to some who posted here.

That is my point, or rather, my proposed debate topic.
 
The Mark said:
Actually, I wasn't referring to religion at all, except in comparing it to political positions.

Religion is, basically, people who believe something, and follow what they believe because they believe that it will get them something, or because they will lose something if they don't follow what they believe.

Many political positions are, increasingly (IMO), becoming the same...Based upon belief...Or they always have been, according to some who posted here.

That is my point, or rather, my proposed debate topic.
Click to expand...

Ok, So you mean based on belief and not religion? Sorry for the missunderstanding :3oops:I guess in regards to that I would say that policy is being based on beliefs. "If we pas X, Y will happen." It doesn't seem to be based on reason such as "We believe according to research that passing X will lead to Y, history has shown this and leading experts from many political spectrums say..." In a sense like this I say it's more belief and not reason.
 
digsbe said:
Ok, So you mean based on belief and not religion? Sorry for the missunderstanding :3oops:I guess in regards to that I would say that policy is being based on beliefs. "If we pas X, Y will happen." It doesn't seem to be based on reason such as "We believe according to research that passing X will lead to Y, history has shown this and leading experts from many political spectrums say..." In a sense like this I say it's more belief and not reason.
Click to expand...
Precisely what I was talking about.
 
They have been for quite some time. Some believers just don't realize they are believers.;)

I tried starting a thread for discussion of the subject awhile back, but nobody would bite.:)
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom