• 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!

Iowa Court says gay marriage ban unconstitutional

Jerry said:
You mis-spelled "Legislature".



You are aware that Pro8 did not, in any way, deny homosexuals any civil right, correct?

Under Prop8 gays can share each and every single civil right, without any exception at all whatsoever, with a member of the SAME sex, as their hetero counter parts can.
Click to expand...

No, I did not mis-spell.....
The courts determine what is constitutional or not....
 
Jerry said:
No, see here again you show that don't know what you're talking about.

Black were ONLY prohibited from marrying whites.

Blacks could marry Asian, Blacks could marry Spanish, Blacks could marry Native American, etc.

***
You people don't even know wtf you're talking about. All you do is read a headline and fell good about it, but you don't understand. You opinions are not based on fact, but emotion, and therefore do not diserve respect.
Click to expand...

so whites were denied their right to marry other than whites, or just blacks?
 
celticlord said:
It is an entirely bad thing. Judicial activism is creating law from the bench, not interpreting existing law. Courts are created to interpret the law. Legislatures are created to create the law.

Legislatures are the expression of the will of the people, not courts.

There is no social good derived from courts pre-empting legislatures. None whatsoever. Whenever this happens, it is to society's detriment.
Click to expand...

when the legislature determines that celticlord is a 3rd class citizen, and enacts laws to support their stand, it will be the courts that restore his rights as an equal citizen, but nothing can change him being second rate....:2razz:
 
TheNextEra said:
In that case you are wrong. It was EXACTLY meant for those that don't follow a religooin.

That was the whole point of the consitution, to not FORCE religious on someone.

Maybe you and others need to research why we have the constitution the way we do.

If it was for a religious person they would have made it religious. The founding fathers didn't for a reason.

Just because someone isn't religious doesn't mean they can't contribute to society.

As for morality, that is subjective. To some having sex for anything other than procreation is immoral.

So who's definition of morals will you use? That is why morality is not entered into the constitution which is what the founding fathers wanted.
Click to expand...
I agree....
a moral people doesn't need as many laws, until they start trampling on the rights of those who don't follow the new morals that get created by self-righteous individuals who pass blue laws, for example. Tyranny of the majority is bad enough when the majority ISN'T deeming themselves the moral majority. There is a reason why we don't have the Taliban roaming OUR streets....
 
celticlord said:
Specific morals may be subjective. The need for morals is absolute. The need for religion is absolute, all the more so because we espouse the freedom to practice any religion.
Click to expand...

A pure and true religion makes it easier for us to be governed, but very few of our religions come even close to being pure and true.
Witchcraft and satanism are religions, how does that fit into the need for religion being absolute?
 
Jerry said:
I might ague that religion (any religion) is a necessary agent of socialization of any society. Could you give an example of a successful and thriving modern atheist society?
Click to expand...

China is coming up. Russia was doing well for awhile. Most free counties have religion because they allow their people to choose. The only way to have an "atheist" society is to deny religion, it's actually anti-theism and is as dangerous as theocracy IMO to freedom. That's what the best government is secular, then the people can choose for themselves their own religion. I like having all sorts of different religions around...it's a good sign of freedom.
 
I think you will see the good people of Iowa overturn the decision of these activist judges by changing their constitution as the good people of California did.
 
UtahBill said:
A pure and true religion makes it easier for us to be governed, but very few of our religions come even close to being pure and true.
Click to expand...
Untrue, but also irrelevant to the topic at hand.

UtahBill said:
Witchcraft and satanism are religions, how does that fit into the need for religion being absolute?
Click to expand...
Don't forget Atheism and Humanism.

People practice them, thus reiterating the human need for religion. Every human has a spiritual dimension and a spiritual perspective. It is the order of things.
 
Ikari said:
China is coming up. Russia was doing well for awhile. Most free counties have religion because they allow their people to choose. The only way to have an "atheist" society is to deny religion, it's actually anti-theism and is as dangerous as theocracy IMO to freedom. That's what the best government is secular, then the people can choose for themselves their own religion. I like having all sorts of different religions around...it's a good sign of freedom.
Click to expand...

China, where the emperor is a god, and Russia is not doing well now, which is what I asked for.

Also, you're talking about a secular government. Don't. We're talking about the society, NOT the government. The people, NOT the state.
 
celticlord said:
Untrue, but also irrelevant to the topic at hand.

Don't forget Atheism and Humanism.

People practice them, thus reiterating the human need for religion. Every human has a spiritual dimension and a spiritual perspective. It is the order of things.
Click to expand...

How so? even superstition can be considered religlion....
do you know of any pure and/or true religions?
 
UtahBill said:
How so? even superstition can be considered religlion....
do you know of any pure and/or true religions?
Click to expand...

Taoism, which rubs off on how Asian people's are better at dealing with morals, and why western societies are much harder at dealing with them.
 
Originally Posted by Wessexman View Post
Of course they didn't want to force religion onto someone. However they certainly did construct it for a people who were religious and moral. It was not made for abstract people but the American people of the time and the FF's were sure of this. They knew it required a certain kind of national and individual temperament for it to be maintained.


The founding fathers wanted NOTHING to do with forcing religion on others. Its a big reason for leaving the motherland to begin with. Freedom of religion also includes freedom FROM religion. In fact the majority of the founding fathers were Deists or Unitarians but rejected the belief in Jesus and the New and Old Testament. My point is that religion and morality are not mutually exclusive. I have met many moral atheists just as I have met many immoral theists. I don't deny that Christianity has brought great happiness to many people and is the foundation of a healthy life, but don't minimize all atheists to terrible people

Jerry: "I might ague that religion (any religion) is a necessary agent of socialization of any society. Could you give an example of a successful and thriving modern atheist society?"

I disagree that it is a necessary agent, but one that will certainly be evident for a long time to come. The reason you haven't seen a thriving atheist society is that people who are atheist don't share a common belief that they need to believe in as a community so much as just a lack of belief. As such we feel no need to congregate in the same way that the religious do. While I feel very distant and disconnected from religion I do still believe that it is one of our nations great rights. I will listen to a person for 15 minutes about why their office chair is their deity, but the moment you try to tell me to believe it, that is when I have a problem. Also, don't confuse an atheist society to Communist states outlawed religion. Anti-theism is far different from atheism and was used only as another method of controlling a states people.
 
Last edited:
Jerry said:
Pastapherianism :2wave:
Click to expand...

I prefer Pizza based theology, you start with the minimum, cheeses, sauce, crust, then add the toppings you desire...
 
UtahBill said:
How so? even superstition can be considered religlion....
do you know of any pure and/or true religions?
Click to expand...
Yes I do.

That which resides in your heart.
That which resides in my heart.
That which resides in any man's heart.

Jesus said, "I am the light that is over all things. I am all: from me all came forth, and to me all attained.

Split a piece of wood; I am there.

Lift up the stone, and you will find me there."
Click to expand...
 
UtahBill said:
I prefer Pizza based theology, you start with the minimum, cheeses, sauce, crust, then add the toppings you desire...
Click to expand...

Pizzapherianism....when does a pizza become a "pizza"?
 
Midwest Lib said:
In fact the majority of the founding fathers were Deists or Unitarians but rejected the belief in Jesus and the New and Old Testament.
Click to expand...

  • Charles Carroll Maryland Catholic
  • Samuel Huntington Connecticut Congregationalist
  • Roger Sherman Connecticut Congregationalist
  • William Williams Connecticut Congregationalist
  • Oliver Wolcott Connecticut Congregationalist
  • Lyman Hall Georgia Congregationalist
  • Samuel Adams Massachusetts Congregationalist
  • John Hancock Massachusetts Congregationalist
  • Josiah Bartlett New Hampshire Congregationalist
  • William Whipple New Hampshire Congregationalist
  • William Ellery Rhode Island Congregationalist
  • John Adams Massachusetts Congregationalist; Unitarian
  • Robert Treat Paine Massachusetts Congregationalist; Unitarian
  • George Walton Georgia Episcopalian
  • John Penn North Carolina Episcopalian
  • George Ross Pennsylvania Episcopalian
  • Thomas Heyward Jr. South Carolina Episcopalian
  • Thomas Lynch Jr. South Carolina Episcopalian
  • Arthur Middleton South Carolina Episcopalian
  • Edward Rutledge South Carolina Episcopalian
  • Francis Lightfoot Lee Virginia Episcopalian
  • Richard Henry Lee Virginia Episcopalian
  • George Read Delaware Episcopalian
  • Caesar Rodney Delaware Episcopalian
  • Samuel Chase Maryland Episcopalian
  • William Paca Maryland Episcopalian
  • Thomas Stone Maryland Episcopalian
  • Elbridge Gerry Massachusetts Episcopalian
  • Francis Hopkinson New Jersey Episcopalian
  • Francis Lewis New York Episcopalian
  • Lewis Morris New York Episcopalian
  • William Hooper North Carolina Episcopalian
  • Robert Morris Pennsylvania Episcopalian
  • John Morton Pennsylvania Episcopalian
  • Stephen Hopkins Rhode Island Episcopalian
  • Carter Braxton Virginia Episcopalian
  • Benjamin Harrison Virginia Episcopalian
  • Thomas Nelson Jr. Virginia Episcopalian
  • George Wythe Virginia Episcopalian
  • Thomas Jefferson Virginia Episcopalian (Deist)
  • Benjamin Franklin Pennsylvania Episcopalian (Deist)
  • Button Gwinnett Georgia Episcopalian; Congregationalist
  • James Wilson Pennsylvania Episcopalian; Presbyterian
  • Joseph Hewes North Carolina Quaker, Episcopalian
  • George Clymer Pennsylvania Quaker, Episcopalian
  • Thomas McKean Delaware Presbyterian
  • Matthew Thornton New Hampshire Presbyterian
  • Abraham Clark New Jersey Presbyterian
  • John Hart New Jersey Presbyterian
  • Richard Stockton New Jersey Presbyterian
  • John Witherspoon New Jersey Presbyterian
  • William Floyd New York Presbyterian
  • Philip Livingston New York Presbyterian
  • James Smith Pennsylvania Presbyterian
  • George Taylor Pennsylvania Presbyterian
  • Benjamin Rush Pennsylvania Presbyterian

It's important to note that all of the Founding Fathers followed Christian doctrine for rules on how to conduct ones self, for it was so intertwined with the society. Benjamin Franklin probably explains it best when he, to paraphrase, said that although he is unsure of whether God exists or not, he felt it was better to believe in Christianity and the Christian God than not to, for the Christian teachings prevented moral anarchy. Thus, our nation was founded on Christian principles because the Founding Generation recognized the value in them to create a moral, virtuous society.

Even Thomas Jefferson, who is today often mistaken for a Deist or an atheist, said when speaking of Jesus' teachings in the NT,

"A more beautiful or precious morsel of ethics I have never seen. It is a document in proof that I am a real Christian, that is to say, a disciple of the doctrines of Jesus"

Jefferson's admonitions of Catholicism and what he saw as Platonic influence on Christianity should not be seen as a dismissal by Jefferson of Christianity as a whole.

While running for President, Jefferson had to defend himself against charges that he was an atheist because there were laws throughout the country at that time that did not permit atheists, or anyone who did not practice Christian morality, to hold office.

Religion of the Founding Fathers of America

RandomHouse.ca | Books | The 10 Big Lies About America by Michael Medved

Hometown Has Been Shutdown - People Connection Blog: AIM Community Network

Midwest Lib said:
The reason you haven't seen a thriving atheist society is that people who are atheist don't share a common belief that they need to believe in as a community so much as just a lack of belief.
Click to expand...

My point exactly.
 
Jerry said:
Pizzapherianism....when does a pizza become a "pizza"?
Click to expand...

When the toppings include fresh tomato slices after the pizza is cooked.
Pepperoni and pineapple is for peasants.
 
"It's important to note that all of the Founding Fathers followed Christian doctrine for rules on how to conduct ones self, for it was so intertwined with the society. Benjamin Franklin probably explains it best when he, to paraphrase, said that although he is unsure of whether God exists or not, he felt it was better to believe in Christianity and the Christian God than not to, for the Christian teachings prevented moral anarchy. Thus, our nation was founded on Christian principles because the Founding Generation recognized the value in them to create a moral, virtuous society."

Seems pretty simplistic and pretty unnecessary to me. Its like saying I don't really know if i believe in it, but its better to be safe than sorry. I can respect a person and their faith, but being a christian "just in case" seems worse than not believing and living a truly moral and good life. I think if there is a god, whether in the capacity any of our world religions see him or not, he could probably see the hypocrisy of one just believing out of fear.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom