• 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!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Christian secularists

What is your position on confessionalism vs. secularism?

  • I'm a Christian, the government should support Christianity in a meaningful way

    Votes: 4 14.8%

  • I'm a Christian, the government should nominally have Christianity as the official religion

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • I'm a Christian, the government should be secular but in practice give preference to Christianity

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • I'm a Christian, the government should be strictly secular

    Votes: 5 18.5%

  • I'm not Christian, the government should support my religion in a meaningful way

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • I'm not Christian, the government should nominally have my religion as the official religion

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • I'm not Christian, the government should be secular but in practice give preference to my religion

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • I'm not Christian, the government should be strictly secular

    Votes: 15 55.6%

  • tuna sandwich

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • other

    Votes: 3 11.1%
  • Total voters
    27
  • This poll will close: .
tacomancer said:
so they are in some cases forced to support a religion that isn't theres then.
Click to expand...

Ya, they have to pay taxes that eventually might be used to support something they disagree with. American conservatives have to do that too and we don't claim it's a human rights violation (of our human rights anyway).

If people didn't have to pay taxes they disagreed with, we might as well abolish taxation.
 
Paleocon said:
Government sanction of religion does not remove individual voluntariness.
Click to expand...

Only if you already 100% agree with the particular religion/confession/interpretation the particular government happens to "sanction". A government "sanctioning" things is not some kind of rhetorical or philosophical exercise; it is a function of an apparatus acting via coercion, funded by coercive taxation, etc. It better be devoted to defense of our (remaining, and hopefully expanding) liberties, not to "sanctioning" the way we think.
 
Paleocon said:
Ya, they have to pay taxes that eventually might be used to support something they disagree with. American conservatives have to do that too and we don't claim it's a human rights violation (of our human rights anyway).

If people didn't have to pay taxes they disagreed with, we might as well abolish taxation.
Click to expand...

with religion its a special case. freedom of religion is a recognized human right.
 
Cyrylek said:
Only if you already 100% agree with the particular religion/confession/interpretation the particular government happens to "sanction". A government "sanctioning" things is not some kind of rhetorical or philosophical exercise; it is a function of an apparatus acting via coercion, funded by coercive taxation, etc. It better be devoted to defense of our (remaining, and hopefully expanding) liberties, not to "sanctioning" the way we think.
Click to expand...

Dissidents would still be allowed the free exercise of their own religions.

tacomancer said:
with religion its a special case. freedom of religion is a recognized human right.
Click to expand...

But tax evasion isn't.
 
Paleocon said:
That's a good point about Christian secularists being neither truly Christian nor truly secular. But now that I think about it it is rather similar to syncretism.

I agree it's getting worse. Our country has always been officially secular, but until recently society (and as a consequence the government) has been imbued with a Christian ethic.
Click to expand...

Similar to, though I don't think representative of.... As it isn't a merging so much as a butting up against...or a jockeying between...
 
ChezC3 said:
Similar to, though I don't think representative of.... As it isn't a merging so much as a butting up against...or a jockeying between...
Click to expand...

True.
 
tacomancer said:
your the one with the reply about it, not me.
Click to expand...

You claimed that Muslims have a human right not to pay taxes to the Costa Rican government.
 
Paleocon said:
Dissidents would still be allowed the free exercise of their own religions.
Click to expand...

Not the point. "Dissidents" are citizens of the supposedly free country. It is not up to the government to "allow" or "disallow" any such thing. This goes to the very heart of the American experience and the American identity.
 
Cyrylek said:
Not the point. "Dissidents" are citizens of the supposedly free country. It is not up to the government to "allow" or "disallow" any such thing. This goes to the very heart of the American experience and the American identity.
Click to expand...

And what makes America automatically right?
 
Paleocon said:
And what makes America automatically right?
Click to expand...

Over two hundred years of unusual (by the sad standards of human race) freedom and prosperity, perhaps?
 
Cyrylek said:
Over two hundred years of unusual (by the sad standards of human race) freedom and prosperity, perhaps?
Click to expand...

And how are we more free than say, Malta?
 
Paleocon said:
I was aware that Buddhism accepted co-faith practitioners, but it was my understanding (from what I've been told by Buddhists) that they believe that there were several Bhuddas before Siddhartha and that there will be several after, and that each comes after the previous Buddhism dies out. If they believe that all religions are equal, then why is Buddhism the established religion in parts of Asia?
Click to expand...

There have been and are many Buddhas. We believe that we all people have Buddha nature, though most of us have not yet become enlightened. Shakyamuni Buddha attained enlightenment and nirvana and thus has not reincarnated. Buddha was human.

I don't know that Buddhists believe all religions are equal. I am a Zen Buddhist and in my experience the idea is irrelevant. The Buddhism I know is not in competition with other religions or with people who have no religion. Buddhism is one path to enlightenment and nirvana or heaven as you might call it. It is not the only path. Even within Buddhism there are different paths. There is no one way. All religions are paths - "Many paths, one destination". I characterize the destination as the realization and attainment of pure love.
 
Risky Thicket said:
There have been and are many Buddhas. We believe that we all people have Buddha nature, though most of us have not yet become enlightened. Shakyamuni Buddha attained enlightenment and nirvana and thus has not reincarnated. Buddha was human.

I don't know that Buddhists believe all religions are equal. I am a Zen Buddhist and in my experience the idea is irrelevant. The Buddhism I know is not in competition with other religions or with people who have no religion. Buddhism is one path to enlightenment and nirvana or heaven as you might call it. It is not the only path. Even within Buddhism there are different paths. There is no one way. All religions are paths - "Many paths, one destination". I characterize the destination as the realization and attainment of pure love.
Click to expand...

I'm aware he is considered human.

Perhaps I've just heard about it from more conservative Buddhists than yourself. Theravada, IIRC.
 
Paleocon said:
I'm aware he is considered human.

Perhaps I've just heard about it from more conservative Buddhists than yourself. Theravada, IIRC.
Click to expand...

There are Theravada Buddhists on DP, perhaps someone will reply.

Back to earlier questions:

What is "true religion"?

Why do you feel it necessary for any religion to have government recognition and support if not to impose the beliefs of one religion on all?

Also, do you support the concept of Sharia law?
 
Risky Thicket said:
There are Theravada Buddhists on DP, perhaps someone will reply.

Back to earlier questions:

What is "true religion"?

Why do you feel it necessary for any religion to have government recognition and support if not to impose the beliefs of one religion on all?

Also, do you support the concept of Sharia law?
Click to expand...

The true religion is that religion which is correct.

Because it is a logical extension of the personal duty of those who have political authority to support the true religion.

No, as I am not Muslim.
 
Paleocon said:
And how are we more free than say, Malta?
Click to expand...

Malta has strict vilification of religion laws which apply to the national strand of Roman Catholicism. Other cults get half the sentence.
 
Paleocon said:
The true religion is that religion which is correct.

Because it is a logical extension of the personal duty of those who have political authority to support the true religion.

No, as I am not Muslim.
Click to expand...

You are getting into pretzel logic here. What is correct religion?

Please present your "logical extension" justification. What is the logical extension and how did you come to that conclusion? In other words, please show me the logic.

Are you saying it is YOUR personal duty to impose your beliefs on me or MY duty to impose my beliefs on you?

You don't support Sharia law but it sounds as if you very much support the concept. Correct?
 
Manc Skipper said:
Malta has strict vilification of religion laws which apply to the national strand of Roman Catholicism. Other cults get half the sentence.
Click to expand...

And this is bad because?

Risky Thicket said:
You are getting into pretzel logic here. What is correct religion?

Please present your "logical extension" justification. What is the logical extension and how did you come to that conclusion? In other words, please show me the logic.

Are you saying it is YOUR personal duty to impose your beliefs on me or MY duty to impose my beliefs on you?

You don't support Sharia law but it sounds as if you very much support the concept. Correct?
Click to expand...

Christianity, however I didn't really intend for this thread to be a debate about which religion is correct, but about the proper relationship between the correct religion and the government.

It is the duty of each person to support the true religion. This duty does not cease merely because a person holds public office, therefore it is the duty of those who hold public office to support the true religion in their official capacity as legislators.

I don't agree with the notion of a divinely revealed positive civil law, however I do agree with the principle that civil law should conform to religion.
 
Manc Skipper said:
You believe that being subject to six months imprisonment for "vilifying a religion" is an attribute of a free society?
Click to expand...

Yes of course. Does it really surprise you that I think that?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom