Quote:But then should religious institutions be allowed to back political parties or candidates, not an individual preacher, but an entire institution. I know this can't be incorporated very well in the debate, but I thought it was an interesting idea.
They should be able to do as they please. But if churches or religious organizations back political candidates, or suggest their followers vote in a certain way, they should not be allowed to maintain their tax-exempt status.
Negative
If you think about it, religion has played a major role in America. For example, we have pledge of allegiance. We also have " in God we trust" on our coins. Without belief of God ( Tom Hobbes believed this), people won't act good. They won't see a reason to act moral. Thomas Hobbes believed people were naturally immoral.
America has a diverse society. To try and impose your belief in laws is wrong because many have bias belief on religion. Also... there is a limit to the amendment ( freedom of religion). Say..... if your religion says you have to kill ten people a week, in America you can't. Why? Life, Liberty, and persuit of happiness.
Any tax-exempt church or faith based group or any other not-for-profit organization can lose part or all of its tax-exempt status if it openly endorses any political candidate. A Presidential candidate speaking to a church congregation during worship service isn't 'campaigning'--he's giving the sermon or an informative talk. (Yeah right, but that's the story and they're sticking to it.)
Re: Negative
amala2 wrote:Without belief of God ( Tom Hobbes believed this), people won't act good. They won't see a reason to act moral. Thomas Hobbes believed people were naturally immoral.
Tom Hobbes was/is wrong. I (and many others) already know from personal experience that non-religious people can, and do, behave morally. And we also know from experience (and news headlines) that religious people in some cases do not behave very well.
Morality and behavior seem unrelated to religious beliefs.
Amala writes
Quote:America has a diverse society. To try and impose your belief in laws is wrong because many have bias belief on religion. Also... there is a limit to the amendment ( freedom of religion). Say..... if your religion says you have to kill ten people a week, in America you can't. Why? Life, Liberty, and persuit of happiness.
The First Amendment, I believe. makes it constitutionally illegal to impose any religious belief by law. That would clearly cross the line to be an establishmetn of religion. Conversely I believe it would be unconstiutional to forbid any religious belief.
There are restrictons on faith-based groups, just alike there are on any individuals or any secular groups. All are required to follow the established law of the land.
There has been a longtime controversery in the desert southwest re the Hope and Navajo practice of using the drug peyote in religious celebrations. The worshipers have been using the drug for generations but it is an illegal substance and thus far has not been allowed any more than the Presbyterians or Catholics can legally lace the communion wafers with hash. The bottom line is that all religious groups, no matter who they are, can't use the First Amendment to protect them from the consequences of breaking the civil law.
amala, on morality:
some people believe in god and that is the source of their morality.
others don't believe in god and they make up a basis for their thoughts on what is good and what is not good. Most people that are not crazy and writhing in absurd rantings on the floor have some hierarchy of values, which means they think some things are good and others are bad. And if they don't believe in god, the basis they use for this is arbitrary.
still others are immoral. but to function, they must have a hierarchy of values. so they often use a dynamic hierarchy, and they are hypocrites.
I am such an immoral hypocrite. But if you were to look at my life and my actions, you'd probably mistakenly call me a very moral individual.
Sorry I know that's off topic.
wow, that's bull not letting the american indians smoke their stuff.
I'm not too big on the drugs, but I wish we could cater to their culture a little more.
binnyboy wrote:wow, that's bull not letting the american indians smoke their stuff.
I'm not too big on the drugs, but I wish we could cater to their culture a little more.
I think we do.
Quote:Until recently, the legal status of peyote was a headache for church members. Congregants who wished to avoid being stopped for possession of peyote were obliged to drive through a loose patchwork of states in which church-sanctioned uses of peyote were legal. Then, in 1990, the Supreme Court ruled that the First Amendment did not protect the religious use of peyote by the Native American Church.
Four years later, Congress--backed by the Drug Enforcement Agency and other federal law-enforcement officials--rebuked the high court by reaffirming the right to use peyote in religious ways, and by preventing states from cracking down on the transport of peyote. Indirectly, that legislation also ensured that the small band of predominantly Latino peyote harvesters, or peyoteros, in south Texas would be able to continue their trade.
Source
However flaps continue in places like Utah.
Church's peyote use OK'd
Quote:I am such an immoral hypocrite.
So are we all, Binnyboy. At least I've never seen an exception to this rule......not saying there aren't any but I do doubt it just the same.
Some of us are bigger immoral hypocrites than others. We can all be forgiven for the human side of our natures. But those who use religion or any system, for that matter, to excuse blatant immorality are the true hypocrites or the biggest and it's unconcionable.
Let me include in that catagory the fundamentalist Christians who are lying out their teeth about the extent to which they are directly endorsing candidates. And those who allow it are dupes or hypocrites themselves.
That's my opinion and I'm stickin to it.
well, on morality and right and wrong, I feel the same about both. i believe that if someone attempts to make "right" decisions, then they are following their own private "religion" Everyone believes in something, or else they would be immoral zombies. and if you disagree, answer this...if the government promotes moral behavor, are they breaking their own law?
Also, as I was saying about the maj., the bill of rights is there to protect the min. from the maj., i totally agree with that, but that doesn't really answer my questions. with the southern slaves example, that would not have been possible if blacks were considered citizens to begin with, just as women were not respected...it is not so now, America continues to grow, making sure not to infringe on rights in THAT way, but in other ways, I don't see have an infringement is occuring
hyper426 wrote:well, on morality and right and wrong, I feel the same about both. i believe that if someone attempts to make "right" decisions, then they are following their own private "religion" Everyone believes in something..
No...everyone does not "believe" in something. And I really wish people would stop asserting that as though it were a given.
Quote:....or else they would be immoral zombies.
Did you just call me an "immoral zombie?"
I will stack my morality up against yours any day.
Quote:....and if you disagree, answer this...if the government promotes moral behavor, are they breaking their own law?
No!
You seem to think morality has something to do with gods.
It doesn't.
Quote:Also, as I was saying about the maj., the bill of rights is there to protect the min. from the maj., i totally agree with that, but that doesn't really answer my questions. with the southern slaves example, that would not have been possible if blacks were considered citizens to begin with, just as women were not respected...it is not so now, America continues to grow, making sure not to infringe on rights in THAT way, but in other ways, I don't see have an infringement is occuring
I have no idea of what in hell you were trying to say here...but it looks as though you wrote this in haste.
I'd like to respond to it.
Could you look it over and make your point more clearly?
Frank, Hyper said "Everyone believes in something, or else they would be immoral zombies."
Even if you are agnostic, you still believe that not everything can be known.
Bibliophile the BibleGuru wrote:Frank, Hyper said "Everyone believes in something, or else they would be immoral zombies."
Even if you are agnostic, you still believe that not everything can be known.
No I don't.
I have no idea if everything can be known or not.
I KNOW that I do not know everything.
I also suspect that there are some things that nobody alive knows...but I sure as hell do not know that....and even surer...I do not "believe" that. I SUSPECT that.
I always thought that you were a "suspicious" character. :wink:
Bibliophile the BibleGuru wrote:I always thought that you were a "suspicious" character. :wink:
Yer on to me, Bib! :wink:
Hey Frank. Where is there a torchlight beaming out of your forehead, and why is there an ice cream cone stuck to the bottom right hand of your beard?
Not literally. Just with reference to your avatar.
Bibliophile the BibleGuru wrote:Hey Frank. Where is there a torchlight beaming out of your forehead, and why is there an ice cream cone stuck to the bottom right hand of your beard?
Acually...I have cleaned up both those things...and have the finished product in my documents. Been there for many moons. But I've forgotten how to do the avatar thingy...and besides, that picture is now two years old...and I've lost a lot more hair and look a lot older. So if I do re-learn how to do the avatar thingy, I will probably update it.
ummmm....i think my earlier point to concentrate on is...if everyone is given a say, how is it infringement. Unless of course, you can find a way that everyone will agree on everything, and still keep some level of democracy. And about the zombie thing...I still agree with Bib's first assessment. I don't believe anyone is an immoral zombie, I believe every one believes in or "suspects" of an immortal truth, whether it be that there is or is not a god, how the world functions, etc.
Oh, and I don't believe morality always has to do with gods. I believe it has to do with "religion," and that everyone has their own morals. I have no problem seeing anyone as moral, even though they sometimes don't follow their own morals (criminals). Every person has a basic conception of right and wrong, but the way they interpret and act on that knowlege is their morality.
