Excuse me, hate to interupt while you attack me, but did I not say Atheism is in fact a spirituality and a belief? It is a belief in nothing BUT it is inherently a belief.
Again, you twist my words and warp them to YOUR benefit.
Quote:
Originally posted by nanofever
If that is your dim view on the prospects involving future seperation of church and state, I find that the only course of actions is that we promptly make Christanity unconstitutional, build a coliseum and start feeding Christians to the lions, tigers or atheist drunk on their dis-belief in a higher power.
|
No I said as long as their are religious and spiritual people who firmly hold their beliefs, THEY will not do anything against those beliefs. Therefore, to try and seperate themselves from their beliefs when making laws is next to impossible and will never be done.
Quote:
Originally posted by nanofever
Society is made of people, you can't seperate the two. By suggesting that you need spirituality to be moral; you also suggest that a lack of spirituality, atheism, is immoral. I think that is clearly an attack to suggest that people without spirituality are immoral.
|
I am saying without spirituality, yes, the masses (society) as a whole will eventually lack morals. Yes, you can seperate the individual from society. We are not inherently born knowing right from wrong. As society gets away from spirituality, you begin to see immorality, you begin to see crime rise, you begin to see people doing whatever they choose to do. This has been proven in the Old Testament, this was a serious downfall of the Roman empire (when they got away from worshipping their Gods. It was a downfall of the Egyptian civilization. It was a downfall for all major civilizations when they got away from spirituality. The USSR was a "spiritual" free government and they did not work.
You cannot take spirituality out of civilization it has been tried and it has failed miserably.
Quote:
Originally posted by nanofever
The statement of "ignorant" was not directed at you but rather your belief that spirtuality is inherrently moral and a lack of spirituality is immoral. That belief *is* ignorant as both a sweeping generalization and as a personal insult to people who lack spirituality. Morality comes from your own actions, not your religious beliefs or what those beliefs *suggest* as actions. I am quite sure that people with ignorant beliefs are upset when people call them on said ignorant beliefs. You have your right to say ignorant thing. I have my right to call you on them and to also be shown when I say ignorant things. Since neither of us are state actors at the moment, this is clearly not " EXACTLY the major part of [my] argument against this "Christianity" ruled government."
|
First, I have no problem with you calling me on my views and beliefs civilly and without calling names or implying you are so much greater than I because you are enlightened and I am something lesser than you. Especially whan I have done nothing but show you respect.
Secondly, morality is not inherent, you are not born knowing right from wrong. It has been taught to you through traditions (which in this country have been Judeo-Christian, however Hindu, Buddhism, even Islamic traditions have been incorporated) and trial and error and observations.
Yes, this is EXACTLY part of your argument as you feel left out in your beliefs by a "Christian society" because in a previous posting and I will not go back to quote it, a person argued they felt pressured to say "under God" because if they didn't they would be subject to dirty looks from others. So, by my not believing in your argument you are doing that to me.
You are the one without facts, without seperating emotion from a philosophical and educational debate. You see things your way and have resorted to name calling to avoid facts and argue without emotion.
You are the one cutting and pasting parts of my argument and twisting things I say instead of reading with open mind ALL that I am saying.
I have read all the opposition has written (and they have made good points) and I have shown tolerence and respect in responding.
I have not once shown disrespect to anyone, the way you have to me. Why, if your argument is so strong do you have to resort to the "I am enlightened and you are just so wrong" attitude?
That is ignorance, that is saying, "I do not care nor listen to what you say because I am so much smarter than you." And in that case your argument is lost and it becomes the "who can call whom the worst names" game. which I refuse to play.
As I said I am not a Judeo-Christian, but I am deeply spiritual and firmly entrenched in my beliefs (as are you). I do not nor ever have felt the government pushed a spirituality or belief system onto me. If anything because of the freedoms I enjoy from the government I feel the exact opposite, that the government has allowed me to seek and practice how and what I want.
Again, I say even Atheism is a spirituality and a belief system. It is just as viable as my beliefs. It is not my job to judge whose spirituality is right or wrong.
If the majority are Christian then we whether we like it or not will be governed primarily by those values and traditions. This country is majority rule with rights for all and protection of the minority. By the very definition of a Democratic Republic that is what we are.
To take this farther and yes, I know the left like I know the back of my hand. IF you are dead set against government recognizing religion, then the Muslim lady in Fla. who by her faith had to wear a veil on her driver's license would be denied by you, because that would endorse a religious practice.
YET, many who are arguing total seperation, argue that lady is well within her rights and government should honor her religious values.
That is not a seperation of church and state though, because the government has to recognize her religious values.
Total seperation means government cannot recognize ANY religious values and therfore CANNOT OFFER ANY DEVIATION OF LAWS TO ACCOMODATE A RELIGIOUS VALUE. Therefore she would be unable to wear her veil. Therefore she has no frredom of religious practice.