Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Gilda
Liberal on most social issues, religious.
I think it would depend a lot on the particular religion. Southern Baptists would, I would guess, tend to be mostly conservative along with Catholics, while Jews and Wiccans and Unitarians tend to be more liberal. Each group is going to have a mix, of course. We have conservatives at our church, even though it's one with a good half dozen openly homosexual couples.
Gilda
|
Just thought I'd point out, because it may be interesting to some, that generally Catholics have tended to vote Democrat as a group. This has only recently started to shift as the Republican Party manipulates the abortion issue for votes. When it comes to most other things, the Democratic Party is much more in line with Catholic teaching on Social Justice.
As I stated originally, I consider myself significantly "religious," but do not tie being "religious" to how often one goes to church/temple/etc or how literally or infallibly one interprets religious texts. If forced to give a description, I would describe myself as a Buddhist Christian pluralist. I do not believe in "god" as a persona. I do not particularly believe that Jesus of Nazareth physically rose from the dead. I do not believe the authors of the bible were "told" what to write by "god." In fact, I believe spiritual truth can be found in the texts of many different religions. I don't think any of them are perfect guides, and I especially don't think they should be read with the intent to literally apply what they say to today's world. Context is everything. I do not believe in fate whatsoever. I do not believe in karma as anything more than a mythological explanation of the fact people who meet the world with negativity will be met with negativity by the world, i.e. a person who chooses to screw someone over will naturally encourage others to screw them over in return, but I do not believe in any metaphysical aspect to karma. Likewise, I do not believe in reincarnation as anything more than a mythological explanation of the belief that we are all capable of reaching enlightenment - understood only as contentment with the fact that we cannot control the world, we can only control how we react to it. I do not believe in heaven or hell as a place one goes after death. In fact, the only "afterlife" I can claim to believe in without lying is the
possibility that there is a universal consciousness flowing through all things, which I would also identify as what we consider to be "god," and which we would all return to after death. I have difficulty laying claim to any particular metaphysical beliefs though. When it comes down to it, most people who consider themselves "religious" would probably consider me atheistic, at most agnostic, yet I don't think anything I believe goes against the spirit of Christianity. Personally, I think I just work hard to fuse what we know of "reality" with what tools we have developed as people to find contentment in an imperfect world.
To jump on the bandwagon regarding issue positions:
Abortion: Generally pro-choice, but I am under no delusion that it is not the taking of life. It should simply be used responsibly - sometimes value judgements are necessary.
Gun controls: Against limiting what kinds of guns law-abiding citizens can own. For background checks, waiting periods, required training, etc. Make it reasonably difficult to get guns, make there be a significant wait unless law enforcement is reasonably convinced the person's life is in danger, but don't make it impossible to get anything. Making possession of certain guns illegal does nothing to prevent the people who are going to be breaking the law anyway from getting them.
Stem cells: definitely pro
Term limits: Generally pro. Perhaps it would be better, at least in the case of House representatives and such, to limit how many consecutive terms one can have, but not how many overall terms. For example, the representative can serve two terms, but cannot run for the third, but if people still prefer him can run again the next term and serve two more. This isn't an idea I have given a great deal of thought to.
Religion in school: As someone else said, school is for science. However, I see no problem with classes in comparative religious studies that are approached from a secular point of view. Generally speaking, these types of classes are more appropriate in the university environment though.
Evolution: I see absolutely no basis for rejecting the general theory of evolution without rejecting our understanding of science altogether.
Creationism: Should not be taught in schools.
Right to die: rigorous psychological evaluation should be required, but a person who is diagnosed with Alzheimer's or has a chronic, painful, and fatal disease, or any similar situation, should have the right to choose not to suffer.
Drug legalization: By prescription, use hemp for paper, etc. I do not have any desire to see things like marijuana become a popular tool to be abused for escapism such as alcohol and the like already are for so many people. As a temporary fix to assist in dealing with the underlying issues of discontent with a therapist, I see much value in responsible and monitored drug use.
Death Penalty: against, in all cases
Media censorship: against, although the reality is that due to the nature of our current economic situation with both parents working, etc, parents need to be given tools to assist in their own monitoring of their children. Television ratings and things like the V-chip are useful in this way. The government should make sure parents are empowered to care for their children, but should not do the job of parents. As for adults, they should be able to make their own decisions regarding what they watch.
Political correctness: The phrase means different things to different people, so I won't take a stance one way or the other. I think it is prudent to consider the thoughts, feelings, and life experiences of other people and social groups when speaking and making policy decisions.