Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community  

Go Back   Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community > The Academy > Tilted Politics


 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 06-24-2004, 01:12 PM   #1 (permalink)
Junkie
 
filtherton's Avatar
 
Location: In the land of ice and snow.
Democracy v. Religion

I'm just trying to understand how a democracy can be based on christian ideals. Keep in mind that i use the term christianity in a general sense, not a specific all encompassing "i understand everything about all of christianity" sense. Maybe this should be in philosophy. Probably.

In a democracy, the citizens vote for representatives who they feel most closely represent their political goals. Or they vote against the candidate whose view most contradicts their own. This is possible because a fundamental implication of democracy is that there is more than one way to skin an eagle. A diversity of ideas is a good thing and homogeneity results in stagnation.

Christianity is the exact opposite of democracy in many crucial ways. First and foremost is the fact that in all christianity the ruler is not elected. The people's opinion doesn't matter. God is king(or queen). This coupled with the fact that fundamentalist christianity paints god as somewhat of a sadist makes christianity more akin to a despotism than a democracy.

Another difference is in the decision making process. In much of christianity there is no decision making process. There is god's divine will and there is heresy. (sounds parallel to the idea that one is either a patriot or a terrorist) In majority christianity there is one true way, one way to think, one way to look at the world, one way to be righteous, and an infinite number of ways to go to hell. In a democracy, if the people decide that a law is unecessary or detrimental it is within their power to change it. In christianity they are forced to abide or go to hell.

I don't understand where america's rich judeo christian traditions fit in. It seems to me that much of what america is flies in the face of what christianity is.

Another thing that puzzles me is the idea put forth in the pledge of allegiance that america is a nation under god. Does that not make us a theocracy? What is the point of a democracy when everything your country does is implicitly divine in origin? If we were truly a nation under god could we not be as succesful under communism or monarchy? It seems like the form of government is irrelevant if god is pulling all the strings anyway.
filtherton is offline  
Old 06-24-2004, 02:13 PM   #2 (permalink)
Cracking the Whip
 
Lebell's Avatar
 
Location: Sexymama's arms...
Quote:
Originally posted by filtherton
In a democracy, the citizens vote for representatives who they feel most closely represent their political goals. Or they vote against the candidate whose view most contradicts their own. This is possible because a fundamental implication of democracy is that there is more than one way to skin an eagle. A diversity of ideas is a good thing and homogeneity results in stagnation.

Christianity is the exact opposite of democracy in many crucial ways. First and foremost is the fact that in all christianity the ruler is not elected. The people's opinion doesn't matter. God is king(or queen). This coupled with the fact that fundamentalist christianity paints god as somewhat of a sadist makes christianity more akin to a despotism than a democracy.

HUH?
__________________
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." – C. S. Lewis

The ONLY sponsors we have are YOU!

Please Donate!
Lebell is offline  
Old 06-24-2004, 02:32 PM   #3 (permalink)
Crazy
 
Location: Fünland
Re: Democracy v. Religion

Quote:
Originally posted by filtherton Christianity is the exact opposite of democracy in many crucial ways. First and foremost is the fact that in all christianity the ruler is not elected. The people's opinion doesn't matter. God is king(or queen).
Doesn't that argument put all religions contra democracy? There is hardly any voting arranged (and not even possible) to elect the next four year omnipotent, supernatural being(s). .

Or did I understand you somehow wrong?
oktjabr is offline  
Old 06-24-2004, 02:42 PM   #4 (permalink)
WoW or Class...
 
BigGov's Avatar
 
Location: UWW
Nice point.

Catholics have the Pope however, which is about as close as any form of religion can get to a King or Queen.

Or what about the Dali Llama (sorry for the spelling)?
__________________
One day an Englishman, a Scotsman, and an Irishman walked into a pub together. They each bought a pint of Guinness. Just as they were about to enjoy their creamy beverage, three flies landed in each of their pints. The Englishman pushed his beer away in disgust. The Scotsman fished the fly out of his beer and continued drinking it, as if nothing had happened. The Irishman, too, picked the fly out of his drink but then held it out over the beer and yelled "SPIT IT OUT, SPIT IT OUT, YOU BASTARD!"
BigGov is offline  
Old 06-24-2004, 03:00 PM   #5 (permalink)
Addict
 
Location: nyc
i'm no religious expert but i *think* buddism allows for multiple paths to enlightenment which does give the follower more a a vote in the decision making process .
brianna is offline  
Old 06-24-2004, 03:05 PM   #6 (permalink)
Psycho
 
Warf Rat's Avatar
 
Location: Philadelphia
What's the point of the question? One nation under God, makes no mention of who's God. It seems to be a referrence to the natural good in all people.

I should not be barred from doing any job or serving any master because of my beliefs. The thought that religion and politics are tied together because of words in the pledge, or for that matter, the words of the founders, assumes one cannot leave his personal opinions at hame and do the job he is sent to do.

We all go to work and few if any impose our personal will on others. We do the best jod we can and then go home.

A representative government works (or should) the same way.
__________________
A day late, and a dollar short.
Warf Rat is offline  
Old 06-24-2004, 03:15 PM   #7 (permalink)
Crazy
 
Location: Fünland
Quote:
Originally posted by brianna
i'm no religious expert but i *think* buddism allows for multiple paths to enlightenment which does give the follower more a a vote in the decision making process .
Well, at least buddhism (and most other similar belief systems) doesn't have a despotic deity to boss you around... of course one could always blame the "world spirit" or whatever for being undemocratic...
oktjabr is offline  
Old 06-24-2004, 03:33 PM   #8 (permalink)
Human
 
SecretMethod70's Avatar
 
Administrator
Location: Chicago
Quote:
Originally posted by brianna
i'm no religious expert but i *think* buddism allows for multiple paths to enlightenment which does give the follower more a a vote in the decision making process .
Actually, so does Catholicism technically. I wish some of the more conservative Catholic Bishops would get this through their thick skulls though and read the documents of the Church from the 60's. All in due time I guess.
__________________
Le temps détruit tout

"Musicians are the carriers and communicators of spirit in the most immediate sense." - Kurt Elling
SecretMethod70 is offline  
Old 06-24-2004, 03:44 PM   #9 (permalink)
I change
 
ARTelevision's Avatar
 
Location: USA
These two forms of human organization have co-existed since the first so-called "democracies" of the Greeks. "Pure" democracies are not quite practical. Representative republics are more common examples of democratic-type governments. In any event, one doesn't necessarily preclude the other in human practice. In theory, anything can be posited, I suppose.

The question of how much religion can be mixed in with a "democracy" or how much religious influence a democratic government can manage and still be "acceptable" may be more relevant. The sticky part is that if the overwhelming majority of the constituents of a government are religious - well then it's going to permeate public life.

Humans do seem to be, for the most part, religious beings. I don't see that changing. Personally, I don't need religion.
But religion is a political reality just about everywhere.
__________________
create evolution
ARTelevision is offline  
Old 06-24-2004, 04:04 PM   #10 (permalink)
 
roachboy's Avatar
 
Super Moderator
Location: essex ma
um.. first if athenian democracy was "impractical" how did it manage to survive from some 500 years?

second, carl schmitt, the german hack constitutional theorist, argued that all democracy was impractical because it tended toward abstract debate, while conservatism tended to be grounded in the concrete--which is itself hilarious thinking about how the term gets deployed in the states today--but conservatives could not do much either, according to schmitt--what mattered was that in a situation of crisis a state of emergency would emerge and a single Leader would come to power and for schmitt this was a good thing, the dictator, because he was efficient--he could take Decisions without all the messiness of debate. that is why the fascists liked his theory so much.

third, there is a relation between the kind of religion and the form of political order--the romans, for example, understood this full well during the council of nicea, after constantine converted, during which they excised many gnostic gospels, not so much on "authenticity" grounds (otherwise all would have been excised) but on theological grounds--the more neoplatonic gospels stage a vision of the universe as hierarchical, which maps quite well onto the bureaucratic state--the state is legitimate because its form doubles that of the cosmos, for example.

as for christianity, i suppose it depends upon which elements you choose to emphasize: those from the gospels about teh dignity of the poor and value of all human beings are not so bad--others are quite foul---personally, i am sympathetic to the former elements--the idea, however, that what happens in this world is not of as much consequence as what happens in the next is a recipe for passivity--so i dunno. it is certainly not optimal for a political regime that would actually give people power. i dont have an alternative in mind---i am probably closest to the old nominalists--if there is an infinite god, then human understanding has no access to it--so the words (like god) are just words knit into systems of social control. if that is accepted, then it follows that nietzsche was probably right......
__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear

it make you sick.

-kamau brathwaite
roachboy is offline  
Old 06-24-2004, 04:13 PM   #11 (permalink)
Crazy
 
Location: Fünland
Quote:
Originally posted by roachboy um.. first if athenian democracy was "impractical" how did it manage to survive from some 500 years?
Erm...well it's rather impractical if you think about the current population - I think that the point was that it is impractical nowadays. Probably wasn't so in the ancient Greece. Or maybe if you shattered all nations into anarchist collectives...

Although it is somewhat debatable if it even was a "true" democracy as only free adult males were eligible to vote.
oktjabr is offline  
Old 06-24-2004, 04:18 PM   #12 (permalink)
 
roachboy's Avatar
 
Super Moderator
Location: essex ma
oktjabr--i know about this line of thinking---its not wrong--however check out some of the writing by cornelius castoriadis on the question--interesting stuff--i could post citations if you like.
__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear

it make you sick.

-kamau brathwaite
roachboy is offline  
Old 06-24-2004, 04:33 PM   #13 (permalink)
Crazy
 
Location: Fünland
Quote:
Originally posted by roachboy
oktjabr--i know about this line of thinking---its not wrong--however check out some of the writing by cornelius castoriadis on the question--interesting stuff--i could post citations if you like.
Hmm. He sounds interesting and I must confess that I haven't heard about him before. I have no objections if you do post some citations.
oktjabr is offline  
Old 06-24-2004, 07:41 PM   #14 (permalink)
Junkie
 
filtherton's Avatar
 
Location: In the land of ice and snow.
I maybe should mention the repeated association that is made between the history of america and judeo christian values.

Buddhism, while possibly allowing multiple approaches, isn't really theistic. It's been a while since i was into it, but i remember having the impression that it lacked a central diety who controlled all.

Since it appears i was too convoluted in my original post let me rephrase: How can america, a democracy, be founded on christian values(as some have proclaimed) when christianity is structured in such a way(absolute truth, one righteous way, one right perspective) as to be everything that democracy is not. Christianity is fundamentally anti-democratic.

I'm focusing only on christianity because that is the amercian majority. Certainly, that same could be said for any number of other religions.
filtherton is offline  
Old 06-24-2004, 09:30 PM   #15 (permalink)
WoW or Class...
 
BigGov's Avatar
 
Location: UWW
Because America's fore fathers came from a place founded on religion, saw how unfair it was, and decided they shouldn't follow in those footsteps?
__________________
One day an Englishman, a Scotsman, and an Irishman walked into a pub together. They each bought a pint of Guinness. Just as they were about to enjoy their creamy beverage, three flies landed in each of their pints. The Englishman pushed his beer away in disgust. The Scotsman fished the fly out of his beer and continued drinking it, as if nothing had happened. The Irishman, too, picked the fly out of his drink but then held it out over the beer and yelled "SPIT IT OUT, SPIT IT OUT, YOU BASTARD!"
BigGov is offline  
Old 06-25-2004, 12:19 AM   #16 (permalink)
Crazy
 
Location: Fünland
I think that the secular and supernatural order should be seen very separate - the bible tells to respect god, but doesn't dictate how to govern on earth, in secular matters. And of judeochristian values, the message of christianity is to respect each other and be friends with your enemies (to simplify a bit) and I don't think that that is so much against the principles of democracy. While relation between god - man could be master - subject, nothing in christianity says that a relation between mortal men should be similar.

And considering the fact that the christian belief in USA has splintered into thousands of different sects (as protestantism lacked the main authority, like the Pope was for catholicism), I wouldn't even call christianity so homogenous that one can talk about "one way, one truth etc." unless you simplify it to few dogmas. I think that a difference between christian fundamentalist zealots and liberal almost-secularized christians is very large and important.
__________________
"If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stomping on a human face -- forever."
-G.O.
oktjabr is offline  
Old 06-25-2004, 10:42 AM   #17 (permalink)
Junkie
 
filtherton's Avatar
 
Location: In the land of ice and snow.
Yeah, i see what you're saying oktjabr and i agree with you. I think the problem mainly is that i didn't think about it enough before i started this thread. Cookies and apologies for all!!!
filtherton is offline  
Old 06-25-2004, 11:37 AM   #18 (permalink)
Kiss of Death
 
Location: Perpetual wind and sorrow
Filth, I think the idea behind the whole "America was founded on Judeo-Christian values" is more philosophical then anything else. I know you know a lot about the history of our law, I would say that said Judeo-Christian influence is more fundamental and underlying then direct. As I have pointed out in past threads, documents such as the DOI is the perfect embodiment of that. Hope that is something useful.
__________________
To win a war you must serve no master but your ambition.
Mojo_PeiPei is offline  
Old 06-25-2004, 02:44 PM   #19 (permalink)
Crazy
 
Location: Fünland
Quote:
Originally posted by filtherton
Yeah, i see what you're saying oktjabr and i agree with you. I think the problem mainly is that i didn't think about it enough before i started this thread. Cookies and apologies for all!!!
I always suspect sarcasm when someone agrees with me.

Jokes aside, I think that the point you raised isn't all that bad. But I'd point my guns toward organized forms of christianity.

Just a sidenote (so that noone makes wrong conclusions) I'm in no way a christian.

On a second sidenote, somehow this reminds me of one thread I saw on some forum - "Was Jesus a socialist?"
__________________
"If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stomping on a human face -- forever."
-G.O.
oktjabr is offline  
Old 06-25-2004, 07:28 PM   #20 (permalink)
Banned
 
You are interpreting religion as dogma instead of values. Christian values such as the Golden Rule are perfectly compatible with Democracy. Each recognizes the individual as having rights.

It's also important to acknowledge that Judeo-Christian values made an important contribution to the development of Western Democracies. If one traces the reformation of Christianity, which separated Church and State more firmly than in the past, one can see how the Enlightenment was able to take root. The Englightment was the philosophical impetus for our system of government.

IMO, we would be better off as a society getting back to our founding values instead of trying to eliminate them from history books.
wonderwench is offline  
Old 06-26-2004, 03:31 PM   #21 (permalink)
Junkie
 
The worrisome thing for me is that many Christians assume that Christianity holds an exclusive patent on what they call "Christian values" and then follow from that faulty assumption to a baseless presumption of moral superiority over non-Christians. Truth be told, all of the great truths that culminate in Man's current sense of morality stem from the insights of a very few thoughtful individuals from diverse cultures throughout history. Indeed, the Golden Rule itself has its parallel in most other belief systems. I'd even hazard to say that "do unto others" is a no-brainer to most people of a philosophical bent, whether religious or not. Thus, to say that one doesn't hold "correct" values because one's religious background (or lack thereof) differs from our own is untenable.

It follows then that no religious group can rightly claim that their religion is solely responsible for the moral climate of a secular society.

Last edited by SinisterMotives; 06-26-2004 at 03:40 PM..
SinisterMotives is offline  
Old 06-26-2004, 04:55 PM   #22 (permalink)
Banned
 
Nice to see you here, SM!

I agree that Christianity should not be the state religion - the separation of church and state is critical to prevent an authoritarian theocracy. I do think it is possible to focus on the enduring values separate from dogma. When we do that, it is far easier to see the parallel universal truths in other religions.
wonderwench is offline  
Old 06-26-2004, 04:58 PM   #23 (permalink)
Junkie
 
You too, Wenchie!

I'd go a step further and say that capitalism shouldn't be our de facto state religion either, but I fear I'd be here for years explaining that one.
SinisterMotives is offline  
Old 06-26-2004, 05:19 PM   #24 (permalink)
Cracking the Whip
 
Lebell's Avatar
 
Location: Sexymama's arms...
Christians are like everyone else in that the "squeeky wheel gets the grease".
__________________
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." – C. S. Lewis

The ONLY sponsors we have are YOU!

Please Donate!
Lebell is offline  
Old 06-26-2004, 05:19 PM   #25 (permalink)
Banned
 
We need a different thread to debate that one. All I'll say on the topic is that Capitalism is the only economic system consistent with Individual Liberty and Responsibility.
wonderwench is offline  
Old 06-26-2004, 05:24 PM   #26 (permalink)
Junkie
 
I don't see that having just enough, as opposed to the capitalist's drive to acquire more than enough, would undermine either individual liberty or personal responsibility. It certainly didn't thwart the citizen's pursuit of either of those things back when the US was an agrarian society and people lived more or less hand-to-mouth. But you're right, that topic is best left for another thread.
SinisterMotives is offline  
 

Tags
democracy, religion

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 06:12 AM.

Tilted Forum Project

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2
© 2002-2012 Tilted Forum Project

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360