Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 13/17 Hour: 1/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   A Christian State.
ReverendDG
Member (Idle past 4110 days)
Posts: 1119
From: Topeka,kansas
Joined: 06-06-2005


Message 31 of 65 (303731)
04-12-2006 11:48 PM
Reply to: Message 28 by nator
04-12-2006 4:31 PM


I supose, i was thinking of many groups who held power over everyone else, they tried to stamp out ideas or thoughts that disagreed with them, example the cathlic church during the middle ages and the puritans in england, and later the CoE
but yes progressive christians didn't do such things

This message is a reply to:
 Message 28 by nator, posted 04-12-2006 4:31 PM nator has not replied

  
Larni
Member (Idle past 164 days)
Posts: 4000
From: Liverpool
Joined: 09-16-2005


Message 32 of 65 (303741)
04-13-2006 3:53 AM
Reply to: Message 6 by Modulous
04-12-2006 9:43 AM


Thats pretty much the way I see it. What do you think would happen to the country's economy and standard of living?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by Modulous, posted 04-12-2006 9:43 AM Modulous has not replied

  
Larni
Member (Idle past 164 days)
Posts: 4000
From: Liverpool
Joined: 09-16-2005


Message 33 of 65 (303742)
04-13-2006 3:58 AM
Reply to: Message 5 by Faith
04-12-2006 9:23 AM


Not so sure.
What about witch hunts and the awfull awfull use of torture on people accused of witch craft? From memory thousands of people were killed in terrible ways in the name of putting it to satan.
The Mayflower brought death and disease to the native population of America and the Conquistidors effectivly destroyed entire cultures.
Is this what we would have to look forward to?
OFF TOPIC - Please Do Not Respond to this message. --AdminPD
This message has been edited by AdminPD, 04-14-2006 06:38 AM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by Faith, posted 04-12-2006 9:23 AM Faith has not replied

  
Larni
Member (Idle past 164 days)
Posts: 4000
From: Liverpool
Joined: 09-16-2005


Message 34 of 65 (303743)
04-13-2006 4:00 AM
Reply to: Message 7 by Chiroptera
04-12-2006 9:48 AM


Don't forget that your Mr Bush jnr would not allow atheist (and I suspect non-xians) to be citizens in the US.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 7 by Chiroptera, posted 04-12-2006 9:48 AM Chiroptera has not replied

  
Larni
Member (Idle past 164 days)
Posts: 4000
From: Liverpool
Joined: 09-16-2005


Message 35 of 65 (303748)
04-13-2006 5:01 AM
Reply to: Message 11 by jar
04-12-2006 11:10 AM


Re: These questions have been asked before.
Pure genius! I never knew how unpleasent the bible really was!
A fundementalist xian state following these rules would be awful.
Who is Dr Laura? She sounds like a barrel of fun.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 11 by jar, posted 04-12-2006 11:10 AM jar has not replied

  
Larni
Member (Idle past 164 days)
Posts: 4000
From: Liverpool
Joined: 09-16-2005


Message 36 of 65 (303749)
04-13-2006 5:12 AM
Reply to: Message 27 by nator
04-12-2006 4:26 PM


Thanks Schraf, I will look it up.
I got the idea thread by reading Rise of Endymion. It has a church state, less brutal in some ways but still oppressive and cruel.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 27 by nator, posted 04-12-2006 4:26 PM nator has not replied

  
AdminPD
Inactive Administrator


Message 37 of 65 (303765)
04-13-2006 6:10 AM


Stay On Topic
I do not want this thread to escalate into a history debate with Faith.
The OP (Message 1) is very specific about the conditions:
I was wondering the other day what would a country turn out like if it became a xian fundementalist state. That is to say that the government would abide by the religious laws and strictures of the bible. Here I include YEC ideology.
It is not about correcting participants' view of history.
Visibility will be restored once the discussion has moved forward.
Please direct any comments concerning this Admin msg to the Moderation Thread.
Thank you Purple

Usually, in a well-conducted debate, speakers are either emotionally uncommitted or can preserve sufficient detachment to maintain a coolly academic approach.-- Encylopedia Brittanica, on debate


Replies to this message:
 Message 38 by crashfrog, posted 04-13-2006 8:26 AM AdminPD has not replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1467 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 38 of 65 (303807)
04-13-2006 8:26 AM
Reply to: Message 37 by AdminPD
04-13-2006 6:10 AM


Re: Stay On Topic
Critical to answering that question, though, is an analysis of the relationship of Christianity and the state in times past. Isn't it?
Your answer is in the Moderation Thread
AdminPD
This message has been edited by AdminPD, 04-13-2006 11:30 AM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 37 by AdminPD, posted 04-13-2006 6:10 AM AdminPD has not replied

  
ThingsChange
Member (Idle past 5926 days)
Posts: 315
From: Houston, Tejas (Mexican Colony)
Joined: 02-04-2004


Message 39 of 65 (303840)
04-13-2006 9:50 AM
Reply to: Message 18 by EZscience
04-12-2006 12:37 PM


Fundamentalist State not as bad as you think
quote:
If there really was a Christian Fundamentalist State it would be little better than Taliban Rule.
I can't believe how you and other people see Christians as so evil.
If anything, they have been domesticated in America. In general, they are focused not on this world but in the next (their belief). The Bible even says to "render unto Caesar" or something like that, so that religious practice is kept separate from governing.
Having studied briefly with fundamentalist Christians, I can tell you that you folks are way off base in thinking it would be so bad, except for perhaps the education realm (IMO). It would not be as much fun to non-Christians, obviously.
I see that many folks on this thread are trying to take Bible verses and having fun with how that would be deployed/enforced. That's fun to you, but not really representative of what the state would be.
Here is what it would likely be, IMO:
1. Sexual businesses (such as topless bars, bath spas, internet porn, etc.) would be banned, or at least "suffocated" (example: cannot be located within 100 miles of a school or church or a public place)
2. Illegal drugs would be more suppressed and penalties stiffer, although there probably would be more preventative programs and help for people to break their habit.
3. Alcohol and bars would be more restricted, but not banned. There would be stronger consequences for drunks, though.
4. Some Sunday activites might be discouraged with laws, so that there would be more incentive to go to church. (in my case, I would take the opportunity to sleep late)
5. TV and movies would be restricted more.
6. The Hollywood rich and corporate over-paid executives would probably be limited in compensation and taxed more heavily.
7. The strategy for helping the poor probably would shift towards more temporary welfare along with programs to help people get off their feet and support themselves (i.e. the old "teach a man to fish" philosophy)
8. Education would incorporate Creationism as the truth, and an ignorant portrayal of Evolution. Prayer would be re-introduced. Teachers would be given more power to discipline (I am not sure if spanking would be allowed, though).
9. Advancement in science would suffer indirectly (from uninspiring education and policy like banning stem cell research)
10. Gay rights would not be established, but gays would not be imprisoned.
11. The establishment of religion clause would be struck, so that "separation of church and state" would no longer be a legal issue.
12. Oh yes, I almost forgot, abortion would be outlawed.
quote:
However, even if they could dominate all their secular opponents, they would probably end up killing each other over which 'true interpretation' of the Bible should be the basis for their legislation.
Good point, but the infighting would be peaceful, of course. The different views would amount to different political parties trying to get the power and influence.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by EZscience, posted 04-12-2006 12:37 PM EZscience has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 40 by SuperNintendo Chalmers, posted 04-13-2006 10:10 AM ThingsChange has not replied
 Message 41 by EZscience, posted 04-13-2006 1:32 PM ThingsChange has replied
 Message 46 by macaroniandcheese, posted 04-13-2006 3:15 PM ThingsChange has not replied
 Message 47 by ReverendDG, posted 04-14-2006 3:01 AM ThingsChange has not replied
 Message 57 by RickJB, posted 05-11-2006 5:11 AM ThingsChange has not replied

  
SuperNintendo Chalmers
Member (Idle past 5834 days)
Posts: 772
From: Bartlett, IL, USA
Joined: 12-27-2005


Message 40 of 65 (303850)
04-13-2006 10:10 AM
Reply to: Message 39 by ThingsChange
04-13-2006 9:50 AM


Re: Fundamentalist State not as bad as you think
I see that many folks on this thread are trying to take Bible verses and having fun with how that would be deployed/enforced. That's fun to you, but not really representative of what the state would be.
Here is what it would likely be, IMO:
1. Sexual businesses (such as topless bars, bath spas, internet porn, etc.) would be banned, or at least "suffocated" (example: cannot be located within 100 miles of a school or church or a public place)
2. Illegal drugs would be more suppressed and penalties stiffer, although there probably would be more preventative programs and help for people to break their habit.
3. Alcohol and bars would be more restricted, but not banned. There would be stronger consequences for drunks, though.
4. Some Sunday activites might be discouraged with laws, so that there would be more incentive to go to church. (in my case, I would take the opportunity to sleep late)
5. TV and movies would be restricted more.
6. The Hollywood rich and corporate over-paid executives would probably be limited in compensation and taxed more heavily.
7. The strategy for helping the poor probably would shift towards more temporary welfare along with programs to help people get off their feet and support themselves (i.e. the old "teach a man to fish" philosophy)
8. Education would incorporate Creationism as the truth, and an ignorant portrayal of Evolution. Prayer would be re-introduced. Teachers would be given more power to discipline (I am not sure if spanking would be allowed, though).
9. Advancement in science would suffer indirectly (from uninspiring education and policy like banning stem cell research)
10. Gay rights would not be established, but gays would not be imprisoned.
11. The establishment of religion clause would be struck, so that "separation of church and state" would no longer be a legal issue.
12. Oh yes, I almost forgot, abortion would be outlawed.
A lot of those points are pretty horrible dude. You seem like an reasonably well-educated guy who enjoys freedom of speech. I don't think you would enjoy this new world order much.
Things... One thing I might be interested in discussing with you in another thread is why you still support the republican party. I used to be a big republican, but left the party once I decided they had completely sold out to the religious right. I am curious as to what you think about this. I ask because I still have a lot of friends that are republicans but even they are starting to pull away because of the religious right (almost all of them voted for a democrat for the first time in the last election: barack obama over alan keyes).
Maybe we could start a new thread on this.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 39 by ThingsChange, posted 04-13-2006 9:50 AM ThingsChange has not replied

  
EZscience
Member (Idle past 5154 days)
Posts: 961
From: A wheatfield in Kansas
Joined: 04-14-2005


Message 41 of 65 (303924)
04-13-2006 1:32 PM
Reply to: Message 39 by ThingsChange
04-13-2006 9:50 AM


The Christian State (according to TC)
TC writes:
I can't believe how you and other people see Christians as so evil.
Not evil. Just misguided. Do you think the Taliban and Islam are evil? Because I know Candle Girl does, and that is kind of implied by your statement. I would merely judge them as misguided, much like fundamentalist Xians.
I don't consider Xians evil. My resentment of Christians only begins when they try and impose their particular values and morals on everyone else through political activism.
TC writes:
The Bible even says to "render unto Caesar" or something like that, so that religious practice is kept separate from governing.
It is not Christian 'practice' of religion we are worried about. It is the laws they would pass if they had control of government
TC writes:
1. Sexual businesses (such as topless bars, bath spas, internet porn, etc.) would be banned, or at least "suffocated" (example: cannot be located within 100 miles of a school or church or a public place)
Wouldn't really affect me personally, but I'm not a single, horny, 20-something guy anymore. I would object to this type of legislation on principle. No one forces Xians to go into topless bars - they should just ignore them - the same way I ignore the saying of grace when it is tacitly assume everyone is a Xian at some public dinner. We can't just be outlawing everything that we find personally distasteful.
TC writes:
2. Illegal drugs would be more suppressed and penalties stiffer, although there probably would be more preventative programs and help for people to break their habit.
Great. More people in jail for longer terms. Another NO vote from me.
TC writes:
3. Alcohol and bars would be more restricted, but not banned.
Presumably because alcohol happens to also be a drug of choice among Xians? I think there are plenty enough restrictions on alcohol and bars already.
TC writes:
4. Some Sunday activites might be discouraged with laws, so that there would be more incentive to go to church. (in my case, I would take the opportunity to sleep late)
Not sure what you have in mind here. No more shopping on Sunday? That would just be a pain in the butt. It is usually the one day I go into town to stock up on food for the week.
TC writes:
5. TV and movies would be restricted more.
I was waiting for the censorship to show up. I happen to prefer to view all artforms in an uncensored format. I think the holier-than-thow gatekeepers at the FCC are far too involved in censorship already. If a TV show offends you, change the channel. That's what I have to do if I happen to surf into Jerry Falwell. I don't complain to the FCC to take him off the air because I am offended by him (and I am).
TC writes:
6. The Hollywood rich and corporate over-paid executives would probably be limited in compensation and taxed more heavily.
Well I wouldn't cry for them, but tax policy can't single out people by their profession - only by income. I would like to TAX ALL THE CHURCHES. Do you have any idea how disgustingly wealthy the Catholic Church is?
TC writes:
7. The strategy for helping the poor probably would shift towards more temporary welfare along with programs to help people get off their feet and support themselves
Well I'm not a big welfare fan having grown up in Canada (I assume you mean get people 'off their ass') but I would be surprised if that panned out. Most of the Xian Right are Republican and the GOP are mostly opposed to welfare in any form.
TC writes:
8. Education would incorporate Creationism as the truth, and an ignorant portrayal of Evolution. Prayer would be re-introduced. Teachers would be given more power to discipline
And this is not as bad as I might think?
Corruption of education with religion.
Replacement of science with dogma.
Brainwashing the young and impressionable with Xian mythology.
This is THE projected nightmare.
TC writes:
9. Advancement in science would suffer indirectly
Indirectly my ass. It would suffer directly.
TC writes:
Gay rights would not be established, but gays would not be imprisoned.
You don't think they would suffer greater discrimination and repression than they do already? I suspect they would. Science is developing a pretty good understanding of the factors that contribute to gender role reversal during development but they haven't been accepted by Xians who prefer to view this biological phenomenon as a 'crime against god'. The Xian approach has included sending gay kids to 'treatment camps' so they can be 'converted' back into straight people. Sheeesh.
TC writes:
11. The establishment of religion clause would be struck, so that "separation of church and state" would no longer be a legal issue.
Great. So there would be no protection of non-Xians from Xian policies and propaganda.
TC writes:
Oh yes, I almost forgot, abortion would be outlawed.
No kidding. Well they are already making inroads there, in South Dakota anyway. This deprives a woman of the right to control her own fertility.
Not something I would want to see in a country I live in.
No, I think your vision (that you seem to consider 'not so bad') is not so far off the mark, but it is a very scary one, indeed.
edited for punctuation - EZ
This message has been edited by EZscience, 04-13-2006 12:36 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 39 by ThingsChange, posted 04-13-2006 9:50 AM ThingsChange has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 42 by ThingsChange, posted 04-13-2006 3:01 PM EZscience has replied

  
ThingsChange
Member (Idle past 5926 days)
Posts: 315
From: Houston, Tejas (Mexican Colony)
Joined: 02-04-2004


Message 42 of 65 (303951)
04-13-2006 3:01 PM
Reply to: Message 41 by EZscience
04-13-2006 1:32 PM


Re: The Christian State (according to TC)
quote:
Do you think the Taliban and Islam are evil? ... I would merely judge them as misguided, much like fundamentalist Xians.
No, I think your vision (that you seem to consider 'not so bad') is not so far off the mark, but it is a very scary one, indeed.
EZ,
I was just trying to bring some reality to the discussion on what it would more likely be, IMO.
The measure of my statement "not as bad as you might think" is: Would you rather live under Taliban or the Christian State (as I figured it would be)?
I know my answer would be Christian State.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 41 by EZscience, posted 04-13-2006 1:32 PM EZscience has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 43 by SuperNintendo Chalmers, posted 04-13-2006 3:07 PM ThingsChange has not replied
 Message 44 by SuperNintendo Chalmers, posted 04-13-2006 3:08 PM ThingsChange has not replied
 Message 45 by EZscience, posted 04-13-2006 3:11 PM ThingsChange has not replied
 Message 48 by Discreet Label, posted 04-15-2006 3:23 PM ThingsChange has not replied

  
SuperNintendo Chalmers
Member (Idle past 5834 days)
Posts: 772
From: Bartlett, IL, USA
Joined: 12-27-2005


Message 43 of 65 (303952)
04-13-2006 3:07 PM
Reply to: Message 42 by ThingsChange
04-13-2006 3:01 PM


Re: The Christian State (according to TC)
deleted: dupe
This message has been edited by SuperNintendo Chalmers, 04-13-2006 03:08 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 42 by ThingsChange, posted 04-13-2006 3:01 PM ThingsChange has not replied

  
SuperNintendo Chalmers
Member (Idle past 5834 days)
Posts: 772
From: Bartlett, IL, USA
Joined: 12-27-2005


Message 44 of 65 (303953)
04-13-2006 3:08 PM
Reply to: Message 42 by ThingsChange
04-13-2006 3:01 PM


Re: The Christian State (according to TC)
Would you rather live under Taliban or the Christian State (as I figured it would be)?
Neither.
The taliban might be more brutal but the christians could be much more efficient about executions, arrests and the like (think nazis... and NO I AM NOT COMPARING ALL CHRISTIANS TO NAZIS!!!! The comment is more about the potential of an advanced society to oppress)
edit: on further thought, the fundamentalist x-tian state would probably be the lesser of two evils (for many of the reasons EZ states).
That's one thing I don't get about some of my fellow liberals. The rail against the chrsitian right and then preach tolerance for fundamentalist muslims who are EVEN WORSE!
This message has been edited by SuperNintendo Chalmers, 04-13-2006 03:15 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 42 by ThingsChange, posted 04-13-2006 3:01 PM ThingsChange has not replied

  
EZscience
Member (Idle past 5154 days)
Posts: 961
From: A wheatfield in Kansas
Joined: 04-14-2005


Message 45 of 65 (303954)
04-13-2006 3:11 PM
Reply to: Message 42 by ThingsChange
04-13-2006 3:01 PM


Re: The Christian State (according to TC)
OK. You got me. IF those were the ONLY choices...((((shiver))))
I guess I would choose Christian.
At least they aren't oppressing women (to the same degree) as the Taliban.
But I might choose some other eastern religion state over a Christian one, were it an alternative.
Something a bit more 'live and let live' like Buddist.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 42 by ThingsChange, posted 04-13-2006 3:01 PM ThingsChange has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024