Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
6 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,810 Year: 3,067/9,624 Month: 912/1,588 Week: 95/223 Day: 6/17 Hour: 2/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Could the US become a theocracy ?
Mammuthus
Member (Idle past 6475 days)
Posts: 3085
From: Munich, Germany
Joined: 08-09-2002


Message 61 of 120 (166477)
12-09-2004 6:56 AM
Reply to: Message 60 by Silent H
12-09-2004 6:16 AM


quote:
Unfortunatly I think the EU gov't is not the same as what we see at the local national levels of europe. Especially with the more powerful non-elected sections of EU, it seems that there is really no check at all on who goes in and what happens.
I think the people of Europe really need to nix the non-elected portions of their uber-gov't.
this is really where the UKs euroskepticism is helpful. the non-elected EU officials seem to feel everything they say or do should be rubber stamped..so what happens? Under Prodi's watch there was a huge money skandal...there is also an Austrian (who's name escapes me at the moment) who reports on the rampant cheating in Brussels by people who claim to show up for work but actually don't yet get paid anyway.
The EU constitution as written is a nightmare. The Economist has shredded it on several occassions and the UK seems highly sceptical of devolving power to an uber-government in Brussels...I am hoping that this kind of tension and pressure will focus minds and open the process up.
quote:
By the way I loved your post to PB. That lambasting on the sin of children vs adults was especially great. Also, is porn open to the public (ie viewable by all on the street) in Germany the way it is in the Netherlands and Denmark? I have been there but not long enough to notice.
Thanks
Porn is perhaps not as open to the public as in the Netherlands. Prostitution is legal but is confined to specific parts of cities...ironically, one area is right in front of my research institute...at least somebody is making a profit.
There is a lot of nudity on television and advertisements and Munich is famous for people walking around parts of the English Garden naked (though before anyone gets too excited, it is usually extremely overweight old men that make up the largest faction of nudists). Hardcore pornography including strip clubs with live sex shows are all over the central part of the city but it is not prominently advertised. I don't think it would compare with Holland. On the other hand, people are much more relaxed about nudity here. If you go to a fitness studio and use the sauna etc. it is mixed and nobody wears clothes. At lakes and swimming pools women walk around topless. You can spot the foreigners because they are usually the ones with their mouths hanging open and gawking while everyone else goes on about their business.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 60 by Silent H, posted 12-09-2004 6:16 AM Silent H has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 62 by Silent H, posted 12-09-2004 7:15 AM Mammuthus has not replied

  
Silent H
Member (Idle past 5819 days)
Posts: 7405
From: satellite of love
Joined: 12-11-2002


Message 62 of 120 (166479)
12-09-2004 7:15 AM
Reply to: Message 61 by Mammuthus
12-09-2004 6:56 AM


the rampant cheating in Brussels by people who claim to show up for work but actually don't yet get paid anyway.
I watched a special on the EU and how it functions from day to day. Do you know that some major soft drink company has exclusive rights to have their product served at all times to the people there? And of course all europeans are footing the bill.
I remember in the recent election there was a transparaant party or something like that whose only agenda was to start bringing these kinds of scandals out. We definitely need more of that.
Heheheh... maybe Nader should run for office in Europe.

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 61 by Mammuthus, posted 12-09-2004 6:56 AM Mammuthus has not replied

  
Ooook!
Member (Idle past 5815 days)
Posts: 340
From: London, UK
Joined: 09-29-2003


Message 63 of 120 (166491)
12-09-2004 8:49 AM
Reply to: Message 57 by Silent H
12-09-2004 5:16 AM


I agree, we do seem to be singing from the same songsheet regarding what should and shouldn't be accepted as tolerant ploitics. I do still think that you are overestimating the significance of 'values' cropping up in European politics. This is the way I see it:
The EU has prided itself on 'shared values' of 'co-operation', 'tolerance' and 'peace'. It's a bit of a cliche, but I still think an aspect of "Never again!" still hangs over Euro politics. On top of the economic considerations and organisational problems involved in EU enlargement, I get the feeling that many politicians (including those from the secular camp) want to ensure that these values are maintained by writing them into the new EU constitution. The Christian Right has viewed this as an oppurtunity to express their views, by demanding a statement in it referring to 'shared Judeo-Christian values' or some such rot. As I said before, I don't think this will happen because A) Turkish politicians could never sign such a document (and big business wants Turkey in the EU) and B) The electorate (at present) don't want that kind of attitude, and that multiparty system that exists in EU countries (as mentionned my Mammuthus) should help ensure that it doesn't weasel it's way into such an important piece of legislation.
I'm not saying that we don't vigilant (I think you're right about a religious political position becoming slightly more acceptable), nor do I want to come across as arogant (European politics, as discussed in your other posts is far from perfect), I just don't think it is in anything to get over-panicky about yet.
Now in the good old US of A, where the election can be won by appealing almost exclusively to evangelical Christians...mmm... I'm less confident.
This message has been edited by Ooook!, 12-09-2004 08:55 AM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 57 by Silent H, posted 12-09-2004 5:16 AM Silent H has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 64 by Mammuthus, posted 12-09-2004 9:03 AM Ooook! has not replied

  
Mammuthus
Member (Idle past 6475 days)
Posts: 3085
From: Munich, Germany
Joined: 08-09-2002


Message 64 of 120 (166492)
12-09-2004 9:03 AM
Reply to: Message 63 by Ooook!
12-09-2004 8:49 AM


quote:
The EU has prided itself on 'shared values' of 'co-operation', 'tolerance' and 'peace'. It's a bit of a cliche, but I still think an aspect of "Never again!" still hangs over Euro politics.
This is probably one of the most important functions of the EU and not a cliche. The social, political and economic integration that has occurred since the founding of the EU is probably the most important feature that will prevent another major European war (at least among EU member states) in the near future.
quote:
Now in the good old US of A, where the election can be won by appealing almost exclusively to evangelical Christians...mmm... I'm less confident.
The plague of ignorance is much further along in the US than in much of Europe...and the old established churches of Europe are less prone to fanaticism (just another branch of government practically i.e. corrupt money hole ). The US is in far greater danger of becoming a theocracy than the EU at this point....on the other hand, maybe that is why (or part of the reason why) holmes and I are posting from where we are respectively

This message is a reply to:
 Message 63 by Ooook!, posted 12-09-2004 8:49 AM Ooook! has not replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 65 of 120 (166493)
12-09-2004 9:09 AM


Some General questions.
Would most folk realize it if the US became a Theocracy?
What would be different?
If the US did become a Theocracy is there any way that could be overturned other than violent revolution?

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Replies to this message:
 Message 69 by Mammuthus, posted 12-09-2004 9:41 AM jar has replied

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2169 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 66 of 120 (166497)
12-09-2004 9:20 AM
Reply to: Message 42 by Phat
12-08-2004 4:27 PM


Re: Theocratic means absolute standards
quote:
Don't be so sure what they would express horror at. They may look around and see how society has changed. They may get to view some movies and T.V.
Whoa, whoa, whoa, there, phat!
If you have a problem with movies and TV, then I'm afraid that you have a problem with capitalsism, not the system of government that our founders set up.
You have lots and lots of control over what you watch on TV for free and what you pay to see in the movie theaters. If you don't like it, you turn the TV off and you don't go see those movies.
I think that the Founders would be horrified by the following:
1)The low percentage of the eligable population that votes.
2)The way the press has become nothing more than a sensationalistic money-making entertainment enterprise instead of a way to investigate issues and government to help citizens learn the truth.
3)the erosion of our civil liberties.
quote:
They may get to dee the issues that would never have been understood or accepted by folks in their day. They would be horrified, allright, but it would not be because of the religious conservatives.
Yes, they absolutely would have been horrified by religion gaining power into the American government like it has.
Remember, those men were products of the Rationalist movement. Several of them were quite anti religion.
Please pay special attention to the Jefferson quotes I have bolded.
"I almost shudder at the thought of alluding to the most fatal example of the abuses of grief which the history of mankind has preserved--the Cross. Consider what calamities that engine of grief has produced!"--John Adams in a letter to Thomas Jefferson
"Religion I found to be without any tendency to inspire, promote, or confirm morality, serves principally to divide us and make us unfriendly to one another."--Benjamin Franklin
"To compel a man to furnish contributions of money for the propagation of opinions which he disbelieves and abhors, is sinful and tyrannical."--Thomas Jefferson, _Statute_for_Religious_Freedom_, 1779, _The_Papers_of_Thomas_Jefferson_, edited by Julron P. Boyd, 1950, 2:545
"History I believe furnishes no example of a priest-ridden people maintaining a free civil government. This marks the lowest grade of ignorance, of which their political as well as religious leaders will always avail themselves for their own purpose."--Thomas Jefferson to Baron von Humboldt in 1813, _The_Writings_of_Thomas_Jefferson_Memorial_Edition_, edited by Lipscomb and Bergh, 14:21
This message has been edited by schrafinator, 12-09-2004 09:50 AM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 42 by Phat, posted 12-08-2004 4:27 PM Phat has not replied

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2169 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 67 of 120 (166498)
12-09-2004 9:26 AM
Reply to: Message 45 by Silent H
12-08-2004 5:23 PM


Re: Theocratic means absolute standards
quote:
not to mention having to leave the building to smoke at all.
quote:
Its what we can't do, or must do, in the name of "security" and "create a decent society" that would shock the hell out of them.
Of course, once we told them that medical science has advanced so that we now understand that second hand smoke is injurious to others besides the smoker, I am sure they would understand their need to smoke away from others.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 45 by Silent H, posted 12-08-2004 5:23 PM Silent H has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 76 by Silent H, posted 12-09-2004 7:34 PM nator has replied

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2169 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 68 of 120 (166499)
12-09-2004 9:32 AM
Reply to: Message 53 by Mammuthus
12-09-2004 3:21 AM


quote:
They banned headscarves, the crucifix, yamulka's and any other religious symbols being worn by state employees while performing their government functions.
Didn't they ban headscarves for children at school? And did they ban the other religious symbols at school, too? I had only heard about the headscarves and thought that if they were singling out the muslims it was wrong.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 53 by Mammuthus, posted 12-09-2004 3:21 AM Mammuthus has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 70 by Mammuthus, posted 12-09-2004 9:43 AM nator has replied

  
Mammuthus
Member (Idle past 6475 days)
Posts: 3085
From: Munich, Germany
Joined: 08-09-2002


Message 69 of 120 (166501)
12-09-2004 9:41 AM
Reply to: Message 65 by jar
12-09-2004 9:09 AM


Re: Some General questions.
quote:
Would most folk realize it if the US became a Theocracy?
What would be different?
If the US did become a Theocracy is there any way that could be overturned other than violent revolution?
Sure it would be different. Imagine if job hiring practice at the goverment level was contingent upon your religious beliefs...want welfare? better start praying to jesus. What if a requirement for holding office was belief in a specific diety? What if access to funds from the government say NIH or NSF was contingent upon all participants being fundamentalists? How about immigration i.e. at the high end in terms of graduate students etc who drive the scientific pre-eminence of the US? That would be gone since many are non-Xian. How about legally, abortion rights gone, freedom of religion (at least non-Xian) gone, forced proselytizing in schools even for non-Xian children, maybe even the right of women to vote or work would be nixed. Science education in school? forget it. Want to have the freedom to listen to the music you like? Forget it if it does not uphold "Xian" values. Censorship of the media...bring it on...a society that spies on and intereferes with the intellectual, financial, sexual and political lives of each of its citizens by force legally, financially and violently..that will be the American theocracy if people let it happen. The government would start serving the fundamentalists exclusively and suppress any dissent by force.
And the biggest consequence...that would come when the different Xian communities started warring with each other over which Xianity should be the "correct" one for America so the Catholics, protestants, mormons, etc. could all do a nice little repeat of their previous wars until somebody comes out on top or everyone is dead.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 65 by jar, posted 12-09-2004 9:09 AM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 71 by jar, posted 12-09-2004 9:49 AM Mammuthus has not replied
 Message 78 by Silent H, posted 12-09-2004 7:43 PM Mammuthus has replied

  
Mammuthus
Member (Idle past 6475 days)
Posts: 3085
From: Munich, Germany
Joined: 08-09-2002


Message 70 of 120 (166502)
12-09-2004 9:43 AM
Reply to: Message 68 by nator
12-09-2004 9:32 AM


The French banned everything...not just islamic symbols. The Germans are targetting Islam exclusively.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 68 by nator, posted 12-09-2004 9:32 AM nator has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 72 by nator, posted 12-09-2004 9:56 AM Mammuthus has not replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 71 of 120 (166503)
12-09-2004 9:49 AM
Reply to: Message 69 by Mammuthus
12-09-2004 9:41 AM


Re: Some General questions.
Well, that kinda addresses part of one of the three questions.
But would those people that may well vote a Theocracy in see any problems in your list?

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 69 by Mammuthus, posted 12-09-2004 9:41 AM Mammuthus has not replied

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2169 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 72 of 120 (166504)
12-09-2004 9:56 AM
Reply to: Message 70 by Mammuthus
12-09-2004 9:43 AM


quote:
The French banned everything...not just islamic symbols. The Germans are targetting Islam exclusively.
I think it's wrong to ban headscarves and other religious gear or symbols which are required by a person's religion.
This ban favors Christians and other religions that don't have such a requirement in their tennets.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 70 by Mammuthus, posted 12-09-2004 9:43 AM Mammuthus has not replied

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 18262
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 73 of 120 (166542)
12-09-2004 12:39 PM
Reply to: Message 58 by Silent H
12-09-2004 5:20 AM


Re: Theocratic means absolute standards
holmes writes:
If you are not planning on responding to any of my posts in the future, will you please admit that my point was made regarding the ACLJ?
Oh sure! I will not agree that the ACLJ is a threat to America, however. We need some conservatism to institute the checks and balances that rampant hands off approaches cause. You guys need to see both sides as well as I do! Perhaps the Christians SHOULD butt out of legislating morality. They would soon see a godless one world government just like their prophetic (pathetic?)book hucksters always predicted. They may even see a world united and a sense of peace and security come upon a truly free global population. We all would then see if there was any truth to the prophecies concerning a suppossed Anti Christ figure. Who knows? Maybe we are seeing him now, disguised as a caring republican!
This message has been edited by Phatboy, 12-09-2004 12:40 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 58 by Silent H, posted 12-09-2004 5:20 AM Silent H has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 74 by nator, posted 12-09-2004 5:51 PM Phat has replied
 Message 79 by Silent H, posted 12-09-2004 7:52 PM Phat has not replied

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2169 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 74 of 120 (166641)
12-09-2004 5:51 PM
Reply to: Message 73 by Phat
12-09-2004 12:39 PM


Re: Theocratic means absolute standards
I'd appreciate a reply to message #66, please.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 73 by Phat, posted 12-09-2004 12:39 PM Phat has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 75 by Phat, posted 12-09-2004 6:04 PM nator has replied

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 18262
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 75 of 120 (166647)
12-09-2004 6:04 PM
Reply to: Message 74 by nator
12-09-2004 5:51 PM


Thomas Jefferson--
OK, Schraff--I looked up the Jefferson Bible and was amazed to learn that old TJ, while a lover of Jesus as a philosopher, was hardly a Christian! I see where this argument stems from...the old freedom from organized religion in the old country idea! Perhaps I should go with my gut feeling...let the legislation of morality be the threat that it is. It does not not mean that I don't think that my kids AND your kids need Jesus, however. Perhaps we need better tv preachers that people...even non-christians--can actually trust and like, if not agree with.
This message has been edited by Phatboy, 12-09-2004 06:05 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 74 by nator, posted 12-09-2004 5:51 PM nator has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 81 by Mammuthus, posted 12-10-2004 2:44 AM Phat has not replied
 Message 87 by nator, posted 12-10-2004 9:27 AM Phat has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024