You are either not logged in or not registered with our community. Click here to register.
 
December 07, 2016, 08:20:33 PM

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length

Click here if you are having problems.
Default Wide Screen Beige Lilac Rainbow Black & Blue October Send us your theme!

Hark!  The Herald!
Holiday Issue 2016

Wiki Blogs Dicebot

Author Topic: Does religion belong in politics  (Read 5802 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Stattick

Re: Does religion belong in politics
« Reply #100 on: November 02, 2012, 09:58:31 PM »
First off, E isn't a sinful site... It is fun, and enjoyable... I am most certainly not a Biblical Literalist, nor a Young Earth Creationist, and I am not a very good debater, as I have so avidly demonstrated... and I tend to spout, or in this case, type off before thinking straight, or even getting my facts straight. I can be reasoned with, and I was not being objective when I typed out my posts, and I beg your forgiveness. I don't know if I was the one that steered this thread away from its original topic, being that, once again, I wasn't thinking clearly(not an excuse, just an explanation)...

I have cooled off a bit now, and I realized what I fool I made myself, and I ask you not to see me like this permanently... I am not usually this emotional, or this stupid... I guess I should avoid this forum from now on, before I go off half-cocked again, before I let my less-then-reasonable beliefs go ahead, and make me spout off again...

Once again, I apologize, and do not blame you in the least for seeing me as an idiot, and a loud mouthed, unknowledgeable dumb-ass... I am that sometimes, as this was not the first time this has happened. You would think I would learn from my mistakes, but, I don't apparently... I have been properly put in my place(again), and will not do so again, if I can help it...

I'm sorry. I misjudged you. I took the evidence, your arguments, and built a story around them that seemed correct to me, but apparently was not.

I accept your apology, and hope that you accept mine. Sometimes, I'm too quick to judge. And sometimes I misjudge, as I did today. Other than that, I understand that religion and faith are very emotional things to people. When I, or someone else, say unflattering things about someone's religion, it's hard not to take it personally. It's hard not to assume that we're talking about you rather than your beliefs. I used to be a very religious person, a fundamentalist Southern Baptist. I understand the reaction to blast back at someone that's questioning your religion.

Don't worry. I don't think you're an idiot. Not a single one of us are knowledgeable about everything. Worse yet, many of us think we're knowledgeable about things, when in fact we know very little about the subject. I've fallen victim to thinking I really knew my stuff about some subject, only to be blasted away by multiple posters who all had a much deeper and more recent education about the same subject. It can happen to anyone.

But it takes a big person to not only swallow their pride and realize that they don't know the subject they thought they knew, but to admit it. It's not something you see often, especially on the internet. So, you have my admiration for being able to admit when you're wrong. You have my respect for being open minded enough to listen to what others have to say, and to accept that it might be you that's wrong.

Again, I apologize for mischaracterizing you.

Offline Tamhansen

Re: Does religion belong in politics
« Reply #101 on: November 03, 2012, 05:09:50 AM »
Ok, here is the thing. And I'm probably going to get scolded for this, but basically I don't really care.

Bane did not cause insult with the things he said or the words he used. Yes he made statements which were debunked and he used some emotional words, but these were not used to cause insult. Those who were insulted by his words took it upon themselves to be insulted. This is a problem I see on both sides of the field, although in my personal experience, religious folk tend to take offense quite easily (certain religious folk I mean)

I mean just look at an example that is put before this thread: Marriage equality. Is there a Christian, Muslim, Jew or any other religious person who can give me one single objective argument on how they would be hurt by Gay marriage? Anyone?  No because it doesn't affect your life, unless you are the gay couple wishing to marry. Those people opposing gay marriage are not hurt or offended by gays marrying, they choose to be offended. They take it upon themselves to be offended.

Basically, what I'm trying to say is this: If we can all just stop trying to look for offense in other people's words and actions, and especially in words or actions that do not affect us in any way, we'd all be a lot happier.And people would be a lot less afraid to speak their mind, or live their lives

Offline Stattick

Re: Does religion belong in politics
« Reply #102 on: November 03, 2012, 05:48:23 AM »
Ok, here is the thing. And I'm probably going to get scolded for this, but basically I don't really care.

Bane did not cause insult with the things he said or the words he used.

I'm sorry. It's probably a stupid thing on my part, but I do get offended when people say things that are patently untrue, and contort facts in bizarre ways. It's probably because I hold truth (and by extension, knowledge) to be of the highest order of importance. I'd rather gravely insult my best friend then to let him get away with believing or saying something that's profoundly false.

Having said that, I believe that the disagreement between he and I is ended, and I for one don't have any hard feelings. I thought uncharitable things about him, and unjustly, so don't take that to mean that I think that my behavior was beyond reproach.

But no, I wasn't trying to look for offense. I almost never do that, especially on the internet. But when people start making claims that are wildly divergent from the truth as if they have THE TRUTH, and the rest of us don't know what we're talking about, yes, I do get offended. But it isn't me looking for offense. It's a knee jerk reaction down in the deepest part of me.

Offline Vekseid

Re: Does religion belong in politics
« Reply #103 on: November 03, 2012, 06:04:48 AM »
I started out thinking Katataban's post was a sidetrack but it really isn't. It is the core of why religion should not be involved in politics.



Pretend for a moment that the Canaanites and their descendent cultures (the Phoenicians and the Carthegians) survived to the modern day in some form.

And you have one group of people claiming that they committed child sacrifice, cannibalism, and other horrific acts. There's no actual evidence of this - just rumors spread by their enemies of the time. And this can be about any culture or belief system, but it's most relevant here because calling the Canaanites tainted is an actual part of the Bible. Are they supposed to be comforted because 'those are just my religious views'?

Things like calling the Norse 'not a civilization' or my own ancestral beliefs (Romuva) not even worth mentioning? I want to know what my great*30 grandfather believed. No one bothered writing much of it down. It wasn't worth their time.

But people feel free to make statements about these and other matters, because "My ignorance is just as good as your knowledge."

This of course is not unique to religion. I've seen atheists do the same, environmentalists do the same, communists do the same, objectivists do the same, etc.

Had someone come in, admit that they didn't know jack about how computers work, and try to tell me that computers were not capable of something that is actually rather trivial for them. Am I supposed to be nothing more than a robot, and not feel the slightest bit hurt when someone tells me that half my life's study doesn't mean shit compared to their half-baked intuition? Did it hurt much? No. Of course not. It was trivial to refute. But it's hard to avoid a sense of "Why am I even needing to have this discussion?" And when they refuse to listen, or consider evidence, and start making accusations that we are like Hitler or Stalin...

I'm not supposed to feel insulted. Right.

Any ideology presents this issue. It is frequently tied to anti-intellectualism. It's never 'right', at least not in the sense of soundness. Not every mass-murderer promoted one religion, another, or none, but every mass-murderer promoted an ideology.

And this presents the core problem of religion infesting politics - any political interference based on religious grounds is by definition the imposition of an ideology.

Offline Tamhansen

Re: Does religion belong in politics
« Reply #104 on: November 03, 2012, 06:44:08 AM »
I started out thinking Katataban's post was a sidetrack but it really isn't. It is the core of why religion should not be involved in politics.

Thanks i did my best to stay on topic.

Any ideology presents this issue. It is frequently tied to anti-intellectualism. It's never 'right', at least not in the sense of soundness. Not every mass-murderer promoted one religion, another, or none, but every mass-murderer promoted an ideology.

And this presents the core problem of religion infesting politics - any political interference based on religious grounds is by definition the imposition of an ideology.

My point is not that people shouldn't be educated, rather that going on the offensive, because you feel insulted by comments made out of ignorance will not contribute to this education. Personally, being an Atheist with a 'pagan' background. (I was raised in the celtic traditions) I have had to suffer derogatory comments my entire life. I had to sit through the most ignorant remarks about my beliefs my entire life. But I soon realised it doesn't affect me.

Point in fact. Suppose some idiot does come into your workplace and tells you computers can't do stuff you know theyu can. Does that impede you in any real sense? Does it make your acomplishments any less real, any less impressive?  No it doesn't your life will go on, just as if it had without this idiot coming by.

Now the problem comes when either you take offense by this idiot, and go on the offensive trying to burn him down, or the idiot seeing your acomplishments and feels threatened in his beliefs and goes on a rampage trying to burn you down.

And that is the problem with Ideology, be it religious or a-religious. The need for people to prove themselves or their beliefs right.

A true teacher does not try to convince by force of argument or force of arms, he simply points out the evidence and explains, so that others can learn for themselves.

Offline Oniya

  • StoreHouse of Useless Trivia
  • Oracle
  • Carnite
  • *
  • Join Date: Sep 2008
  • Location: Just bouncing through. Hi! City of Roses, Pennsylvania
  • Gender: Female
  • One bad Motokifuka. Also cute and FLUFFY!
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 3
Re: Does religion belong in politics
« Reply #105 on: November 03, 2012, 10:57:25 AM »
Also, not taking offense doesn't mean that you have to ignore the person.  In the case of the computer-idiot, instead of calling them an idiot, you can pull up a bit of code, have the computer execute it, and sit back.  More of a 'see, isn't this cool?' moment than a 'what rock have you been hiding under?' approach.

Offline Pumpkin Seeds

Re: Does religion belong in politics
« Reply #106 on: November 03, 2012, 04:21:52 PM »
Yes, but following that train of thought would mean that a politician should aspire to power without any ideology.  That seems a practical impossibility.

Offline Oniya

  • StoreHouse of Useless Trivia
  • Oracle
  • Carnite
  • *
  • Join Date: Sep 2008
  • Location: Just bouncing through. Hi! City of Roses, Pennsylvania
  • Gender: Female
  • One bad Motokifuka. Also cute and FLUFFY!
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 3
Re: Does religion belong in politics
« Reply #107 on: November 03, 2012, 05:18:55 PM »
I'm not sure exactly how that follows?  You can have an ideology without it being the be-all and end-all of your existence - or of your arguments.

The trick is remembering that those on the other side(s) love their children too (to paraphrase Sting).

Offline Pumpkin Seeds

Re: Does religion belong in politics
« Reply #108 on: November 03, 2012, 05:59:46 PM »
“Any ideology presents this issue. It is frequently tied to anti-intellectualism. It's never 'right', at least not in the sense of soundness. Not every mass-murderer promoted one religion, another, or none, but every mass-murderer promoted an ideology.

And this presents the core problem of religion infesting politics - any political interference based on religious grounds is by definition the imposition of an ideology.”

If the core problem of religion being part of politics is the imposition of an ideology, then the solution seems to be a lack of ideology.  This seems to be a problem of ideology then over religion. 

Offline Oniya

  • StoreHouse of Useless Trivia
  • Oracle
  • Carnite
  • *
  • Join Date: Sep 2008
  • Location: Just bouncing through. Hi! City of Roses, Pennsylvania
  • Gender: Female
  • One bad Motokifuka. Also cute and FLUFFY!
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 3
Re: Does religion belong in politics
« Reply #109 on: November 03, 2012, 06:13:43 PM »
I'd think that the solution would be to not impose your ideology.  It's fine to have one.  It's when you try to force it on others that everything goes whack.

Offline Pumpkin Seeds

Re: Does religion belong in politics
« Reply #110 on: November 03, 2012, 06:18:56 PM »
Isn't the point of politics to guide people in a way that you believe correct?  The person with their hand on the steering wheel should have an idea of where they are going afterall.

Offline Vanity Evolved

Re: Does religion belong in politics
« Reply #111 on: November 03, 2012, 06:47:49 PM »
Isn't the point of politics to guide people in a way that you believe correct?  The person with their hand on the steering wheel should have an idea of where they are going afterall.

You're supposed to be guiding people towards something which benefits everyone - what sort of benefit is there is stopping homosexuals from being married because you think it's a sin? What benefit is there in you forcing young children to learn Bible stories as science and jeoperdize their future because you believe the Earth was made in six days?

To give a more extreme and far more unlikely example, what if your belief was that kosher meats were evil and you enforced a law against that? People tend to not look at things on the flip side; as a Christian or whatever dominant religion is in your country, if suddenly, your ability to learn about your religion was forbade? If, say, another major religion came into power such as Islam, and enforced mandatory worship to Allah across it's entirity, as Christianity once had in it's schools?

I remember quite a few tales of culture shock from Christians in the Middle East attending festivals, and feeling hugely alienated once their beliefs were in the minority and another religion was imposing their customs on people who were used to being in a country where their beliefs were the dominant ideology.

It's not your place to put what you believe is right for everyone onto everyone - you've got to do what is right for everyone. Abstinence only programs are horribly harmful and religiously motivated, causing large amounts of ignorance and pregnency rate increases amounts teenagers, backed by the government. Just because you believe it's right, doesn't mean it is; if the facts say it's not helping, it's your job to fix it, regardless of what you believe. What your believe does not equal reality.

Offline Pumpkin Seeds

Re: Does religion belong in politics
« Reply #112 on: November 04, 2012, 08:31:23 AM »
Don’t you think that what the person thinks is right, is what he would think is right for everyone?  The politician presented his platform to a constituency and was then elected by those people on the values presented and the policies put forth.  The people elected that person on the belief that he would carry out what was proposed and would work toward the goals he set forth while running for office.  Should the goals be religious ones or coincide with the public’s religious belief, then does the politician not have an obligation to represent the views and wishes of his constituents?

To pass laws in opposition to public opinion and want would be imposing that person’s ideology on a resistant population. 

Offline Vanity Evolved

Re: Does religion belong in politics
« Reply #113 on: November 04, 2012, 10:39:19 AM »
Don’t you think that what the person thinks is right, is what he would think is right for everyone?  The politician presented his platform to a constituency and was then elected by those people on the values presented and the policies put forth.  The people elected that person on the belief that he would carry out what was proposed and would work toward the goals he set forth while running for office.  Should the goals be religious ones or coincide with the public’s religious belief, then does the politician not have an obligation to represent the views and wishes of his constituents?

To pass laws in opposition to public opinion and want would be imposing that person’s ideology on a resistant population. 


He may think it. Doesn't mean it -is- right. Someone may think that banning gay marriage, because 'gay couples are unnatural' is the right thing because the Bible tells him so, but does this benefit the ten to twenty percent of homosexual couples in the world? Does this benefit the remaning eighty percent of hetrosexual couples in any way? What about when the proof is given to him that homosexuality is not, infact, 'unnatural' and just as natural as hetrosexuality? He either had the option to do what is -right- (and put his bias aside) or he can be dishonest and enforce -his- belief on the people (I don't care what the evidence says, I've decided/the Bible told me that homosexuality is a sin, therefore, no marriage for you)

The latter implies that it's possible to not only represent an entire religion, but an entire religion and group of people in which beliefs -within- the religion are the same. You have a fourty percent Christian population, say. Twenty percent of them believe gay marriage is wrong, and they're Class A Christians. The other twenty are Class B Christians. Their doctrine teaches that homosexuality is fine. However, ten percent of those Class B Christians also believe homosexuality is wrong.

What do you do here? Do you ignore the seventy percent of people who want gay marriage, just to apply your laws and 'fixes' to the country on the thirty percent of people who don't believe it's right? Do you force out the religious people who don't believe it's right, to change the law in the favour of the majority who supports gay marriage? What about your reasoning for banning gay marriage, or adoption? Do you think it's right that someone in power could say 'Well, I don't care what subjective evidence presents, my book says homosexuality is wrong, therefore, it's in your best interest homosexuals, hetrosexuals and religious people alike?'

The idea that someones religious beliefs are the correct thing for an entire country is baffling to me. In a country of over sixty percent Christians in America, that is split up between hundreds of different groups of Christianity, and even people within the same -branch- of Christianity don't agree with each other on the same topics. The idea of a theocracy and state religion with decisions based on that religion only works if you've got an entire country which not only follows the same religion, but the exact same portions of that religion entirity.

Offline Pumpkin Seeds

Re: Does religion belong in politics
« Reply #114 on: November 04, 2012, 01:57:36 PM »
 Well, for one Vanity you are speaking in absolutes as if there is a clear cut, correct decision that is simply being ignored in favor of a religious one.  As if to say, this is right and that is wrong but religion is forcing people to make the wrong decision.  Rarely are decisions so cut and dry.  The decision is easy in your mind because of the way you think, your ideology and your beliefs.  Someone that does not believe that way would feel quite differently.  For instance, not all homosexuals want gay marriage.  There is a minority among the gay community that do not believe seeking marriage is right for the community and do not believe they benefit from having marriage.  So there is certainly not a simple right and wrong answer at this point.

Also, the number of 70% is a bit large at this point and not truly reflecting of this debate.  There are few things that 70% of an entire country can get behind which is not law.  I don’t even think support of marijuana is at that level.  The latest Gallup poll that I have seen puts the country split pretty evenly in regard to the issue.  As a side note, the main predicator for someone being for or against gay marriage is age not religious affiliation.

In any democracy type setting, a group of people are not going to get what they want.  Sometimes that group is the minority; often times that group is the minority.  By the ideals of democracy that is how things are supposed to be where everyone puts in their opinion and the majority of what the people want, happens.  So someone is going to “lose out” on the decision no matter what that choice might be.  Such is the difficulty of politics and the fine line that must be walked by political figures when the choices are so gray instead of black/white.

Offline Vanity Evolved

Re: Does religion belong in politics
« Reply #115 on: November 04, 2012, 02:40:57 PM »
Well, for one Vanity you are speaking in absolutes as if there is a clear cut, correct decision that is simply being ignored in favor of a religious one.  As if to say, this is right and that is wrong but religion is forcing people to make the wrong decision.  Rarely are decisions so cut and dry.  The decision is easy in your mind because of the way you think, your ideology and your beliefs.  Someone that does not believe that way would feel quite differently.  For instance, not all homosexuals want gay marriage.  There is a minority among the gay community that do not believe seeking marriage is right for the community and do not believe they benefit from having marriage.  So there is certainly not a simple right and wrong answer at this point.

Also, the number of 70% is a bit large at this point and not truly reflecting of this debate.  There are few things that 70% of an entire country can get behind which is not law.  I don’t even think support of marijuana is at that level.  The latest Gallup poll that I have seen puts the country split pretty evenly in regard to the issue.  As a side note, the main predicator for someone being for or against gay marriage is age not religious affiliation.

In any democracy type setting, a group of people are not going to get what they want.  Sometimes that group is the minority; often times that group is the minority.  By the ideals of democracy that is how things are supposed to be where everyone puts in their opinion and the majority of what the people want, happens.  So someone is going to “lose out” on the decision no matter what that choice might be.  Such is the difficulty of politics and the fine line that must be walked by political figures when the choices are so gray instead of black/white.

Yeah, I do tend to make it sound rather sweeping; I don't intend to. I'm not trying to imply that religion is the only driving force which causes people to work this way, it just simply tends to be a very powerful and common driving force behind some of the more out there ideas which groups like to try and force on people - the anti-homosexual and anti-atheist set ups within America's Boy Scouts, Absteinence Only programs, etc.

In response to that: So what? If a homosexual doesn't believe marriage is for them, the correct answer isn't 'stop every other homosexual in the world having the right to marry'. It's 'don't get married'. Gay marriage happens to be a very good example of a ruling which proves why secular ruling is superior, in these instances. Homosexuals being given the right to marry does no harm to anybody. It doesn't affect heterosexual people, as it doesn't influence their rights or marriages. If homosexuals don't want to get married, it doesn't affect them, because they don't want to get married anyway. It does affect the homosexual population who does want married very positively. So, what secular reasoning is there that homosexual marriage is a bad thing which isn't in the public interest? The few arguements I've seen against it are exclusively theological or simply make no sense/are actively offensive.

The only reasons to be against gay marriage is your personal ideas; there is no secular reason to stop gay marriage, as pointed out. Only homophobic or theological arguements. If 'I don't like gay marriage, therefore is shouldn't be legal' is right, then what about all the people who opposesed inter-racial marriage? Is it their right to prevent two people of another race marrying? Apparently not, as that is legal now, and for good reason.

The numbers are large, but they're simply an example for the purposes of the analogy. In the case of a religious disagreement to gay marriage and a homosexual's right to marriage, in my mind, there is a very clear cut answer: You either allow the religious to impose their books law on the minority, forcing their personal religious beliefs as fact onto a populace which doesn't believe or, more reasonably, homosexuals are granted their full right, as I believe they have, to become husband and husband/wife and wife while allowing the religious groups to exercise their power as seperate entities from the government to, for example, not allow gay marriage ceremonies in their church. Both people get to exercise their wants.

Offline Tamhansen

Re: Does religion belong in politics
« Reply #116 on: November 05, 2012, 02:36:08 AM »
The whole "religious" argument against gay marriage is bullcrap anyway. If god exists as is told in the bible, then he is the one to judge, not humans. The bible gives you a set of rules and says, we want you to live by these laws, and if you do you'll go to heaven. Nowhere in the bible does it say you get extra credit for forcing others to live by those rules. You are to preach the word of god to try and save them, but those who will not heed are to be judged by god, not by men.

Basically it is not religion that is the problem here, it's arrogance. Man thinking they can decide for god. Arrogance is pride, and pride is one of the seven Cardinal sins (and a very yummy magnum flavour) and god will strike you down for that sin. The only reason he hasn't done so already, well the same reason Santa didn't put a lump of coal in your stocking.

Offline Pumpkin Seeds

Re: Does religion belong in politics
« Reply #117 on: November 05, 2012, 05:43:49 AM »
The point of the back and forth here is not gay marriage, but rather a look into the exact nature of politics in terms of ideology.  From what has been said, imposing an ideology on people is bad.  Yet from what I can gather here, people want their own ideology forced on people that are resistant.  The excuse being that their ideology is better for everyone.  That reason of course being the same reason a politician would push their ideas onto a populace in the first place.

Vanity would have people of a religious bent forced to accept gay marriage because he does not believe their religious opinion or wants is valid.  That would be his ideology that he is attempting to force on other people for the “greater good.”  So is imposing an ideology only bad if you, personally, don’t agree what it?

Offline Tamhansen

Re: Does religion belong in politics
« Reply #118 on: November 05, 2012, 05:59:35 AM »
The point of the back and forth here is not gay marriage, but rather a look into the exact nature of politics in terms of ideology.  From what has been said, imposing an ideology on people is bad.  Yet from what I can gather here, people want their own ideology forced on people that are resistant.  The excuse being that their ideology is better for everyone.  That reason of course being the same reason a politician would push their ideas onto a populace in the first place.

Vanity would have people of a religious bent forced to accept gay marriage because he does not believe their religious opinion or wants is valid.  That would be his ideology that he is attempting to force on other people for the “greater good.”  So is imposing an ideology only bad if you, personally, don’t agree what it?


Although I agree with the gist of what you are saying, you are using false logic. Accepting the possiblity of gay marriage is not pushing his ideology on you. He does not force you to conform. He does not force you to marry someone of the same sex. He just wants to give everyone the same options regardless of ideology.

In an ideology free society everyone would be free to choose their own path straight people can marry the opposite sex, gay people can marry the same sex, and those inclined to do so can marry their toaster. Point is, that no one gets hurt by this. Politicians should only assure that people are free to live their lives without being harmed by another. And well there is not a single objective argument you can put down that you as a god fearing Christian would be hurt by marriage equality. Nor by the legalisation of Marijuanna for that matter

Offline Pumpkin Seeds

Re: Does religion belong in politics
« Reply #119 on: November 05, 2012, 06:12:51 AM »
They are forcing people, who do not want this to happen, to accept that this is happening.  That is forcing ideology.  “We don’t want gay marriage.”  “Well we’re going to pass a law that allows gay marriage, deal.”  That is the essence of forcing gay marriage on people.  The logic is simple.  People must accept that the state, which they pay taxes to and adhere to, allows for same-sex marriage even though they do not approve of the state doing so.  Because you don’t see a downside to this does not mean that others, the voters, don’t see a downside.

The logic is not faulty.  If I say, I don’t want gay marriage because I believe God will be angry at our country and punish us.  Then you respond with, not a valid reason we’re doing it anyway.  You are pushing your agenda and ideology on me.  I have to accept, since in this example you are in a leadership position, the decision made.  My only other option is to protest, rebel and not accept the decision.  In which case you, who are in power, invoke authoritarian figures to make me comply or punish me for not complying with your decision.

Offline Vanity Evolved

Re: Does religion belong in politics
« Reply #120 on: November 05, 2012, 07:33:33 AM »
They are forcing people, who do not want this to happen, to accept that this is happening.  That is forcing ideology.  “We don’t want gay marriage.”  “Well we’re going to pass a law that allows gay marriage, deal.”  That is the essence of forcing gay marriage on people.  The logic is simple.  People must accept that the state, which they pay taxes to and adhere to, allows for same-sex marriage even though they do not approve of the state doing so.  Because you don’t see a downside to this does not mean that others, the voters, don’t see a downside.

The logic is not faulty.  If I say, I don’t want gay marriage because I believe God will be angry at our country and punish us.  Then you respond with, not a valid reason we’re doing it anyway.  You are pushing your agenda and ideology on me.  I have to accept, since in this example you are in a leadership position, the decision made.  My only other option is to protest, rebel and not accept the decision.  In which case you, who are in power, invoke authoritarian figures to make me comply or punish me for not complying with your decision.

I'm sorry, but -this-, to me, is horribly faulty logic. Once upon a time, inter-racial marriage was against God. This was a sin which was and would ruin the country. Were we wrong to allow this, too? Some people hate Mexicans, and think they're 'stealing all the jobs'. Does that make alright to deport every Mexican out of the country? Does not annoying people to ritualisticall sacrifice their daughter to God infringe on their religious beliefs?

The reason I used gay marriage as an exampe is because it's an easy one; it is not a grey area. If homosexuality offends you that much that gay marriage hurts you to your core, then how do you deal with your everyday life? Homosexuals are out there, in relationships. What is it about a piece of paper giving them some tax breaks which suddenly makes this so offensive to people that it must be forbade? What is that gives one group the right to deny another happiness because of their belief? Is it offensive to the Flat Earth Society that we public books which state, without a doubt, that the world is round?

Gay marriage is the perfect example of why theological opinion should -not- drive politics. It denies entire groups rights they deserve with no reason other than 'Because my imaginary friend said so'. There is a very, very vast gulf between 'Homosexuals can marry, this offends me' and 'Homosexuals can get married. My book says this is wrong, but now it's legal, I guess -I- have to compromise my beliefs and get married to my own gender'.

To use weed, as it was mentioned earlier; giving someone else the right to smoke weed does -not-, in any way, infringe on your right to -not- smoke. If someone finds gay marriage wrong in their religion, they are completely within their rights to not marry someone of the same gender. This does not give them -any- right to stop other people. Once again, for an analogy, I like white chocolate. I don't really like milk chocolate. Am I allowed to stop others from eating milk chocolate because someone else enjoying the sweets they want insults my taste in sweets? Or do I simply need fifty one percent of the country to agree with me that milk chocolate is somehow inferior and -no-one- is allowed to like it because I don't and can't understand how someone else would?

The point of the back and forth here is not gay marriage, but rather a look into the exact nature of politics in terms of ideology.  From what has been said, imposing an ideology on people is bad.  Yet from what I can gather here, people want their own ideology forced on people that are resistant.  The excuse being that their ideology is better for everyone.  That reason of course being the same reason a politician would push their ideas onto a populace in the first place.

Vanity would have people of a religious bent forced to accept gay marriage because he does not believe their religious opinion or wants is valid.  That would be his ideology that he is attempting to force on other people for the “greater good.”  So is imposing an ideology only bad if you, personally, don’t agree what it?


Gay marriage, in this example, is not 'an ideology'. Unlike people trying to force their religious ideas through politics, gay marriage is not forcing homosexuality onto people and telling them that it's better for everyone. It's not telling them they have to get married to another man, because heterosexual marriage is inferior. Gay marriage is not superior, nor is it inferior; theres an entire population which it will make happy, and an (hopefully) small portion of people it will offend.

And yes, because your belief is not -their- belief. If they were trying to force you into a homosexual marriage, then that would have a footing. But if, say, fifty one percent of the country were homosexual, would they be allowed to, if they thought this was the case, forbid heterosexual marriage because they believed this was the right thing for everyone?

One last analogy before work: I don't like Dr. Who. Let's say that over sixty percent of people in the country say it's the best show in the world, and it's given the Best Show In The World Award. I take offense at this, because I disagree. Am I allowed to stop this, because my personal belief is that they're wrong? Better yet, because this affects me? Does my offense at this title entitle me to stop an entire group of people watching that show? Does this show being named the Best Show In The World somehow invalidate my opinion that it's terrible and force me to watch it, and accept it as great, regardless, because The Guys In Charge said it is? No, it does not.

Edit: Also, you've summed up forcing ideology through politics. " The excuse being that their ideology is better for everyone." Excuse being the operative word.
« Last Edit: November 05, 2012, 07:47:46 AM by Vanity Evolved »

Offline Pumpkin Seeds

Re: Does religion belong in politics
« Reply #121 on: November 05, 2012, 08:57:13 AM »
I fail to see the faulty logic or really why any logical argument needs to be made.  You are quite blatantly stating that what you believe to be right supersedes what someone else believes to be right.  That you would enforce your statements, your values and your belief is imposing your ideology onto another group of people that feel differently.  So you do not feel that imposing your values, ideas and beliefs onto another group is wrong.  You just don’t want them imposing those things on you.

Offline Vekseid

Re: Does religion belong in politics
« Reply #122 on: November 05, 2012, 10:02:07 AM »
They are forcing people, who do not want this to happen, to accept that this is happening.  That is forcing ideology.

An ideology is a set of beliefs to which facts are supposed to conform, not the other way around.

The desire for two consenting individuals to perform an act that only involves each other and calling it whatever they feel like has no innate material impact on the rest of the world. On its own, it is not even a belief in the first place to qualify, much less there being no facts quantified.

Quote
“We don’t want gay marriage.”  “Well we’re going to pass a law that allows gay marriage, deal.”  That is the essence of forcing gay marriage on people.  The logic is simple.  People must accept that the state, which they pay taxes to and adhere to, allows for same-sex marriage even though they do not approve of the state doing so.  Because you don’t see a downside to this does not mean that others, the voters, don’t see a downside.

In terms of state recognition, you have to present two arguments in order for this to qualify
1) That discriminatory status based on factors not of the participants' choosing should exist, and
2) Why they should exist in this case.

We hold as self-evident that all people are born equal. It's one of the founding principles of this country, though it has taken time to actually mean 'all' people, and still won't even after this fight is done.

Quote
The logic is not faulty.  If I say, I don’t want gay marriage because I believe God will be angry at our country and punish us.

This is your ideology. You forcing your bigotry on others. You have no facts to back up your claim, just a belief.

Whereas, we hold, as an axiom, that all should have an equal opportunity. The state provides certain rights and privileges to married couples as opposed to unmarried couples. Therefore this is a form of discrimination and should be eliminated.

Quote
  Then you respond with, not a valid reason we’re doing it anyway.  You are pushing your agenda and ideology on me.  I have to accept, since in this example you are in a leadership position, the decision made.  My only other option is to protest, rebel and not accept the decision.  In which case you, who are in power, invoke authoritarian figures to make me comply or punish me for not complying with your decision.

And this is just ludicrous. What is compliance? Not murdering them?

Offline Stattick

Re: Does religion belong in politics
« Reply #123 on: November 05, 2012, 10:13:28 AM »
Pumpkin Seeds is sort of right and sort of wrong.

What she's getting into is the dividing line between maximum person rights and societies protection of the rights of minorities. It's arguing that a bigot that hates black people, and only wants them allowed to have demeaning and/or dirty service jobs, has his rights infringed on when he sees black people capable of getting good jobs. He has his rights infringed upon when black people are able to go to college through affirmative action programs, or for some companies to have a hiring preference imposed on them from the government due to affirmative action programs. But that same bigot has his rights imposed on when his taxes go to giving "those people" a free education in elementary through high school. He has his rights imposed on when his taxes help to pay for medical care for "those people", and when his taxes help pay the salaries of police and firemen that serve in "those" neighborhoods.

Now, in a true democracy, where each person only has one vote, and there are no protections in place for people, it's very easy for society to turn into a horrible and evil mob that systematically brutalizes people for being different. Maybe at first, society decides that it doesn't like people who have brown skin, so they're all rounded up and deported. Or maybe they're just killed. Next society decides it doesn't like non-Christians, so all the Jews, Pagans, and atheists are rounded up and likewise done away with. But why stop there? Some people hate gingers. Or stutterers. Or people that drool. Or people with speech impediments. Or people with stupid hairstyles. Do away with them too. And maybe the machine starts turning on itself. It voted to get rid of the non-Christians before. But maybe now it's decided that Mormons and Catholics aren't real Christians, so put them against the wall too.

So, you obviously have to have some sort of protections for people. And at some point, my rights are going to rub against your rights. Society gets the fun job of deciding whose rights supersede the others. If my offense at the smell of ranch dressing knows no bounds and can literally make me vomit, do I have the right to ban ranch dressing? Do I even have the right to ban ranch dressing in my personal vicinity? I don't think so. I think I have to just put up with the disgusting culinary habits of lesser evolved creatures. But what about peanuts? Can I ban peanuts if even the slight exposure to them might kill me because of an allergy? Yes... yes, my life should be protected, even if it inconveniences others to some small degree. So food items should be carefully labeled so I can avoid peanuts, and restaurants should have to go to pains to avoid serving me food that will knock me dead.

Now, between those two extremes, there are a whole slew of rights that people have. It's often the case that these rights come into conflict. So, for some people, it can be very disturbing and impose on their "rights of happiness" to see gay people acting gay. Of course, they're just bigots, but those bigots still have rights. Society's goal has to be to decide if the bigots' "rights to happiness" is more important than gay people's "rights of happiness", which happens to be, in this case, the right to be themselves and act gay in public if they want to.

A pure democracy always just defaults to mob rule, so whoever the majority is gets to make the rules. They could decide to just get rid of all those nasty gay people if they wanted. But in a society like ours, we try to protect the rights of everyone, even from the wishes of the majority. So those gay people can be gay if they want.

So, in the context of this conversation, Pumpkin Seeds is right, in that to allow gay marriage, the rights of bigots to be happy gets ignored. Bigots are being forced to be tolerant. So yeah, she has a point. But on the other hand, fuck bigots.

So, getting back to the topic, does religion have a place in politics? Well, much of the "politics" of religion in this nation revolves around bigotry of one form or another. And, as I so eloquently said before, "fuck bigots." So no, I don't believe that the politics of bigotry should be allowed in politics. On the other hand, religious stuff that doesn't involve bigotry or trampling on someone's rights... well, I suppose I should give a bit on that, and have to tolerate some religious stuff in politics even if I dislike it, because in this case, it's I that could be accused of bigotry for not liking organized religion or (most) Abrahamic faiths, and when it comes down to whose rights are more important, we already have the precedent to "fuck bigots".

Offline Stattick

Re: Does religion belong in politics
« Reply #124 on: November 05, 2012, 10:18:16 AM »
This is your ideology. You forcing your bigotry on others. You have no facts to back up your claim, just a belief.

I don't think that Pumpkin Seeds is actually against gay marriage. I think she's playing the devil's advocate here, and picked up the cause of gay marriage as an example because Vanity Evolved used it. I could be wrong though.