"Faithism"

Isobel - posted on 09/25/2009

Loureen and Diana...I am without words, I am so sorry to hear that any of this happened to you.



America is supposed to take pride in providing the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness...how interesting that you only care about the "under god" part. I choose to pay attention the the "pursuit of happiness part" how dare you feel that you have a right to vote on whether or not another human being has the right of pursuit of happiness...your forefathers have already granted it, and sorry to get off the thread of abortion but what could be more indicative of the pursuit of happiness than having the right to marry the person you are in love with, gay, interracial, interfaith, etc. My boy boyfriend is part Jewish and I'm pretty sure that your pastor would tell me that it would be a sin to marry him...I would be up in arms if that were made law...don't say it's not the same as gay marriage because it is exactly the same. It is the unlawful denial of human rights based on one faith.

Diana - posted on 09/25/2009

Evelyn,



I think you took some of what I said too personally.I have read all of all of your posts-and everyone else's in the forum. I generally agree with what you have said, and I do know that you agree that abortion (at least in some cases) and homosexual marriage should be legal. I didn't mean that part to refer to you. I'm sorry it seemed that way. I was using those as examples of things that some people use only religious reasons to back up their views on.



Also, I'm in no way discrediting your religion. I'm merely saying that your religion, or mine, or anyone else's, has no place in politics. That's it. Any other time-fine, talk about it however much you want to. But with politics, there needs to be more foundation than mere religion. Your stance on when conception begins-that I can see, that I can make some sense of outside of religion. And that's all I want when it comes to politics-something not grounded *only* in religion-because that's not what our country is about. The other main point I'm making is that when you introduce religion in a political conversation, you can expcet it to critiqued just like any other worldview. Religion isn't exempt. That's just the way political conversation works.



And Christa-apology accepted. Just please think about what might've happened to the people you're talking to the next time you say that if abortion is legal then so should rape be. It's really, really insensitive sounding to someone who has gone through it, even if you don't mean it that way. Also, you have just officially met a person who believes in God but is not religious-and I do know some others if you'd like to meet them. =) I believe in a God-and I have my own relationship with him/her outside of any religion. I don't feel that I need a church of any sort to have a relationship with what created me.



Mmm, margaritas. =)

Evelyn - posted on 09/25/2009

Diana,

I never assumed you were not Christian, I was merely pointing out where my value system stems from. What I'm saying is that we all have our values, no matter where we get them from. I just happen to get SOME of mine from my faith. Some I get from humanity, education and my family. The same can be said for everyone. I just don't see why that ONE aspect of my value system has to be discounted just because it is religion. So then I should tell you that if you get your values from your education, you cannot bring that to the table because I don't agree with them? Maybe that's not what you meant, but that's really no different than how you feel about my religious values.

Oh and another thing, when have I ever said I was against gay marriage or abortion? I've NEVER said that. I just said I personally wouldn't do it. That doesn't mean I want to outlaw either one. Which is why I am all for sep of church/state.
I also never said Christians had a "monopoly" on God, if you read my post again I said that Christians and people of VARIOUS FAITHS would like to be considered as well. Can we make everyone happy all of the time? Absolutely not.
You also mentioned that you need reasons other than religious reasons for why a person feels the way they feel about a policy. Concerning abortion...regardless of what religion I am, I think abortion is wrong. Except in cases of rape/incest and if the life of the mother/child is in danger. That's just how I feel. If I wasn't a Christian I'd feel the same way. I feel life begins at conception and I don't think we have the right to deny someone their chance at life because it's not the right time, or because we don't have enough money...etc..etc. Those are pretty flimsy reasons to deny someone a chance to live. Those are situations that can be remedied. Now, for women who have been raped, victims of incest, ill, or when the baby is not viable or will not live after birth...I am able to understand why someone would make this choice. If I were ever in this position, I can't say I know what choice I'd make. I totally understand you Loureen when you say..."unless you have lived you have NO IDEA ". It's the same thing people say about racism all the time. People think they understand but until you've been in that situation...you have no clue. Ladies, we all have had our experiences that we have learned something from. Life experience, whether good or bad, family, school, friends or religion. The point is we ALL have something to bring to the table and we should ALL be heard.

**Loureen, I am so heartbroken that that happened to you...please know I have you in my thoughts**

Charlie - posted on 09/25/2009

Sorry Christa , i should have read on .

It just really gets to me when people make no lee way or have compassion for the grey areas and especially gets my goat when Rape comes up .

I am glad you are open to compromise :)

Diana - posted on 09/25/2009

Quoting Loureen:

Quoting Christa:

Quoting Cathy:

A 13 year old is raped by her father ... to which she opts to abort the feotus .... you think she is as evil as her father? Sorry Christa .... not buying it.

Well I do.  Two wrings don't make a right.  In both cases an innocent life was ruined.  At least the 13 year old has a chance to make it better, her baby did not get the same chance.  That is the point I'm trying to make, I view an unborn baby as an equal human in this world.  It should be protected just as any other person should be.  I understand there are those who disagree and just think it's a "cluster of cells" or "a mass".  Which is why I don't normally bring up the two topics in relation to another, but I was talking to a Christian who I was assuming viewed life in the same way.

I was raped not once but twice as a teen , i live with it everyday writing this now makes me want to throw up .

I got severly depressed about it , you cant imagine the horror of reliving those nights and i do ALL THE TIME , i suffer very privately .

I see those guys faces and i feel sick , weak , empty it blocks everthing out and consumes me at times .

I fourtunatly didnt fall pregnant and i cant say what i would have done if i had fallen pregnant in my state at the time i would not have handled it , i was already suicidal at the time because i would often see those boys around town .

Those who do keep children of rape i applaud them but its a very personal decision .

It's so easy to assume you know whats best when you havent been through a situation as horriffic as rape so perheps people shouldnt assume anything on a sensitive , personal matter i dont care what religion or non religion you from , you could be a member of  DR , seuss and the church of green eggs and ham for all i care but unless you have lived you have NO IDEA .

So I said I was going but I have to respond to you, Loureen. Thank you for sharing your story. I didn't feel good enough to share mine, but now I will share a bit. I'll just say I was date raped and did get pregnant. I miscarried. Until you've been there, you never know the pain the situation brings, or how you will deal with it. I find that sometimes I'm glad, which makes me feel guilty-and others I'm sad, because that child was part of me, too. Suggestions such as those made earlier in this thread disgust me. I'm very sorry you had to deal with that situation, and even sorrier that it got brought up in such an insensitive manner-I really do know how you feel.

Charlie - posted on 09/25/2009

Quoting Christa:

Quoting Cathy:

A 13 year old is raped by her father ... to which she opts to abort the feotus .... you think she is as evil as her father? Sorry Christa .... not buying it.

Well I do.  Two wrings don't make a right.  In both cases an innocent life was ruined.  At least the 13 year old has a chance to make it better, her baby did not get the same chance.  That is the point I'm trying to make, I view an unborn baby as an equal human in this world.  It should be protected just as any other person should be.  I understand there are those who disagree and just think it's a "cluster of cells" or "a mass".  Which is why I don't normally bring up the two topics in relation to another, but I was talking to a Christian who I was assuming viewed life in the same way.

I was raped not once but twice as a teen , i live with it everyday writing this now makes me want to throw up .

I got severly depressed about it , you cant imagine the horror of reliving those nights and i do ALL THE TIME , i suffer very privately .

I see those guys faces and i feel sick , weak , empty it blocks everthing out and consumes me at times .

I fourtunatly didnt fall pregnant and i cant say what i would have done if i had fallen pregnant in my state at the time i would not have handled it , i was already suicidal at the time because i would often see those boys around town .

Those who do keep children of rape i applaud them but its a very personal decision .

It's so easy to assume you know whats best when you havent been through a situation as horriffic as rape so perheps people shouldnt assume anything on a sensitive , personal matter i dont care what religion or non religion you from , you could be a member of  DR , seuss and the church of green eggs and ham for all i care but unless you have lived you have NO IDEA .

Diana - posted on 09/25/2009

=) That was an attempt at humor. Sort of like The Princess Bride "Never get involved in a landwar in Asian" thing. Apparently it failed-sorry.



Anyhow, as I said, God does not equal religion. Not any one religion, anyway. So the assumption that they meant that to be the Christian God and that we should thus make all laws based on Christianity is a bit assanine.



As for Abraham Lincoln-great man, great speech-but he was not enacting policy when he gave that speech. The government as a whole is not supposed to make laws based on religion.



Now-I'm done with this conversation. It's clear that you'll never accept or believe that Christianity doesn't have a place in government-and that's fine, whatever. But I'm not being faithist when I critique your religious ideas as they relate to government, because you put them out there to be by making them not only a personal belief system but also a political ideology-and if you can blast mine and others who disagree with you, we can do the same to you. Frankly, I'm offended by many of your suggestions-the rape comparison, that a 13 year old should be forced to carry a baby born of incest and rape, that I-and everyone else-should have to live my life by your values. So I'll just say we disagree and leave it at that before I start thinking about what the implications are of all that and get my blood pressure up for no damn good reason.



As I'm childless tonight, I'm going to have a margarita. I bid you adieu, and hope that no one ever makes you go through any of the things you're so willing to heap on others' heads.

Charlie - posted on 09/25/2009

Quoting Christa:

Quoting Cathy:

A 13 year old is raped by her father ... to which she opts to abort the feotus .... you think she is as evil as her father? Sorry Christa .... not buying it.

Well I do.  Two wrings don't make a right.  In both cases an innocent life was ruined.  At least the 13 year old has a chance to make it better, her baby did not get the same chance.  That is the point I'm trying to make, I view an unborn baby as an equal human in this world.  It should be protected just as any other person should be.  I understand there are those who disagree and just think it's a "cluster of cells" or "a mass".  Which is why I don't normally bring up the two topics in relation to another, but I was talking to a Christian who I was assuming viewed life in the same way.

I was raped not once but twice as a teen , i live with it everyday writing this now makes me want to throw up .

I got severly depressed about it , you cant imagine the horror of reliving those nights and i do ALL THE TIME , i suffer very privately .

I see those guys faces and i feel sick , weak , empty it blocks everthing out and consumes me at times .

I fourtunatly didnt fall pregnant and i cant say what i would have done if i had fallen pregnant in my state at the time i would not have handled it , i was already suicidal at the time because i would often see those boys around town .

Those who do keep children of rape i applaud them but its a very personal decision .

It's so easy to assume you know whats best when you havent been through a situation as horriffic as rape so perheps people shouldnt assume anything on a sensitive , personal matter i dont care what religion or non religion you from , you could be a member of  DR , seuss and the church of green eggs and ham for all i care but unless you have lived you have NO IDEA .

Diana - posted on 09/25/2009

Only because it was right underneath my post....

Christa - posted on 09/25/2009

funny that you assume it was meant for you.....

Diana - posted on 09/25/2009

How did I just do any of those things?

Christa - posted on 09/25/2009

I believe there are Members of Circle of Moms Leaders forum in here...in case you didn't see the Private Message sent out yesterday.......I am including it for you:



We recently came up with an acronym, "No T.H.U.M.P.S.," to help everyone remember the Community Guidelines:



No...



...Threats (You may not publish or post direct, specific threats of violence or illegal acts against others.)



...Hate speech (No slurs or stereotyping.)



...Unlawful use (You may not use Circle of Moms for unlawful purposes or promotion of illegal activities. If it's illegal where you live or in the state of California it's illegal here.)



...Misrepresentation (You must be who you say you are. No false mom or child profiles.)



...Personal attacks (You may not abuse, slander, or vilify another member.)



...Spam (You may not publish or post solicitations or advertisements except in designated areas.)

Diana - posted on 09/25/2009

Quoting Christa:

Diana you are incorrect about one nation under God. This is from the Declaration of Independence.

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."

Also here is a piece talking about all the Christian references through out our history in Washington.

http://www.providencefoundation.com/docu...(2)...pdf


Many argue that when the fore father reference God they are not speaking of the Christian God and that may be so, but they are talking about God none the less and that is always related to religion. So you see religion has always been a part of our history and it always will be.

That never says that their creator is the Christian God. Also, for the record, "One nation under God" is from the pledge, and the "under God" part was added in 1954.

God does not equal a specific religion. Christianity doesn't hold a monopoly on God-lots of other religions believe in a creator, a god. Religion and government are separate. The forefathers were mostly Deists, as I already mentioned. Thomas Jefferson wrote his own version of the Bible by deleting everything except what Jesus actually said.

Do not argue American history with someone who has a degree in American history. =)

Diana - posted on 09/25/2009

Quoting Evelyn:

Diana you're gonna have an uphill battle ahead of you considering this is still considered "one nation under God". Christians and people of various faiths are still the majority and expect to be heard and considered JUST as much as atheist/agnostic people. Just because your values don't stem from religion does not make them any more valid than mine. Nor does it make mine any more valid than yours. Please remember that. I don't expect to be 'dismissed' when I start having a political argument just because I am a Christian, just as I wouldn't dismiss you because you are not. I get the whole separation of church and state argument, and I agree...but I also understand Christa's earlier point of not being able to separate your values (which stem from your beliefs) from a part of your decision making. If you wanted people to detach ALL emotion from the enactment of bills and laws...then we wouldn't have examples like Megan's law now would we? That bill was created because of a horrible situation and obviously an emotional one. Detaching emotions and values from politics is impossible. I know I sound hypocritical right now from my previous posts...I'm just trying to explain that although I do agree with separation of CHURCH and state...people cannot separate themselves from their values, no matter where they came from...if they could, then their values cease to have any true meaning. Values are a part of you..they cannot be shut on and off. They can be amended of course to adapt to different situations...which is why I am empathetic to abortion laws for more extreme cases...but I cannot just say...I'm all for abortion. Because, personally I'm not. I just won't try to outlaw it because I happen to think it's wrong. It's not up to me to choose for another person. Geez I hope that made sense. LOL I'm so out of it right now.

lol...This has only been considered one nation "Under God"  for about 60 years or so, when it got put into the pledge and on the money. Lest we forget, most of our forefathers were Deists-and the motion to open the Constitutional Convention in prayer was voted down. So, like it or not, religion doesn't have a place in politics. I need some other reasons for not allowing gays to marry, for outlawing abortion-because those based solely on religion cannot be used to dictate public policy, per our Constitution.

Please remember that I've never brought my religion to the table for this conversation. I've never once suggested that I do or do not believe in God. You're merely assuming that I'm not Christian because I don't seen Christianity as a valid argument for the enactment of law.

My point is that we all have different values-and that values based on religion alone cannot stand as valid reasoning for public policy, because they uphold one religion over another and suggest that values based on one religion are better than those based on another.  My point is that there needs to be more reasoning than mere religion behind the policies that are enacted, and that no matter how many Christians there are in our nation, they don't have the right to run over others. With things like Megan's law-do you think it wouldn't have been enacted without Christianity? Is it not something that protects us all? That's all I'm saying-laws should protect us all, and should be based in more than religious doctrine, no matter what religion that may be. That's why I ask, repeatedly, for other reasons that a person does or doesn't support a public policy when I'm given a religious reason-because according to the division of church and state, religious reasons *alone* aren't valid.

Evelyn - posted on 09/25/2009

Diana you're gonna have an uphill battle ahead of you considering this is still considered "one nation under God". Christians and people of various faiths are still the majority and expect to be heard and considered JUST as much as atheist/agnostic people. Just because your values don't stem from religion does not make them any more valid than mine. Nor does it make mine any more valid than yours. Please remember that. I don't expect to be 'dismissed' when I start having a political argument just because I am a Christian, just as I wouldn't dismiss you because you are not. I get the whole separation of church and state argument, and I agree...but I also understand Christa's earlier point of not being able to separate your values (which stem from your beliefs) from a part of your decision making. If you wanted people to detach ALL emotion from the enactment of bills and laws...then we wouldn't have examples like Megan's law now would we? That bill was created because of a horrible situation and obviously an emotional one. Detaching emotions and values from politics is impossible. I know I sound hypocritical right now from my previous posts...I'm just trying to explain that although I do agree with separation of CHURCH and state...people cannot separate themselves from their values, no matter where they came from...if they could, then their values cease to have any true meaning. Values are a part of you..they cannot be shut on and off. They can be amended of course to adapt to different situations...which is why I am empathetic to abortion laws for more extreme cases...but I cannot just say...I'm all for abortion. Because, personally I'm not. I just won't try to outlaw it because I happen to think it's wrong. It's not up to me to choose for another person. Geez I hope that made sense. LOL I'm so out of it right now.

Diana - posted on 09/25/2009

Ok-I'm going to ignore the argument about abortion, because that's not even the point at hand. I should never have used it as an example for what I was talking about, because it got hijacked out of my post and we've turned this into a discussion about abortion and rape and war-and that's not the point.



Whatever your personal feelings and values dictate you do in a given situation, you cannot assume that I have the same values and feelings, or that anyone else does. As Jo so astutely pointed out, individual situations have no place in government. We have to do what is best for the whole. Therefore your arguments must be grounded in more than your personal values and beliefs to make valid political points. If not, we open ourselves up to shifting back and forth between religious ideologies with whomever is in power.



As for the rape analogy-I'm not even going to touch it, aside from to say it is the most offensive, crass, ridiculous argument I've ever heard-and it's disrespectful to those who have been in that situation.



It is ridiculous to say that sin should be against the law. There are things-like cursing, adultery, honoring the Sabbath-that are not currently against the law, and should not be, because they reflect a religious ideology and also because they do not serve to protect others from harm (sure adultery hurts emotionally-but not physically.) The laws that we have in place are supposed to serve to protect us. If they do not do that duty, then they are out of step with what our country is supposed to be.



I disregard religious reasons in political conversations not because I'm against religion, or because I'm "faithist", but because they have no place in a political conversation. Since there is a separation of church and state, they are not valid reasons for allowing or preventing people to do certain things. When you use your faith as a reason for a certain law, it's an invalid argument-because not everyone shares your belief, and not everyone has to, so you need to come up with something else to say as a reason for whatever law you want to enact.



I respect religion and religious people-but there are some places religion doesn't belong, and legislating and enforcing laws is one of those places. And if you insist on bringing religion into a political conversation, then you can expect it to be criticized just as any other ideology would be, and you can expect to immediately hear me (and many others) immediately dismiss it because of the simple fact that your religion-or mine-or my neighbor's-has no place in government, and religious arguments are not valid when discussing politics.

Dana - posted on 09/25/2009

Christa, I'm in no way trying to be a jerk here or put your mother down in any way but, how was she forced to have an abortion?

Evelyn - posted on 09/25/2009

Quoting Christa:

Evelyn, I see what you are saying, and I admit this is the worst case scenario. I just don't believe we have the right to decide who lives or dies. That right solely belongs to God. Having said all of this, while I personally don't think anyone should be allowed an abortion ever, I am open to a compromise to allow for these terrible situations.

Then shouldn't you also be against war?

I'm glad to see you can compromise on this situation, think if it were your daughter. (I am in NO WAY implying that her father would do this) and look at it from that angle. Would you force your little girl to go through this? No, it's not up to us who lives or dies, but your child that is HERE could 1. die of complications from having a child so young 2. become depressed and suicidal (which is already likely from having been raped by her own father 3. have to deal with the hurt and anguish of a severely deformed baby being born to her. I would pray and pray and pray for forgivness, but I couldn't let my child go through that.

?? - posted on 09/25/2009

Christa, have you ever been raped? You talk about it as though you've either been through a rape or the complete opposite and have never dealt with anything even remotely close to being raped. Generally curious what the answer is here because it will clear up alot for me about your stance.



Not asking to be rude, I think the answer to that 1 question is the key to me understanding why you say what you do.

Evelyn - posted on 09/25/2009

**not produce, product**

Evelyn - posted on 09/25/2009

LOL, we have haven't we? We have to have them here though, I won't go over to PDM, I just don't have the strength. LOL I don't peek often, but when I do I get tired just reading those threads. ;-)

Gotta disagree w/you regarding the 13 yr old raped by her father though. To expect that girl to carry a child at such a young age, a child that is a product of violent incest by her own father is cruel. I may not agree with the procedure, but I would understand the reasoning. Even for the unborn child's sake. That child has every chance of being born with gross abnormalities, mental and developmental issues and could you imagine knowing that you were a produce of a father/daughter rape? That your mother was both your sister and your mother? This is a child barely into puberty forced to carry this burden. No, I cannot fathom allowing that to go on. Even if the baby were to go up for adoption, this victim has suffered enough being raped by her father. Now she has to carry this baby to term and give it up as well? If cruelty has a limit, this situation passed it long ago.

Evelyn - posted on 09/25/2009

Christa, I'm not taking the easy way out, I'm taking the only way out. Your argument is lost on me, as mine obviously is on you. I can talk/debate til the cows come home, I just refuse to do it with a brick wall. I'm open to learning new things and hearing others opinions and actually digesting and considering them, you've proven that you are not.

Oh and just so you know, I too agree that life begins at conception. But other people do not.. Just because we feel that we're right, what makes it right to force others to think the way we do? We can't. Just as they can't force us to think their way. But just because I am against something, doesn't mean I have any ill will towards those who aren't.

Like I said before, I keep everything in prayer, I do what I can to help who I can and I make no judgments and cast no stones. I've got enough of my own issues to criticize someone else for theirs.

I'm gonna throw out a cliche statement that we've discussed before...."Hate the sin, love the sinner". This is how I translate that phrase, "I may not like what you do, but I still love you. I may not do what you did, but I still love you. I will not judge you, that is not my place. I am not perfect and neither are you. We've all got our crosses to bear, I'll help you carry yours if you'll help me carry mine. I'll help you even if you don't help me." If everyone had THAT mentality...(even if it's not based in faith) this would be a beautiful world.

Cathy - posted on 09/25/2009

A 13 year old is raped by her father ... to which she opts to abort the feotus .... you think she is as evil as her father? Sorry Christa .... not buying it.

Sara - posted on 09/25/2009

I don't think the argument is "lost" on people that don't believe life begins at conception, the point you're trying to make is clear, they just think it's not a good argument.

Cathy - posted on 09/25/2009

Women who choose abortion aren't doing so out of some saddistic urge to hurt another human being. The rape analogy is so wrong!

Evelyn - posted on 09/25/2009

Christa, that has got to be the most ridiculous, far-fetched statement on this entire thread. Heck, the entire group! So much so, that I'm not even going to bother commenting on it. There is no way I can take someone with that type of thought process seriously.

**Everyone else*** This is where they came up with the phrase "Pulling something out of your ass" ie, what happens when you are proven wrong and have no other options.

Sara - posted on 09/25/2009

But I think it would be remiss to mention that there is debate upon when life begins...there's no static definition of it, some people have different interpretations of that...so some may not think that abortion is murder because they may not view the fetus as a "baby" yet. There's no disputing that a woman is a person and a man having sex with her without consent is rape.

Jenny - posted on 09/25/2009

Puh-lease. Reaching now aren't you?

Evelyn - posted on 09/25/2009

LOL Cathy!

Evelyn - posted on 09/25/2009

Christa...I don't know how else I can say this. I am not saying it's OK for anyone else to do it! I'm saying I AM NOT GOING TO TELL SOMEONE ELSE WHAT THEY CAN DO WITH THEIR BODY. That doesn't mean I think it's ok. Like I said...FREE WILL.

Yes, banning abortion is telling someone what they can and cannot do with their body. You can't change definitions just to suit your needs hun. No good has come of this war, we don't know that we've prevented more terrorist attacks because none have happened again...they mightn't have happened anyway. Could the war have been a reason why? Sure, that's just as feasible as any other theory. Christa, no one is saying any good has come of millions of babies being aborted I mean COME ON. That's absolutely ridiculous. Don't get me wrong, I'm all for you being against abortion, that's your prerogative, but dont say "I see it as protecting an innocent life from being murdered" while making excuses for the war. What about the Iraqi children and babies being killed over there? It's ok just because there less of them??? Wth???

Christa look, I've stated my opinion and you've stated yours. At this point I'm just going to agree to disagree because I know when I've hit a brick wall and I've got other stuff to do today LOL.

Cathy - posted on 09/25/2009

Two fellow Christians argue political policy .... if you don't agree does that make you "faithist" towards each other?

Evelyn - posted on 09/25/2009

You must not have read any of my posts then...because I have clearly stated time and time again that I am NOT ok with abortion. So it makes perfect sense.

I don't have to agree with everything my party stands for, but I am for a womans right to choose what she want to do with her own body. But I personally am against abortion. I just don't force my values on others. God gave ALL of us free will and I live by His word. I witness when it is needed and asked for, and I pray when it is not. I am heartbroken for those families that were destroyed. I happen to have been VERY good friends with one of the firemen that were killed when the buildings fell. I grew up on Long Island and still lived there at the time and I knew several others who perished, just not as well as I knew Tim. So yes, I'm even angrier about it than you are. That however, does NOT justify the reign of terror and death that our previous administration unleashed on the innocent people of Iraq. (yes, some are not so innocent, but only a handful of them have actually been killed!)

Condemning death out of one side of your face while condoning death out of the other, THAT'S what makes no sense.

On a similar note, how is it you are against socialism, (not that that is what is going on, but your party seems to think so) yet you are all for telling someone what they can and cannot do with their body? Yet ANOTHER hypocritical stance the Rep party has taken.

Evelyn - posted on 09/25/2009

Sorry Christa, but that is the oldest excuse in the book. And that is exactly what it is, an EXCUSE. A pretty flimsy one at that. No one is directly threatening your family's life. It is not a NECESSITY to kill hundreds of thousands of Iraqis and thousands of American soldiers while trying to hunt down ONE FREAKING PERSON. Do you even hear how ridiculous that sounds??? The commandment is "Thou shalt not Kill", not "Thou shalt not Kill, oh except in the case of etc..etc.."

Evelyn - posted on 09/25/2009

I've always said it's very hypocritical of conservatives to support war but not abortion. I personally think both are wrong. Death is death no matter how you want to spin it. It seems to be a "do as I say, not as I do" type mentality. On quite a few issues. I find it hard to view many conservatives (most, not all) as compassionate baby protectors when they support the rampant bombings and death going on overseas.

Esther - posted on 09/25/2009

Quoting Sara:

Quoting Christa:

I'm speaking from my personal values about what I will and won't vote for. Not I don't support that, but if someone who does wants to create legislation and try to get it passed that is their right. Everyone is entitled to their own values and all are equally relevant in deciding policy for this country. IMO

My first thought when you say that you don't support legislation that supports sin, do you support the legislation that supports the wars in Iraq in Afghanistan?  I"m not trying to be rude or anything here, but I'm seriously curious.  Murder is a sin, but is it ok when it's in the context of war?

Or as an "oops" result of torture? Or the death penalty?

Sara - posted on 09/25/2009

Quoting Christa:

I'm speaking from my personal values about what I will and won't vote for. Not I don't support that, but if someone who does wants to create legislation and try to get it passed that is their right. Everyone is entitled to their own values and all are equally relevant in deciding policy for this country. IMO

My first thought when you say that you don't support legislation that supports sin, do you support the legislation that supports the wars in Iraq in Afghanistan?  I"m not trying to be rude or anything here, but I'm seriously curious.  Murder is a sin, but is it ok when it's in the context of war?

Johnny - posted on 09/24/2009

The original purpose of the separation of church and state was to provide protection for religion from interference from the government, and it continues to serve that function. Let's suppose for a moment that religion and the state were one, that laws were formed based on one group's religious principles. And that the state controlled what was considered moral and acceptable for everyone to believe. Basically similar to Saudi Arabia where the law is based on the Wahhabist (sect of Islam) interpretations of Sharia law. And where the Wahhabist beliefs are governed by the king. You are expected to believe in and follow the tenets of a religion that is proscribed by the government. The moment we allow the wall to come down that separates church and state, not only can religious beliefs from certain groups govern all the people, but the government also will have a right to govern what people believe.



I think this is seldom considered by those American Christians who are so keen to have laws created to govern all the population that reflect their own specific religious beliefs. They forget that while it seems appealing to force their own beliefs on everyone, they will also be subjected to the government's control of their faith.



Of course an individual's opinions will be informed by their faith (or lack of it). I don't think anyone is arguing that point. However, when laws are created to specifically force the ENTIRE population to follow the moral beliefs of one religious sect, you degrade the protections offered by the separation of church and state, both for religion and government.

?? - posted on 09/24/2009

Core values are respect, decency, consideration, understanding, passion and compassion - those values are imperative in deciding what laws, legislation and regulations that are going to be imposed on an entire group of people who will be expected to live under these laws and regulations.



Exact situations - exact circumstances - exact scenarios have NO place in a decision that will be placed over an entire nation of people's who within a group of even just TEN people - there are 10 different ideas, positions, opinions, core values and religious variations.



I think it's arrogant, insulting, counter productive and honestly - moronic to believe than any single 'exact' expectation of any circumstance should be a deciding factor on any political platform.



My examples of "single 'exact' expectation of any circumstance":

Religious views saying abortion is a sin therefore no one is allowd to have an abortion.

Enviromentalist views saying drilling will kill the earth so no one can drill ever.

KKK views saying black people are nothing more than dogs so they become 2nd class again.



None of those "values" have any place in politics. Ever. Period. I don't care what opinion you have - those are all 'ways of life' and those are all 'values' that are chosen individually and taught individually. It would be absolutely ridiculous to expect an entire nation of people to conform to any of them.



If you want to talk about CORE VALUES - that is a whole other story. Core values are qualities that people gain from being good people and having a good heart. Core values are the support system behind religious views, the KKK view, the Enviromentalist view etc. If you take away religion from a person, they will still have those inner qualities and emotions in them that allow them the means to look beyond themselves and look at others.



I think "the REAL" Christians are able to look to their CORE values - to HUMANITIES core values - being decent to people, being understanding of people in a whole, being considerate and compassionate and being able to look beyond themselves to see every other person in the world live their life the way that individual sees fit. Not just rely on the values of their religion - but look beyond and look to the values of being a human being - human rights. Not religious rights, not political rights, not community rights, but the right of every human.



It takes character and strength to stand by the decisions we make when we are telling millions of people what they can and can not do - and even more so what they will or will not be punished for doing. Allowing any specific ideal, religion, way of life to be allowed into the discussion when you're discussing something that diverse is counter productive. It has nothing to do with one being more worthy than another or one being less important than another - all it is, is looking beyond the individuality and looking at the whole and deciding on factors that will help the millions and millions of people live their lives in a happy, healthy and productive way.

Isobel - posted on 09/24/2009

Quoting Christa:

Diana, I mean that is their personal values. I personally can't support any legislation that says its ok for people to sin. To me I view it as me condoning their actions and I can't do that. Those are my values. If a Christian can separate themselves from that part of the faith, then those are their values. I can not separate the two because like I already explained, it is a part of me. It affects every decision I make and I cannot sit back and say it's wrong, but it's ok for someone else to do. I'm just not wired that way. So again all I've been saying is each person's personal values are their own and just because one's stem from religion that doesn't make it any less ok. Here's an example I was thinking about that reverses things a bit. The environmentalists, from their personal values, don't think we should drill in AK because it would harm the earth and the wildlife. I believe the earth is here to support humans (not that we should irresponsibly destroy it) if our species can benefit from drilling then we should. So in this case people of those values are telling me I can't do something I think I should be able to. If you don't want to drill then don't but why do you get to tell me what I can or can not do? How is that any different in me taking my values and telling someone they can't commit murder of their unborn child? I don't want to get into a big debate about these topics I'm just trying to illustrate that peoples values are constantly telling others of different values what they can and can not do. Why does the difference that mine stem from religion make a difference? It doesn't.

So, you support the notion of Sharia law?  That's what you get when you don't have separation of church and state...Women must cover themselves, hide their faces, accept beatings from their husbands...to change these laws would be (in their opinion, supporting sin).  Your country was built on the notion of separation of church and state, your original settlers were fleeing from religious prosecution.  America is not a Christian nation...it is a nation with a lot of Christians in it

Esther - posted on 09/24/2009

Christa - I don't think anyone ever said that your values don't matter. And you can and should vote according to your values. That is your absolute right. I don't know how I can say that any clearer. What I don't think anyone should be allowed to do is write & pass laws that impose those values on others when that directly impacts their life and does not serve to protect anyone elses. I already told you that I think abortion by those standards is a difficult issue. But gay marriage is not. Also, even if we all went by your bible, people interpret that book very differently. People pick & choose as to what's important. People read different meanings into different words. Some people take it litterally, others see it symbolically. So, unless God himself comes down from up above to lay down the law, how will we ever know who's right or wrong? We won't. Therefore you are entitled to your values, I'm entitled to mine. I won't tell you to stop praying, you don't tell me who I get to marry. Simple.

Dana - posted on 09/24/2009

Are Christians considered a race of people now?

Sara - posted on 09/24/2009

Quoting Christa:

Quoting Sara:

 

Uh, don't put words in my mouth, I don't agree with the values behind murder, stealing, abuse, etc.  And you don't know what laws I agree with or don't, for the record. I was saying you agree with the values behind the laws preventing murder etc.  That's why you think those laws are ok even though they take away a persons choice, I wasn't saying you agree with murder.  Sorry I didn't word that better. :-)

 

I don't think it's ok to discriminate against Chrisitians, but I also don't think that's what we're doing in the thread, Christa.  I think that what some other ladies have said is true, that religion isn't exempt from criticism just because it is sacred to some people. If you're going to use your faith to backup your arguments against or for certain things, you're opening yourself up to criticism.    

You are free to argue with my values as I will argue with yours.  That's not what I'm saying, but people constantly dismiss them and tell me I have no place in politics because my religious values don't count.  And it's not fair for me to push my values on others.  That's the whole point I'm getting at.  You are free to say I disagree, but to then come and say I'm forcing my religion on people and that violates separation of church and state is crap.  It's an easy way for you (generally) to dismiss those that think like me and tell us we don't count.  That is discrimination and "racism" which is what the whole thread is about.  It's no different then telling a black person their values don't matter because they are black.  We all push our own values on others that's why we constantly have these discussions because we want others to see things as we do.  Just because I'm a Christian and mine come from God doesn't make them any less valuable then yours.

 

Ok, thanks for clearing that up!  :)

Diana - posted on 09/24/2009

Quoting Christa:

Quoting Sara:

 

Uh, don't put words in my mouth, I don't agree with the values behind murder, stealing, abuse, etc.  And you don't know what laws I agree with or don't, for the record. I was saying you agree with the values behind the laws preventing murder etc.  That's why you think those laws are ok even though they take away a persons choice, I wasn't saying you agree with murder.  Sorry I didn't word that better. :-)

 

I don't think it's ok to discriminate against Chrisitians, but I also don't think that's what we're doing in the thread, Christa.  I think that what some other ladies have said is true, that religion isn't exempt from criticism just because it is sacred to some people. If you're going to use your faith to backup your arguments against or for certain things, you're opening yourself up to criticism.    

You are free to argue with my values as I will argue with yours.  That's not what I'm saying, but people constantly dismiss them and tell me I have no place in politics because my religious values don't count.  And it's not fair for me to push my values on others.  That's the whole point I'm getting at.  You are free to say I disagree, but to then come and say I'm forcing my religion on people and that violates separation of church and state is crap.  It's an easy way for you (generally) to dismiss those that think like me and tell us we don't count.  That is discrimination and "racism" which is what the whole thread is about.  It's no different then telling a black person their values don't matter because they are black.  We all push our own values on others that's why we constantly have these discussions because we want others to see things as we do.  Just because I'm a Christian and mine come from God doesn't make them any less valuable then yours.

 

Actually, it's totally different. What I'm saying is that religion has no place in politics because our government set it up to be that way, and becaues that prevents one faith from rolling over anyone and anything in its path-so if you've got some other reasoning aside from religion about why these laws should not be passed, I'll be happy to hear it-and if you want to talk about why you dislike that other people do these things, that's fine-but when you start using your religious values to try and dictate law, that's when I step and and say no, because that's not what our system is bulit to do. It's totally different than saying I won't listen to a person because they're black, white, Asian, etc.

Diana - posted on 09/24/2009

Quoting Christa:

Quoting Sara:

 

Uh, don't put words in my mouth, I don't agree with the values behind murder, stealing, abuse, etc.  And you don't know what laws I agree with or don't, for the record. I was saying you agree with the values behind the laws preventing murder etc.  That's why you think those laws are ok even though they take away a persons choice, I wasn't saying you agree with murder.  Sorry I didn't word that better. :-)

 

I don't think it's ok to discriminate against Chrisitians, but I also don't think that's what we're doing in the thread, Christa.  I think that what some other ladies have said is true, that religion isn't exempt from criticism just because it is sacred to some people. If you're going to use your faith to backup your arguments against or for certain things, you're opening yourself up to criticism.    

You are free to argue with my values as I will argue with yours.  That's not what I'm saying, but people constantly dismiss them and tell me I have no place in politics because my religious values don't count.  And it's not fair for me to push my values on others.  That's the whole point I'm getting at.  You are free to say I disagree, but to then come and say I'm forcing my religion on people and that violates separation of church and state is crap.  It's an easy way for you (generally) to dismiss those that think like me and tell us we don't count.  That is discrimination and "racism" which is what the whole thread is about.  It's no different then telling a black person their values don't matter because they are black.  We all push our own values on others that's why we constantly have these discussions because we want others to see things as we do.  Just because I'm a Christian and mine come from God doesn't make them any less valuable then yours.

 

Actually, it's totally different. What I'm saying is that religion has no place in politics because our government set it up to be that way, and becaues that prevents one faith from rolling over anyone and anything in its path-so if you've got some other reasoning aside from religion about why these laws should not be passed, I'll be happy to hear it-and if you want to talk about why you dislike that other people do these things, that's fine-but when you start using your religious values to try and dictate law, that's when I step and and say no, because that's not what our system is bulit to do. It's totally different than saying I won't listen to a person because they're black, white, Asian, etc.

Diana - posted on 09/24/2009

Quoting Christa:

Diana, abortion hurts another person why is that allowed? What I already said is if some can separate it, good for them, my faith is too deep and effects everything I decide. That is how it is for the Christians I know.

I'm done with this conversation because it's obvious you (generally) will go on thinking it's ok to discriminate against someone because of their religious beliefs and that their opinion shouldn't be valued or allowed because it is different from yours.

You (generally) have proven case and point of the OP. There is an unfair prejudice towards Christians and their beliefs in this country and I don't see it changing. The "tolerant" will be tolerant of everything but the Christians. But God forbid we say anything wrong about the Muslims because radicals killed 3000 people, but damn those Christians for not wanting unborn babies killed or gays to marry. That makes sense.

See, I knew this would come up. First and foremost, the law and science disagree on when a person is a person. Second, I'm not only talking about abortion when I say that women should be able to do what they want their bodies. I'm talking about a slew of things-prostitution, porn, stripping, surogacy-anything they want to do that doesn't harm others.

I'm not saying that I discriminate against you or others because of their religion. What I am saying is that I'm offended by your view that I have to share your morality and values just because you want to live in a society that supports them. I'm not being unfair-but you are, by forcing me and others to live under your own opinions of what is right and wrong.

Dana - posted on 09/24/2009

Christa, I am a Christian, I go to church. I am not going to push my values onto the next person.

You can have your opinions, I just can't stand when Christians go out and vote for a candidate only because of his/her stance on abortion or gay marriage. That is bringing religion into government.

Diana - posted on 09/24/2009

Quoting Christa:

Quoting Esther:

Quoting Christa:

[ ] I want my children growing us in a society that supports my values, as do you. [ ]

Actually, no I don't. I want my kid growing up in a society that just respects my right to have my own values and live accordingly. I don't need society to support them.

 

Then why do you care if gay marriage passes?  Have a ceremony with the ones you love who cares if society doesn't support it?

Who cares? Why should their right to union be hampered by your personal beliefs? You're confusing opinions and values. Your values dictate what you personally should and should not do. It is your values that keep you from living a homosexual life (not that there aren't other factors, like not being attracted to the same sex...lol) but your opinion is that everyone should have to do things the same as you and only get married if they are heterosexual. Denying them the right to get married denies tax benefits, joint insurance enrollment, and transfer of property after death, just to name a few things. Christians do not hold a monopoly on marriage-it is also a legal union with legally recognized benefits-benefits that everyone should be able to enjoy, not just those whose lifestyle fits into your personal belief system.

Jenifer - posted on 09/24/2009

I feel this discussion is straying quite a bit from the original topic..... but I don't think the separation of church and state is quite so broad. I don't take it to mean that politicians cannot be moved my religious values. As for abortion and gay marriage, I've known atheists who oppose both - does that mean it is okay for them to voice their opposition but not for someone who is religious? Religious conviction in and of itself doesn't violate the separation of church and state. I think the Lemon Test has held up pretty well over the last 40 years, and seems to make the most sense in terms of allowing people the freedom to practice their religion without imposing it on others. If a law's only purpose is religious, it should be thrown out. If something has a secular purpose, despite being motivated by faith, I think it is okay.

Dana - posted on 09/24/2009

It seems to me Christa, that you don't like that we (general) don't agree with you. I don't think that anyone is saying that a religious person's opinion doesn't matter, it just has no place in government.

Amie - posted on 09/24/2009

Christa it's called Human rights. Everyone should have them equally. No one has discriminated against your faith. It is not something that should be used to pass laws or bills though.

The laws you mentioned are not in place for moral or personal reasons. It's to try and better society and keep it safe. Those are laws that are not stemmed from any type of faith.

A law prohibiting gay marriage.. well the majority who oppose it are faith based in their reasoning. Faith should not be pushed onto others. It should not be used to enact law. Period.

I'm not commenting on the boy whose parents refused him chemo because I don't remember all the details. I'll look into it though.