Originally posted by Darth Jello
What i mean is that your perspective of judaism and what a jew is is flawed.
I'm not arguing the difference between a racial jew and a jew that is a jew based on his/her faith. I'm addressing Israel as a nation that can not exist in the world without the constant political and monetary support of the western world.
Originally posted by Capt_Fantastic
You're misunderstanding, as always, is at teh heart of your reply. Religion has no place in secular government. And government, should always exist as a secular entity. Your faith, once again, doesn't allow you to see past your own world.
I understand what you are stating Captain, it's just that it doesn't make sense. You only think it makes sense.
All belief systems followed with zeal and devotion are religions.
Who represents "God" in a secularist society? Answer: The Government.
What represents scripture in a secularist society? Answer: The Laws that the Government makes.
Secularism..in
essence is just a "non-spiritual"..."non supernatural" religion...get it?
But you have the right to your opinion..and I respect it.
Originally posted by Darth Jello
What i mean is that your perspective of judaism and what a jew is is flawed.
Well it depends on how one defines what makes one a "Jew." If we go by the new testament...according to the words of Paul.."Jews" are those who believe in Christ as being Lord and Savior.
If you go by this world classification system, there's a couple of different ways of classifying Jews. Geneology is one of them. Geneologically speaking, many of the peoples who currently reside in Israel today, and call themselves Jews..have little to no geneological relation to the Jews of the Bible.
Originally posted by whobdamandog
Who represents "God" in a secularist society? Answer: The Government.
And you accuse me of being "oxymoronic"..what ever that means.
I'm not talking about communism. I'm talking about thinking outside the box, outside the past. You are apparently incapable of that. When I say that the government should be secular, I'm saying it should never favor one religion over another. The pit fall in all of that is that governments that assumed the position of the national religion in a society, made a concerted effort to do that. It isn't needed, it isn't affable. And conversely, there's no need to support one religion over another; based soley on teh fact that a mojority of individuals in that country are members of that religion. And that is what the jews in Israel are doing. That's what the government of this country is doing, and that's what the government of Palestine is doing.
You are saying that a government that doesn't favor any one religion is doomed to become the religion of the people in that country. But, that's only happens when that government tries to do that. That's what's happening in the US today!
It is possible to be a government without sponsoring any one religion over another...
Your argument in this case is only more evidence of your two dimensional thinking. You are one of those people that think your personal tastes should be legislated by the government. That's fine. But, that is also the essence of pettiness.
Originally posted by Capt_Fantastic
When I say that the government should be secular, I'm saying it should never favor one religion over another.
The statement above demonstrates the core contradiction in your argument. Guess what belief system a government favors in a secularistic society? Answer: It's own.
The idea of "secularism"..becomes a "religion" unto itself..when it is followed with zeal and devotion, and when it is administered/represented in some sort of organized system.
If we really want to get into specifics, most secularist societies generally adhere to the principles which embody "Naturalism"..which is obviously defined as a religion.
whob simply has his own definition of religion. It's pretty useless, because no-one else accepts it.
He thinks all belief systems are religions. That is logic the rest of us do not accept.
Most of us are pretty clear on what does and does not qualify as a religion, and we do not see secular systems as being like religions in any way at all.
And many also think that the entire political process would be better if religion was removed from the equation, and no, that does not equate to the removal of any system at all, nor of the simple replacement of one system by another that can be defined by the same criteria- except by whob's twisted definition of what a religion is. In fact, a secular system would be entirely different in concept from any religious one it replaces.
whob's idea that morals can only come from a religious source is flawed as well. Morals have been known to come from religious sources. Such sources have also spawned plenty of immorality, the legacy of which we constantly struggle with. Humans- and their systems- are perfectly capable of morality independant from such things.
Therefore it is perfectly possible to have responsible, moral Government with no religious input at all, which is what many people think would help in situations such as the Middle East. Seeing as religion has messed up so juch there and turned so many things completely unreasonable... I see their point.
Originally posted by Ushgarak
whob simply has his own definition of religion. It's pretty useless, because no-one else accepts it.
The definition is not my own Ush..its actually taken from the dictionary..
Religion def:A cause, principle, or activity pursued with zeal or conscientious devotion.
Let me guess your response..dictionary definitions are not authoritative..right.?.🙄
Originally posted by Ushgarak
He thinks all belief systems are religions. That is logic the rest of us do not accept.Most of us are pretty clear on what does and does not qualify as a religion, and we do not see secular systems as being like religions in any way at all.
And many also think that the entire political process would be better if religion was removed from the equation, and no, that does not equate to the removal of any system at all, nor of the simple replacement of one system by another that can be defined by the same criteria- except by whob's twisted definition of what a religion is. In fact, a secular system would be entirely different in concept from any religious one it replaces.
And you wonder why I classify you as a "groupthinker" lol. The problem with your argument is that you are assuming the term "religion" can only be defined by spiritual or supernatural value systems. As I've demonstrated with my definition above this isn't the case my friend.
Originally posted by Ushgarak
whob's idea that morals can only come from a religious source is flawed as well.Therefore it is perfectly possible to have responsible, moral Government with no religious input at all,
Religions/Governments are simply this Ush.."Moral belief sytems" which are put together in an organized fashion by some sort of authority. You can't seperate Morality from the concept of Religion or government..because quite frankly..Morality is what makes these concepts up.
It's kind of like asking the age old question. Which came first..the chicken or the egg? You can't seperate the chicken from producing the egg right..or the egg from producing the chicken. Same logic can be attributed to Religion/Government and Morality..which came first? Who knows..but it's obvious that these concepts are dependant upon one another.
Originally posted by PVS
...considering that made no sense as a comeback, i think its time you flooded the thread with 'owned' pics
I think its time you actually attempt to address the argument, but I assume that based on your last two comments, you are unable to do so.
Moving on..anyone else want to tell me why "secularism" can not be interpreted as a non-spiritual, non-supernatural religion based on the given defintion of "religion" above?
Didn't think so...back on topic..Iran. They will definately attempt to attack Israel..what can the US do? Nothing at this point. We don't have the resources to take down Iran. I think the US needs to go through the proper channels to sanction Iran, starting another war, will inevitably lead to our countries eventual downfall.
Originally posted by whobdamandog
The statement above demonstrates the core contradiction in your argument. Guess what belief system a government favors in a secularistic society? Answer: It's own.The idea of "secularism"..becomes a "religion" unto itself..when it is followed with zeal and devotion, and when it is administered/represented in some sort of organized system.
If we really want to get into specifics, most secularist societies generally adhere to the principles which embody "Naturalism"..which is obviously defined as a religion.
Jesus age Christ man! You are officially retarded.
Originally posted by Capt_Fantastic
I'm not arguing the difference between a racial jew and a jew that is a jew based on his/her faith. I'm addressing Israel as a nation that can not exist in the world without the constant political and monetary support of the western world.
Originally posted by Darth Jello
Unless you're an orthodox jew (whom most of us view as misguided and elitist), the general agreement is that a jew is a jew is a jew. Regardless of what you believe in and if you convert or not or if you're circumcized or not or if you go to temple or not. If you are born jewish or convert to judaism, you are a jew for the rest of your life in the eye of all other jews. The reason i and many others do not count messianic jews is cause they are often a front for southern baptists and have absolutely nothing to do with judaism.
Let me see if I can make this clear for you. I couldn't give a shit what makes a jew a jew. My point is religion and politics. When religion and politics are no longer bedfellows, then we can find peace in this world. For all I care, the jews can splinter into ten thousands groups that meet every Saturday behind the downtown bakery and beat the shit out of each other until they're all dead. As long as their religion doesn't effect the politics that govern my life. The same goes for Christians, and Muslims.