Religon and Politics in today's world.
The video isn't the best visual quality. But the sound is fine and really suggest people listen to it. It makes a very important statement about religon mixing with politics.
Religon and Politics in today's world.
The video isn't the best visual quality. But the sound is fine and really suggest people listen to it. It makes a very important statement about religon mixing with politics.
Originally posted by lord xyzSo much for compassion and open mindedness from the Left Wing. 🙄
I hate right wingers.
Anyway, as we see from some of the regimes in the Mideast, Religion can be morphed into a pernicious tool when it controls governments. I don't have a problem with Religion in the private and public arena. For example: Christmas. Hanukkah, Ramadan, etc. decorations during their respective Holidays on people's homes, yards or public grounds. As for Religion in Government, I don't believe that Religion should make policy but those of Faith should use facts as the guiding principle for decisions. I personally don't use my Faith as a guide in running my business but I won't do anything that I personally find morally wrong.
Politics and religion are touchy subjects. Even touchier when combined.
Example: Abortion.
Pro-Choicers: The beliefs of others should not be imposed on others. Making it illegal takes away from my rights. Making it legal still gives those opposed the option to not do it. Problem solved
Pro-Lifers: Life begins and conception. We have an obligation as human beings to protect all life and therefore it should be outlawed just as killing those born. Abortion is murder, plain and simple.
No. Religion is not controlling governments. Governments are using religion as a tool of state. VERY WRONG.
"But what I am suggesting is this - secularists are wrong when they ask believers to leave their religion at the door before entering into the public square. Frederick Douglass, Abraham Lincoln, Williams Jennings Bryan, Dorothy Day, Martin Luther King - indeed, the majority of great reformers in American history - were not only motivated by faith, but repeatedly used religious language to argue for their cause. To say that men and women should not inject their "personal morality" into public policy debates is a practical absurdity; our law is by definition a codification of morality, much of it grounded in the Judeo-Christian tradition.
...
This brings me to my second point. Democracy demands that the religiously motivated translate their concerns into universal, rather than religion-specific, values. It requires that their proposals be subject to argument, and amenable to reason. I may be opposed to abortion for religious reasons, but if I seek to pass a law banning the practice, I cannot simply point to the teachings of my church or evoke God's will. I have to explain why abortion violates some principle that is accessible to people of all faiths, including those with no faith at all.
...
You know that we enter times that are fraught with possibilities for good and for harm, times when we are struggling to make sense of a common polity in the context of plurality, when we are unsure of what grounds we have for making any claims that involve others."
- BHObama
Originally posted by AllianceThat is an intelligent human being.
No. Religion is not controlling governments. Governments are using religion as a tool of state. VERY WRONG."But what I am suggesting is this - secularists are wrong when they ask believers to leave their religion at the door before entering into the public square. Frederick Douglass, Abraham Lincoln, Williams Jennings Bryan, Dorothy Day, Martin Luther King - indeed, the majority of great reformers in American history - were not only motivated by faith, but repeatedly used religious language to argue for their cause. To say that men and women should not inject their "personal morality" into public policy debates is a practical absurdity; our law is by definition a codification of morality, much of it grounded in the Judeo-Christian tradition.
...
This brings me to my second point. Democracy demands that the religiously motivated translate their concerns into universal, rather than religion-specific, values. It requires that their proposals be subject to argument, and amenable to reason. I may be opposed to abortion for religious reasons, but if I seek to pass a law banning the practice, I cannot simply point to the teachings of my church or evoke God's will. I have to explain why abortion violates some principle that is accessible to people of all faiths, including those with no faith at all.
...
You know that we enter times that are fraught with possibilities for good and for harm, times when we are struggling to make sense of a common polity in the context of plurality, when we are unsure of what grounds we have for making any claims that involve others."
- BHObama