Religiously Intolerant?

[bio-chem]

Franklin was a Deist and was a skeptic of how Christianity was practiced in his time. Another name, the one I believe to be the sole reason we struck out for independence was Thomas Paine [/I]

ha ha ha. I'm LDS. do you really think I have a problem that some of our founders questioned how Christianity was practiced in 1776? my point still stands it does not mean that these men were not Chrisitans, or didn't believe in Jesus Christ. These men read the bible and saw the difficulties with Christianities past. Many recognized the effects of the apostasy on Christianity as a whole. None of this changes their faith in Christ.

All of this further backs my belief that there was a need to break away from the European Christianity and it's history.

 

[maniclion]

Many of the documents created at the founding of the country make mention of God. The US was founded by Christians in the pursuit of freedom of religion, not freedom from religion.

You keep for fighting for your baseless world and I'll fight for mine.

It doesn't say whose God now does it, is it the Jewish God, a Greek God, an Incan God or maybe it was an all inclusive God since Ahteism wasn't popular at all during their time. We all know that they intended Freedom of religion to mean they would not declare nor would they ever allow the US gov. to declare this a "Christian" Nation because if they could do that what would stop them from claiming it a Catholic Nation.....that was their goal simple as that. They were all learned men and knew of all the various religions around the world and made it known that in this Free Land the people could practice anyone they wished.

 

[bio-chem]

You are missing the point completely. Yes, they came here for religious freedom, but not the freedom to follow only their religion. The colonies were made up of many religions. They came here to ge taway from state sponsored religion such as the Church of England. For fuck's sake, 3 of the signers of the Declaration of Independence weren't Christians. Thomas Jefferson became president, and did a pretty damn good job. Benjamin Franklin did more to win our independence from the British than any other man in our nations history, and he was a deist who spoke out adamantly about religious intolerance. That notion of religious tolerance is the core of separation of church and state.

To keep all religious practices and liberties free and pure, the government must not get involved under any circumstances. It keeps everyone on a level playing field. That is the price of freedom. You don't get to legislate laws based on your religion, and nobody else can legislate laws against you based on their religion.

That is why so many people came here. That is why the greatest minds came here. That is why America has flourished and succeeded.

The constitution mentions God, but it never ever ever ever ever differentiated who's God. The founding fathers recognized the importance of spiritual practice, and the right of humans to practice their beliefs on their own terms. The colonies had everything from Quakers to Protestants to Puritans to Baptists to Catholics to probably 10 others that I don't know. Religious diversity was a dominant part of colonial life.

But 200 and some odd years years later, you are going to tell me that the founding fathers intended Christians to have all the power? That is ridiculous. They went to great efforts to prevent that. They new that down the line some new religion might pop up and then it would be a dominate power. Then there would be no fail safes to prevent that religion from taking over.

I would argue the case that Franklin or Jefferson were not Christian.

No one here is saying that Christians should have all the power? When you argue separation of church and state don't think religion, think denomination. The founders broke away from a country where the king was also the titular head of the church of england.

Of course if the majority of our country follows a certain religion we are going to want our ideals reflected in our laws. to think otherwise is absurd. separation of church and state is something that has completely been misused lately because it is not understood as the founders intended it. A quick study of the men who built separation of church and state into our laws, and their practices will show what they intended this concept to mean. If now you believe that should be expanded that is another discussion.

 

[NeilPearson]

mine = there is right and there is wrong, the difference is glaringly obvious and there is no wiggle room.

mine = there is often two sides to every story. The difference between right and wrong is often a matter of perspective.

When we decide that our perspective is the truth and others are wrong, this just breeds intolerance.

 

[bio-chem]

mine = there is often two sides to every story. The difference between right and wrong is often a matter of perspective.

When we decide that our perspective is the truth and others are wrong, this just breeds intolerance.

And this outlook is why people can rationalize living immoral lives.

 

[NeilPearson]

And this outlook is why people can rationalize living immoral lives.

In your opinion. Nobody was ever killed or beaten in the name of tolerance. Can you say the same thing about Christianity?

 

[KelJu]

And this outlook is why people can rationalize living immoral lives.

The dualism here is that it allows immoral behavior to be passed around as religious truth, and therefor justified.

You can't get away from the fact that truth doesn't exist in the external world.

 

[bio-chem]

In your opinion. Nobody was ever killed or beaten in the name of tolerance. Can you say the same thing about Christianity?

I don't consider tolerance and immorality to be the same thing. I don't agree with the premise of your statement or question.

 

[bio-chem]

The dualism here is that it allows immoral behavior to be passed around as religious truth, and therefor justified.

You can't get away from the fact that truth doesn't exist in the external world.

I believe truth is an eternal principal. it exists regardless of whether we accept it or not.

 

[NeilPearson]

I don't consider tolerance and immorality to be the same thing. I don't agree with the premise of your statement or question.

I am just saying that people do some pretty immoral things in support of their moral beliefs.

I don't believe morality can be dictated. What is right for one is not right for everyone.

Just because I have no desire to have sex with a man and that morality doesn't work for me, why should I have the right to tell two other people that are perfectly happy living like that that their beliefs are immoral?

For me being moral means you don't hurt other people and you consider how your actions will affect others.

 

[NeilPearson]

I believe truth is an eternal principal. it exists regardless of whether we accept it or not.

I believe that is the exact thinking that has caused most of humanities problems

 

[maniclion]

I think Benjamin Franklin, one of our Founding Fathers and my favorite, says it best in his essay Savages of North America in which he wrote this anecdote:

"A Swedish minister having assembled the chiefs of the Susquehanna Indians, made a sermon to them, acquainting them with the principal historical facts on which our religion is founded, such as the fall of our first parents by eating an apple; the coming of Christ to repair the mischief; his miracles and sufferings, etc. When he had finished, an Indian orator stood up to thank him. 'What you have told us,' said he, 'is all very good. It is indeed bad to eat apples. It is better to make them all into cider. We are much obliged by your kindness in coming so far to tell us those things which you have heard from your mothers. In return, I will tell you some of those which we have heard from ours. In the beginning, our fathers had only the flesh of animals to subsist on; and if their hunting was unsuccessful, they were starving. Two of our young hunters having killed deer, made a fire in the woods to broil some parts of it. When they were about to satisfy their hunger, they beheld a beautiful young woman descend from the clouds, and seat herself on that hill which you see yonder among the blue mountains. They said to each other, it is a spirit that perhaps has smelt our broiled venison and wishes to eat of it; let us offer some to her. They presented her with the tongue; she was pleased with the taste of it, and said, 'Your kindness shall be rewarded. Come to this place after thirteen moons, and you shall find something that will be of a great benefit in nourishing you and your children to the latest generations.' They did so and, to their surprise, found plants they had never seen before; but which, from that ancient time, have been constantly cultivated among us to our great advantage. Where her right hand touched the ground they found maize; where her left hand touched it they found kidney- beans.' ... The good missionary, disgusted with this idle tale, said, 'What I delivered to you were sacred truths; but what you tell me is mere fable, fiction, and falsehood.' The Indian, offended, replied, 'My brother, it seems your friends have not done you justice in your education; they have not well instructed you in the rules of common civility. You saw that we, who understand and practice these rules, believed all your stories, why do you refuse to believe ours?'

 

[PainandGain]

I believe truth is an eternal principal. it exists regardless of whether we accept it or not.

This is pretty up-tight bullshit right here.
Humans created the idealism behind truth or falsehood.

You think God just decided at some point to "create"
a set of values that are good or real or true, and then naysay
the rest?

 

[bio-chem]

This is pretty up-tight bullshit right here.
Humans created the idealism behind truth or falsehood.

You think God just decided at some point to "create"
a set of values that are good or real or true, and then naysay
the rest?

I'm not sure I even follow your rationalization on this one. What the hell are you even trying to say?

 

[PainandGain]

I'm not sure I even follow your rationalization on this one. What the hell are you even trying to say?

Probably because you have zero rationalization yourself.

You said truth is an eternal thing. What the hell does that even mean?
That if anything is true, then it is always true?

 

[maniclion]

Probably because you have zero rationalization yourself.

You said truth is an eternal thing. What the hell does that even mean?
That if anything is true, then it is always true?

I think his truth is eternal means that even though evidence may be found suggesting otherwise the truths will still be true in the minds of believers. An example being that even though science has found tons of evidence pointing to the earth being formed ages ago and evidence of man and woman not coming until much later they all believe we were put here just a few days after it's creation....

 

[KelJu]

What I understand of truth is that it negates itself.

Truth, like many other values, ideas, and beliefs we hold don't really exist: omnipotence, tolerance, omnipresence, good, evil, ect.

This words are logical fallacies. They can't exist outside the human mind.

Can God create a rock so heavy that he himself can not lift it?
Can we become so tolerant that we tolerate intolerance?
Is good still good, when there is no evil to compare it to, or does good become neutral and cease to exist?


Truth is completely present inside our own reality. As far as moral truths go, the closest thing we can get to that is a democratic vote. All people who think abusing animals is morally wrong, raise your hand? Well, that sure is a shitty system if you ask me, but currently, this is the best humans have. We will try to find common truths.

This is where 99% of bickering, killing, fighting, and hate come from.

My conclusion is to say fuck it all. I will proclaim my truths, and live my life by my rules. I will try to bend and warp my truths to satisfy my life and bring the most amount of happiness to me and others. If your truths infringe on my truths, I will not yield, but I will fight to change, beat, or circumvent your systems that you have created to make your truths mine.

And in that you see, that the person with the most power has the most truth.

 

[bio-chem]

What I understand of truth is that it negates itself.

Truth, like many other values, ideas, and beliefs we hold don't really exist: omnipotence, tolerance, omnipresence, good, evil, ect.

This words are logical fallacies. They can't exist outside the human mind.

Can God create a rock so heavy that he himself can not lift it?
Can we become so tolerant that we tolerate intolerance?
Is good still good, when there is no evil to compare it to, or does good become neutral and cease to exist?


Truth is completely present inside our own reality. As far as moral truths go, the closest thing we can get to that is a democratic vote. All people who think abusing animals is morally wrong, raise your hand? Well, that sure is a shitty system if you ask me, but currently, this is the best humans have. We will try to find common truths.

This is where 99% of bickering, killing, fighting, and hate come from.

My conclusion is to say fuck it all. I will proclaim my truths, and live my life by my rules. I will try to bend and warp my truths to satisfy my life and bring the most amount of happiness to me and others. If your truths infringe on my truths, I will not yield, but I will fight to change, beat, or circumvent your systems that you have created to make your truths mine.

And in that you see, that the person with the most power has the most truth.

I like reading your posts. They have a flow to them that just works.

 

[bio-chem]

Probably because you have zero rationalization yourself.

You said truth is an eternal thing. What the hell does that even mean?
That if anything is true, then it is always true?

Well numb nuts. You have been here for all of about 12 minutes so I'm going to cut you some slack.

How about an eternal truth like murder is bad, or God exists. irregardless of whether you accept these two statements as fact, they are in actuality true. They do not require your belief, or my belief in them to be true, they just are.

 

[PainandGain]

Well numb nuts. You have been here for all of about 12 minutes so I'm going to cut you some slack.

How about an eternal truth like murder is bad, or God exists. irregardless of whether you accept these two statements as fact, they are in actuality true. They do not require your belief, or my belief in them to be true, they just are.

Ok see now this I can work with.

I would agree with those 2 truths.
But I wouldn't agree that it is an absolute truth that you must follow a certain
set of doctrines, written by other humans who are no different than I fundamentally, in order to attain nirvana.

I don't think it's an eternal truth to that killing someone is bad because I could always justify it by saying if I didn't kill the armed robber, then he would have killed me and mine. Or that maybe by me taking out a sniper, that our president would not be killed, and therefore would not allow mass hysteria to ensue and hurt a lot more people.


It's okay to believe that you are right, but just remember that is only your opinion that you are right and not a fact that you are correct.

TO KELJU: Amazing post, i couldn't agree more.

 

[Chubby]

Who god? what god? How does he look? God is invented by human mind. So called his teaching are made up by some one to keep people under control.
A LIE REPEATED A THOUSAND TIMES BECOMES THE TRUTH._Chief Goebbels.

 

[lucifuge]

Who god? what god? How does he look? God is invented by human mind. So called his teaching are made up by some one to keep people under control.

I like you.
Unfortunately there's that whole 'faith' problem that continually interferes with most people's rational thought process. The very concept of religion appalls me.

 

[AKIRA]

I am agnostic so i am really getting a kick out of these posts.

 

[bio-chem]

Who god? what god? How does he look? God is invented by human mind. So called his teaching are made up by some one to keep people under control.
A LIE REPEATED A THOUSAND TIMES BECOMES THE TRUTH._Chief Goebbels.

This is really quite good. Pretty soon even the people that might want to agree with you won't because they know your posts are pretty much worthless.

Prove it big boy. prove to me God is made up, prove he is invented.

 

[DOMS]

This is really quite good. Pretty soon even the people that might want to agree with you won't because they know your posts are pretty much worthless.

Prove it big boy. prove to me God is made up, prove he is invented.

You can't prove that God exists in the lab. You can't disprove that God exists in the lab. That of course make him right.

 

[lucifuge]

This is really quite good. Pretty soon even the people that might want to agree with you won't because they know your posts are pretty much worthless.

Prove it big boy. prove to me God is made up, prove he is invented.

there's that faith problem I mentioned...

 

[DOMS]

there's that faith problem I mentioned...

Fair enough. You fight to remove our beliefs from the places they reside and we'll fight to keep them there.

Do keep in mind boy that we've been here longer and there are more of us.

 

[Arnold]

Prove it big boy. prove to me God is made up, prove he is invented.

no one can prove there is a god, nor disprove it, if you believe in god its called faith.

 

[lucifuge]

Fair enough. You fight to remove our beliefs from the places they reside and we'll fight to keep them there.

Do keep in mind boy that we've been here longer and there are more of us.

To be honest, I'm not 'fighting' to remove anything from you. Believe whatever you want... it quite honestly doesn't matter that much to me. I find it humorous how quickly and easily people become offended over the topic of religion. It doesn't matter what God an individual professes to worship, they all require and rely on the handy 'faith' catch all defense. IMO, believe in whatever ever helps you sleep better at night. I just know that from my point of view, there is simply too much evidence against and absolutely none for the case of religion - any religion.

Oh, and history and majority doesn't make it any more right..... boy.

 

[maniclion]

My conclusion is to say fuck it all. I will proclaim my truths, and live my life by my rules. I will try to bend and warp my truths to satisfy my life and bring the most amount of happiness to me and others. If your truths infringe on my truths, I will not yield, but I will fight to change, beat, or circumvent your systems that you have created to make your truths mine.

And in that you see, that the person with the most power has the most truth.

As long as you live by the Golden Rule then whatever truths you yield from it should be fine with me...