Politics AND Relgion

I

iwant8inches

1
http://portal.wowway.com/news/read.php?id=13223019&ps=1011

100% agree with his decision on the late term abortion limitations, but look into Ohio's politics and probable candidates for local and state positions and you'll see my beef about this...that is if you know about the people running in 06.

Way to go. He didn't just mix politics and religion he turned his used a church to sign the bill. That is just about the icing on the cake. Texas obviously has the same problems as Ohio with "religous" people taking over the government. Politics and religion... like nothing else. Why don't we just make the switch to a theocratc run government already? Didn't Texas legislature just ok gay foster parents? So, no one believes its right for a gay foster parent to be married??? ...Riiiight...Sounds like Ohio. I also saw something about Texas in that there are major problems in legislature dealing with property tax relief and school financing. Sounds like my state too. At least they're getting child protection service help and adding a few thousand though. I think many states could use some help in that department. Just trying to keep up on politics around the country and spotted this article.

One thing to note...despite all of these "activist or radical judges" I hear about there sure isn't a whole lot of evidence in Ohio of much "radical" legislature or laws or even court rulings in Ohio. Then again I mean this isn't Massachusetts where I live. I'm convinced that if we didn't have so many people dragging their feet on issues like abortion, same sex marriage, capital punisHydromaxent, that can't simply be solved by outlawing them then Americans would be forced to think about something more than the most generalized basic issues. Ohio government...don't let it happen to you.
 
The beleif that religious freedom is safest when religion is left as a private thing as the basis of the !st Amendment "EstablisHydromaxent Clause" forbidding state-supported religion. The constitutional separation of church and state had been maintained for 200 years.
Religious texts have been interpreted and fucked with a bunch of creeps seeking to better themselves and using religion to justify their actions. For example, both Christians and Muslims are guilty of twisting the original teachings of their messangers. The texts are ancient, often lost, and have been translated many times by many people, with many different talents and purposes. Neither of these collections of translated writings form a coherent framework, full of contradictions everywhere. Extremeists of either group can selectively pick out whatever meaning they want.
All organized religions have an autocratic point of view. And their grand poobahs make sure that the religions followers do just that: Follow
In other words, the whole point of organized religion is to scare the shit out of you so that you'll obey some power-hungry SOB into doing something you would'nt on your own.
Bottom line is when a proper education teaches children proper values of respect for everyone, nobody is willing to crash an airplane into a building in the name of "Allah", or any other supernatural being hoping to access an imaginary "heaven".
 
Well in the States, more or less thank god at least they just want votes...some of these guys are nuts and harmless, others have certain ties to particular groups that go unnoticed and I'd consider them very harmful to society in general without the platform of holding official office, but in the office! they can inflict damage to society on too many levels.
 
Kal-el said:
The beleif that religious freedom is safest when religion is left as a private thing as the basis of the !st Amendment "EstablisHydromaxent Clause" forbidding state-supported religion. The constitutional separation of church and state had been maintained for 200 years.
Religious texts have been interpreted and fucked with a bunch of creeps seeking to better themselves and using religion to justify their actions. For example, both Christians and Muslims are guilty of twisting the original teachings of their messangers. The texts are ancient, often lost, and have been translated many times by many people, with many different talents and purposes. Neither of these collections of translated writings form a coherent framework, full of contradictions everywhere. Extremeists of either group can selectively pick out whatever meaning they want.
All organized religions have an autocratic point of view. And their grand poobahs make sure that the religions followers do just that: Follow
In other words, the whole point of organized religion is to scare the shit out of you so that you'll obey some power-hungry SOB into doing something you would'nt on your own.
Bottom line is when a proper education teaches children proper values of respect for everyone, nobody is willing to crash an airplane into a building in the name of "Allah", or any other supernatural being hoping to access an imaginary "heaven".
Click to expand...

And exactly who, pray tell, is the "grand poobah power-hungry SOB" of Christianity? Who is scaring the shit out of Christians? I don't know enough about Islam to know whether they have a single leader, but the only leader of the Christian church I'm aware of is Christ Himself. And I couldn't imagine him telling me to crash airplanes into buildings. The things people say. :s Sounds like you read that somewhere and you're spitting it back out.
 
originally posted by 9cyclops9:
And exactly who, pray tell, is the "grand poobah power-hungry SOB" of Christianity? Who is scaring the shit out of Christians? I don't know enough about Islam to know whether they have a single leader, but the only leader of the Christian church I'm aware of is Christ Himself. And I couldn't imagine him telling me to crash airplanes into buildings. The things people say. Sounds like you read that somewhere and you're spitting it back out.
Click to expand...

I personally stay away from any type of organized religion. I think it's just society-sanctioned brainwashing. Anyway to answer your question, through the years religion has had alot of "poohbahs", or false prophets, as some might think. Look at the pope, and Darwin- they didnt practice a lived out religion. If it had not been for the Vatican, medical science would be much more advanced today, we would already have found the cures to cancers, AIDS and all ills. The blind would be able to see and the lame would be able to walk as predicted by Jesus. The truth is that the Vatican hindered medicine every step of the way, right from its inception. Anyway, if I'm wrong on this, but I belive that even Peter condemned the early church. And he was one of Christ's deciples. I belive if Christ was walking the earth today, he would refer to all these ministers and reverenes the same way he referred to the pharisees of his time. They are nothing more than false teachers peddling their religios texts (which they pick apart to make their ways seem logical) to better themselves.

Religion isn't for everybody. Yes, but religion in this country isn't what it was a thousand years ago in old Europe. These days you actually have a choice, albeit a select few, of what you want to practice. Now I am not practicing a religion, but for the most part they are all pretty positive.
The one big thing that just gets to me is listening to the old so called adage "He's an honest church-going person". Now that is a crock of shit. I have seen more of these bastards commit more wrong doings than so called "dishonest, non-church-goers". Let's stop deluding ourselves and live our own lives with and without religion, and for your own sakes, STOP SELLING RELIGION LIKE ITS MERCHANDISE!!!

I'm not buying.
 
That's cool. Sorry to come off kinda sarcastic in that post. I agree with your views on the Vatican, the pope, etc. But I don't consider the pope the leader of the church, and I know many people do so I assumed that's what you meant. He may be the leader of Roman Catholicism, but I won't associate myself with him or with that branch of Christianity.
 
Kal-el said:
If it had not been for the Vatican, medical science would be much more advanced today, we would already have found the cures to cancers, AIDS and all ills. The blind would be able to see and the lame would be able to walk as predicted by Jesus. The truth is that the Vatican hindered medicine every step of the way, right from its inception.
Click to expand...

Kal-el,

how do you come to this conclusion? I'm not Catholic, i.e. my nose isn't out of joint over this, I'm just curious about your rationale behind these statements.

Cheers!
 
Originally posted by 9cyclops9:
Sounds like you read that somewhere and you're spitting it back out.
Click to expand...

I'm a perfectionist, and I very rarely respond to a post improptuly. I like to think clearly what I want to say, and put into exact wording so as not to come of childish or naive, sorry if I misled anyone.


That's cool. Sorry to come off kinda sarcastic in that post.
Click to expand...

That's cool, don't worry about it 9cyclops9, I expect skeptism and conflicting views; if everyone agreed with my views, we would'nt have much of a discussion.

Originally posted by Priapologist:
how do you come to this conclusion? I'm not Catholic, i.e. my nose isn't out of joint over this, I'm just curious about your rationale behind these statements.
Click to expand...

The Pope and the Vatican have been a wonderful example of hipocracy, following in the true church's tradition of condenming any new advance in science, and yet the former pope used all possible medical treatment which only yesterday was condenmed by his predecessor. The inquisition who burned midwives as whitches in the 1500s would have condenmed today's pontiff for his hospitalization as surely as the pontiff condenms tomorrows stem cell medicine.
 
Originally posted by Iwant8inches:
100% agree with his decision on the late term abortion limitations, but look into Ohio's politics and probable candidates for local and state positions and you'll see my beef about this...that is if you know about the people running in 06.
Click to expand...

Ok, here's where I have to break with the party line a bit.

Partial birth abortion is hideous. I have always and will always support a woman's right to choose, but I can't get over the gut reaction, skull punctures and brains being sucked out.. I can't beleive someone can do this to a child.

I'm not saying ban it or don't, I'm just saying it's a horrible, painful thing to think about. I'm attributing adult emotions to an infant, I know, but can you imagine being in a warm, dark, comfortable place and having someone come in and pop your brain out?
 
As a father of two sons, I can't even imagine someone doing that to a baby. There are far too many childless couples out there who want to adopt to be killing children out of convenience.

As far as religious beliefs, I believe in God but I do not believe in religion. One of these days, all the crusaders, right-wing conservative warmongers and crazy cult leaders are going to get their just deserts for blaming God for their greedy, hateful, murderous deeds. God Loves, Man Kills.
 
Yeah, He always seems to get the blame, doesn't He?

God made me do it...

God told me to do it...

It was an act of God...

If I was God, I'd get kind of tired of being blamed for everything bad that happens.
 
Kal-el said:
Originally posted by Iwant8inches:

Ok, here's where I have to break with the party line a bit.

Partial birth abortion is hideous. I have always and will always support a woman's right to choose, but I can't get over the gut reaction, skull punctures and brains being sucked out.. I can't beleive someone can do this to a child.

I'm not saying ban it or don't, I'm just saying it's a horrible, painful thing to think about. I'm attributing adult emotions to an infant, I know, but can you imagine being in a warm, dark, comfortable place and having someone come in and pop your brain out?
Click to expand...

I understand what you mean. This guy placed limitations on that kind of thing and I agree with his decision to do so.
 
Originally posted by LambdaCalc:
Heh, apparently you have not read the Old Testament. God was really good at killing people back in the day.
Click to expand...

You are right, even though it's impossible to justify killing, the old testament was really a barbaric time period. It wasn't a "Love your enemy" kind of time. "God" had to kill the hebrews enemies' because he promises Abraham many decendents, and out of them would come a messiah.
 
Kal,

>even though it's impossible to justify killing<

Are you serious about that statement? You can NEVER see a reason for killing anyone? That would explain your stance on Iraq I guess.

Bigger
 
Bib, killing should DEFINETLY be a last resort to end all things. I beleive non-violence is always more efficient than violence.
 
If we lived in a perfect world then yeah idealistically killing would not be justifiable because no one would kill and you wouldn't have any reason to do so. Killing is horrible in any scenario. However, war inevitably ends up with much more killings all of them about as unjustifiable as another. Typically it's a few people that committ atrocities that lead to war compared to the thousands that have to fight and kill each other for the cause at hand. One side can say it was worth it, but it's not always the case when both sides didin't have justified reasons for war so you have to wonder if we'll ever come up with a better solution than war to stopping or "preventing" atrocities. Also, in a perfect world we could just "spread" democracy and everything would fine and it wouldn't take war after war after war either. It's a cycle and we're never a second removed from the past.
 
The Pope and the Vatican have been a wonderful example of hipocracy, following in the true church's tradition of condenming any new advance in science, and yet the former pope used all possible medical treatment which only yesterday was condenmed by his predecessor. The inquisition who burned midwives as whitches in the 1500s would have condenmed today's pontiff for his hospitalization as surely as the pontiff condenms tomorrows stem cell medicine.
Click to expand...

Speaking to African bishops at the Vatican, the Pope Benedict XVI said that the spread of HIV and Aids in Africa should be tackeled through fidelity and abstinence and not by condoms. He said, "The traditional teaching of the church has proven to be the only failsafe way to prevent the spread of HIV/Aids."

This Pope is becoming a criminal against Africa by inciting African people not to use condoms. Millions will perish because they listen to him.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top