NationStates

Dakini wrote:

Jute wrote:Not everything can be measured easily, though. Feelings are more able to guide your actions in most places (as backed by science)

...that doesn't mean it's a good idea to base one's understanding of the world on one's feelings.

Christainville wrote:I know the more liberal side will hate everything I wrote her probably, but hey, I want a honest discussion, a honest view, pull apart what I said, if its the truth, it should stand firm. So, my question is, the things I wrote down, should that be real conservatism, should it be accepted, in a 21st century world should Christianity play a part? Lets have a honest discussion, and lets try to keep it civil with out a lot of cursing and what not.

Norstal wrote:

Jute wrote:While I agree with the general sentiment of your post, I don't understand how he insulted anyone in that line? Is being accused of having a "faith" in atheism offensive to some people now?

The same way it's offensive to some Christians when you call them polytheist. It's ignorant.

Grave_n_idle wrote:

Norstal wrote:The same way it's offensive to some Christians when you call them polytheist. It's ignorant.

At least there's a good argument for referring to Christianity as polytheistic - it does, after all, turn the Hebrew monotheism into a trinity.

Jute wrote:

Grave_n_idle wrote:
At least there's a good argument for referring to Christianity as polytheistic - it does, after all, turn the Hebrew monotheism into a trinity.

Which is still seen as one in a way, though. Like a hand with several fingers.

Christainville wrote:I would write this out fully but my computer isn't giving me the chance, every 5 mins this page keeps non responding, so I took a picture of what I have been trying to write and hopefully I can finish it.

(Image)


So, to put it simply, I wanted to see the reaction if honest facts were put a certain type of sentiment, or stated in a way that makes them seem more outlandish then they really are. The 4 things I wanted to imply from this.


1. Anyone that relates religion and politics as the same will cause trouble.

2.Religion can be politically involved.

3. Some morals when tied religiously are more accepted then when others are.

Sanctissima wrote:

Salandriagado wrote:
That's what we don't believe. Now start on what we actually do believe.

Well, that's kind of the thing about Atheism.

The only thing all atheists have universally in common is that:
1) They don't believe in a deity.
2) They don't believe in anything spiritual (afterlife, souls, etc.)

The entire premise of the faith is not believing in something, rather than believing in it. Sure, most atheists believe in evolution and the big bang theory, but those aren't aspects of atheism. They're aspects of science, and science is not the same thing as atheism.

Greater Nevadian Empire wrote:

Geilinor wrote:Conservatives aren't necessarily Christian, I don't see the wisdom in trying to drive out non-Christians from the ideology. American conservatives need to do some learning from British and Canadian conservatives.

Many conservatives are other religions, and their are atheist conservatives. There are also liberal/centre Christians, like me.

Sun Wukong wrote:

Christainville wrote:Its just, even atheists, have a faith. they have a faith there is no god

It would be nice if conservatives could go even a paragraph without lying about and insulting their enemies.

Christainville wrote:

Liriena wrote:Indeed. You said "subtracting religion [...] from government in an attempt to create a neutral state, is not wrong, but impossible."

So, I ask again: Have nations that separated church and state (that is, subtracted religion from government in an attempt to create a neutral state) collapsed due to the impossibility inherent to their method?

Well, they didn't collapse, they just were taken over by the stronger minded religion.

Liriena wrote:

Christainville wrote:
Well, they didn't collapse, they just were taken over by the stronger minded religion.

I was not aware that Japan had been taken over by any particular religion.

Jute wrote:

Grave_n_idle wrote:
At least there's a good argument for referring to Christianity as polytheistic - it does, after all, turn the Hebrew monotheism into a trinity.

Which is still seen as one in a way, though. Like a hand with several fingers.

The Nexus of Man wrote:

Sun Wukong wrote:It would be nice if conservatives could go even a paragraph without lying about and insulting their enemies.

>implying enemies of conservatives are atheists even though some atheists are conservative

Sun Wukong wrote:

Christainville wrote:Its just, even atheists, have a faith. they have a faith there is no god

It would be nice if conservatives and liberals could go even a paragraph without lying about and insulting their enemies.

The Marshmallow people of tgs wrote:

Sun Wukong wrote:It would be nice if conservatives and liberals could go even a paragraph without lying about and insulting their enemies.

fixed it

Sun Wukong wrote:

The Marshmallow people of tgs wrote:fixed it

I bow before your razor wit.

The Marshmallow people of tgs wrote:

Sun Wukong wrote:I bow before your razor wit.

You know its true

Sun Wukong wrote:

The Marshmallow people of tgs wrote:You know its true

No. I don't.

The fallacy of the golden mean is perhaps something you should look into.

The Marshmallow people of tgs wrote:

Sun Wukong wrote:No. I don't.

The fallacy of the golden mean is perhaps something you should look into.

Theres almost non stop insulting of the right here on NS, everyday a new thread pops up insulting the right for the actions of a few. However when a left wing person does something stupid, y'all are quiet.

Christainville wrote:I wanted to talk on a few thing as a Christian and conservative, that currently are things I see going on daily.

1st off, separation of church and state is used and abused by both sides. In political talks, I hear a lot of more left leaning people say instead of doing dumb things like protesting over abortion and what not, why wont Christians solve world issues, like hunger and what not. Well, for the record, some do, but they are hated because they are religious, Christian, in nature, which then makes them old world and un effective, so they want to provide a result that the world demands but wont let them give, so in a sense how can they do anything?

2nd. Most Christians and conservatives are not scared, and do not have a phobia of Islam. One thing I notice, because we don't accept something, people equate it with a fear, but then when other people don't accept something, its a civil right? Well, I wont lie, there are some people that miss represent Christians and conservatives. Its just, in a 21st century world, where women's rights is a huge political topic, we also take up for a culture that endorses the beating of women that are raped. So, do we accept what's behind to move forward? This is just one version of how we move forward but bring what's behind us with it and call it a future. Its not that I or any other conservative is scared of a Islamic person, its just we cant over look the bad things that are happening, the same as I can say with some people that call themselves "Christians" but have a hard time actually showing the love and compassion Christ commanded. Yet, does the love and compassion demand that you over look things that are wrong, things that are dangerous, things that cause issues? Nope, but you should reprimand in love of another person, and not in hate, and that's the things so many have failed at.

3rd and my final thing. This one will get me in a lot of trouble with the more liberal side of politics. Civil rights didn't come from man, because if they did, nothing would be civil. If we legislate morality, you push people to do the opposite, but do you over look un moral actions, nope. Through out history, what was defined as civil was ever changing, is that what we would want in our nations, in our cities? To have a ever changing format of what's right and wrong, what acceptable, to only have freedom and justice if your on the side of the political party that won the most recently election. A example of this is the recent Indiana bill, using religious freedom, discrimination occurs, and that's what religion should not be used for. My question is, do we become so secular and so accepting, that we block out groups and views that can do good, but because of the name we don't allow them to do anything? We allowed Islam into the 21st century with out changing a lot, all I ask is that Christians be allowed the same with out chaining their faith to meet the current political views. Because, in the end, what good is faith if every other person determines it, except a unchanging standard that is the headline for what you believe in. That's why for me, Christianity and conservative ideas, will never be split. Its true, their are liberal Christians, and some liberal ideas work fine, make a good economy, make a good place to live in. Yet, its the idea of non-chaining standards, morals that help some one live a good life, and the belief that by doing this, we make things better in the hope for a brighter future. And for me, that should actually be conservatism.

If we legislate morality, you push people to do the opposite

I know the more liberal side will hate everything I wrote her probably, but hey, I want a honest discussion, a honest view, pull apart what I said, if its the truth, it should stand firm. So, my question is, the things I wrote down, should that be real conservatism, should it be accepted, in a 21st century world should Christianity play a part? Lets have a honest discussion, and lets try to keep it civil with out a lot of cursing and what not.

Sun Wukong wrote:

The Marshmallow people of tgs wrote:Theres almost non stop insulting of the right here on NS, everyday a new thread pops up insulting the right for the actions of a few. However when a left wing person does something stupid, y'all are quiet.

Do you need a hug?