Right-Wing Discussion Thread XVI: Making Things Right Again

[Kowani]

If motivated by logic, you’re a lot less likely to end up killing someone else and then getting yourself thrown in prison.

Excluding extremes, what difference does it make if two people have a similarly amoral lifestyle, only one is a sociopath and the other is "logical"?

In that case, none.

You’ll remember that I’m not American.

Nor am I. I just really like the 1A. What's your opinion on it?

Good for its time. Useful transition tool. Eventually to be dismantled.

[Kernen]

Both?

Why do you want to remove that clause?

Makes it easier to tax church property, mostly.

[The Xenopolis Confederation]

Why do you want to remove that clause?

Makes it easier to tax church property, mostly.

I thought that taxing church property was perfectly within the bounds of the 1A.

[The Xenopolis Confederation]

Good for its time. Useful transition tool. Eventually to be dismantled.

I see it as a charter of rights rather than a tool, but I understand why you wouldn't.

How and why is it to be dismantled?

[Hanafuridake]

Tell your past self that banning religion violates the first amendment.

Time to amend it.

Smh do you even want to found a Hellenist Empire.

[Camelone]

Even though I like the idea of a confessional Christian state I would still very much like keeping "or prohibiting the free exercise thereof" as a part of the 1st Amendment. Everyone should be free to make up their minds and worship the way they wish to, excluding of course those which threaten the stability of the nation or society but Salafism seems more of an ideology than a religion in my opinion. I also do not like the mixing of the Golden Sword with the Steel Sword, if I may use Medieval terminology of the Investiture Controversy.

[Nova Cyberia]

Amend which clause in particular?

Strike out "or prohibiting the free exercise thereof".

Yep. That's where I'm at.

[The Xenopolis Confederation]

Strike out "or prohibiting the free exercise thereof".

Yep. That's where I'm at.

Why tho?

[Camelone]

Yep. That's where I'm at.

Why tho?

Most likely to mobilize the power of the secular government against groups that they deem dangerous, ridiculous, or simply do not like.

[Hanafuridake]

Even though I like the idea of a confessional Christian state I would still very much like keeping "or prohibiting the free exercise thereof" as a part of the 1st Amendment. Everyone should be free to make up their minds and worship the way they wish to, excluding of course those which threaten the stability of the nation or society but Salafism seems more of an ideology than a religion in my opinion. I also do not like the mixing of the Golden Sword with the Steel Sword, if I may use Medieval terminology of the Investiture Controversy.

My only interest in a state religion is something akin to the Church of England, as opposed to legislating laws based on religious commands. While Christianity and Islam are fundamentally opposed to Asian traditions, they're not a serious threat in size or activity and should be viewed with benign indifference as heterodoxic eccentric doctrines.

[LiberNovusAmericae]

Amend which clause in particular?

Strike out "or prohibiting the free exercise thereof".

While I believe that government should be unapologetically secular, I don't like the idea of the bill of rights being tampered with. The wrong modification can give a potential regime a method to suppress dissent and hold onto power. Hell, those changes can even be used against you.

[Bienenhalde]

Yep. That's where I'm at.

Why tho?

I suppose because he is an authoritarian leftist?

[Camelone]

Even though I like the idea of a confessional Christian state I would still very much like keeping "or prohibiting the free exercise thereof" as a part of the 1st Amendment. Everyone should be free to make up their minds and worship the way they wish to, excluding of course those which threaten the stability of the nation or society but Salafism seems more of an ideology than a religion in my opinion. I also do not like the mixing of the Golden Sword with the Steel Sword, if I may use Medieval terminology of the Investiture Controversy.

My only interest in a state religion is something akin to the Church of England, as opposed to legislating laws based on religious commands. While Christianity and Islam are fundamentally opposed to Asian traditions, they're not a serious threat in size or activity and should be viewed with benign indifference as heterodoxic eccentric doctrines.

Mine idea is a little more active than the Church of England, and the head of the church should not be the secular ruler, because I do believe a Christian confessional state should have a Christian nature to the laws. Though like I said earlier freedom to practice a different religion must be ensured, I think we have similar ideas here just slightly different due to the core of our beliefs.

[Bienenhalde]

Even though I like the idea of a confessional Christian state I would still very much like keeping "or prohibiting the free exercise thereof" as a part of the 1st Amendment. Everyone should be free to make up their minds and worship the way they wish to, excluding of course those which threaten the stability of the nation or society but Salafism seems more of an ideology than a religion in my opinion. I also do not like the mixing of the Golden Sword with the Steel Sword, if I may use Medieval terminology of the Investiture Controversy.

My only interest in a state religion is something akin to the Church of England, as opposed to legislating laws based on religious commands. While Christianity and Islam are fundamentally opposed to Asian traditions, they're not a serious threat in size or activity and should be viewed with benign indifference as heterodoxic eccentric doctrines.

What exactly do you mean by "Asian traditions"? Do you mean religious traditions specifically?

[Hanafuridake]

My only interest in a state religion is something akin to the Church of England, as opposed to legislating laws based on religious commands. While Christianity and Islam are fundamentally opposed to Asian traditions, they're not a serious threat in size or activity and should be viewed with benign indifference as heterodoxic eccentric doctrines.

What exactly do you mean by "Asian traditions"? Do you mean religious traditions specifically?

Mostly yes. Confucianism, Buddhism, and folk religions.

[Washington Resistance Army]

Time to amend it.

Smh do you even want to found a Hellenist Empire.

I just want a polytheistic America tbh

[Jean-Paul Sartre]

Smh do you even want to found a Hellenist Empire.

I just want a polytheistic America tbh

We already have that. It’s called Christian America.

[Camelone]

Smh do you even want to found a Hellenist Empire.

I just want a polytheistic America tbh

I mean it seems like New Age stuff is growing in influence but I'm doubtful that is the sort of polytheism you wish to see.

[Camelone]

I just want a polytheistic America tbh

We already have that. It’s called Christian America.

Hang on timeout. Are you considering the doctrine of the Trinity polytheism?

[Washington Resistance Army]

I just want a polytheistic America tbh

I mean it seems like New Age stuff is growing in influence but I'm doubtful that is the sort of polytheism you wish to see.

You'd be correct, though there's a growing number of polytheists like me too.

[Jean-Paul Sartre]

We already have that. It’s called Christian America.

Hang on timeout. Are you considering the doctrine of the Trinity polytheism?

Well it’s certainly not monotheism and certainly not atheism.

[Hanafuridake]

I mean it seems like New Age stuff is growing in influence but I'm doubtful that is the sort of polytheism you wish to see.

You'd be correct, though there's a growing number of polytheists like me too.

The best kind in all honesty.

[Kowani]

Good for its time. Useful transition tool. Eventually to be dismantled.

I see it as a charter of rights rather than a tool, but I understand why you wouldn't.

How and why is it to be dismantled?

Barring a revolution headed by me, you’d need an amendment.

Why? To remove religion from the private sphere.

[Camelone]

I mean it seems like New Age stuff is growing in influence but I'm doubtful that is the sort of polytheism you wish to see.

You'd be correct, though there's a growing number of polytheists like me too.

I've read about that. It's interesting to see as someone who enjoys history and is a history major but is also slightly concerning I must admit as a Christian and a theology major.

Hang on timeout. Are you considering the doctrine of the Trinity polytheism?

Well it’s certainly not monotheism and certainly not atheism.

Would you be willing to read the Athanasian Creed which explains the Trinity if I post a link?

[Jean-Paul Sartre]

You'd be correct, though there's a growing number of polytheists like me too.

I've read about that. It's interesting to see as someone who enjoys history and is a history major but is also slightly concerning I must admit as a Christian and a theology major.

Well it’s certainly not monotheism and certainly not atheism.

Would you be willing to read the Athanasian Creed which explains the Trinity if I post a link?

Repeating something illogical and preposterous doesn’t make it true. Arianism is and always has been the more logical view on the trinity. Regardless, we digress.