Christian Discussion Thread XII: Soter? I hardly know her!

[Lady Victory]

I don't care what your church teaches.

You, Joe Biden, and the Catholic members of Congress and the Supreme Court.

I for one am quite glad to hear that Catholic members of the United States Federal Government take their jobs, oaths, and the Constitution seriously.

Now if only Catholic voters like yourself could do the same.

[Tarsonis]

You, Joe Biden, and the Catholic members of Congress and the Supreme Court.

I for one am quite glad to hear that Catholic members of the United States Federal Government take their jobs, oaths, and the Constitution seriously.

Now if only Catholic voters like yourself could do the same.

Voters are under no obligation to abide by the constitution. They can vote for whatever they want.

[Immortan Khan]

Which just affirms what a shit and godless country we live in.

But I digress.

You can't force people to abide by the tennets of our faith. That's like a core principle of Christ's teachings. People have to choose, freely. If we want to do away with abortion, we have to come at it sideways. Healthcare, maternity leave, social services, etc. Make abortion obsolete. This 60 year pissing contest over Rowe has solved absolutely nothing.

But we have to abide by the tenants of liberalism? This reasoning could be used in the event infanticide is legalized, that we should just come at it sideways instead of, you know, criminalizing murder. This libertarian approach to social issues has failed time and time again.

[Immortan Khan]

You, Joe Biden, and the Catholic members of Congress and the Supreme Court.

I for one am quite glad to hear that Catholic members of the United States Federal Government take their jobs, oaths, and the Constitution seriously.

Now if only Catholic voters like yourself could do the same.

The electorate isn't obligated to keep the Constitution as it is. If tomorrow morning 80% of the electorate voted in a government that would completely scrap the Constitution that's what would happen.

[Salus Maior]

Which just affirms what a shit and godless country we live in.

But I digress.

You can't force people to abide by the tennets of our faith. That's like a core principle of Christ's teachings. People have to choose, freely. If we want to do away with abortion, we have to come at it sideways. Healthcare, maternity leave, social services, etc. Make abortion obsolete. This 60 year pissing contest over Rowe has solved absolutely nothing.

Human life is either treated as inherently and objectively valuable or it is not. And a country that does not treat human life with all due dignity and worth is not a country to be proud of or its structure worthy of loyalty. That’s all I’m going to say on this subject.

[Tarsonis]

You can't force people to abide by the tennets of our faith. That's like a core principle of Christ's teachings. People have to choose, freely. If we want to do away with abortion, we have to come at it sideways. Healthcare, maternity leave, social services, etc. Make abortion obsolete. This 60 year pissing contest over Rowe has solved absolutely nothing.

But we have to abide by the tenants of liberalism? This reasoning could be used in the event infanticide is legalized, that we should just come at it sideways instead of, you know, criminalizing murder. This libertarian approach to social issues has failed time and time again.

Slavery was topped in much the same way, both by public outrage and the advancement of industrialization made Slavery more and more obsolete. Even if the civil war hadn't broken out, it likely would have been phased out of the south by the end of the 19th century.

It really wasn't.

[Salus Maior]

But we have to abide by the tenants of liberalism? This reasoning could be used in the event infanticide is legalized, that we should just come at it sideways instead of, you know, criminalizing murder. This libertarian approach to social issues has failed time and time again.

Slavery was topped in much the same way, both by public outrage and the advancement of industrialization made Slavery more and more obsolete. Even if the civil war hadn't broken out, it likely would have been phased out of the south by the end of the 19th century.

It really wasn't.

So we should have just told African Americans to wait patiently to be treated like human beings?

Not a very good take, Tars.

[Tarsonis]

Slavery was topped in much the same way, both by public outrage and the advancement of industrialization made Slavery more and more obsolete. Even if the civil war hadn't broken out, it likely would have been phased out of the south by the end of the 19th century.

It really wasn't.

So we should have just told African Americans to wait patiently to be treated like human beings?

Not a very good take, Tars.

That's not what I said, but by all means twist my words to suit your agenda.

[Kowani]

Ed Litton elected President of the Southern Baptists

I’ve read another article about this. It seems that many in the SBC are angry that the organization isn’t right-wing enough and are upset about this. An issue that appears to divide black and white SBCers is the issue of CRT.

no it doesn't
it really doesn't
White SBC'ers don't know what it is
it's a propaganda campaign pushed out by conservative media to create what is, for all intents and purposes, another satanic panic (and prevent any discussion of racism in general

You know I'm actually going to have to back Sundiata here. There is no point for more traditional Christians be they Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, OO, Protestant etc protesting against abortion and struggling against it if when given positions of power they do absolutely nothing to get rid of it. ACB, Kavanaugh etc have also all written about how Roe was poorly decided upon and there are legitimate criticisms of it based solely on judicial grounds so it's not as if it would be impossible to overturn on that let alone moral grounds. They are just cowards at this point.

The funny thing about Roe is that the Justices at the time used arguably the weakest arguments to decide it so even if the current majority struck it down a similar case would almost certainly be won using less terrible logic. It's a damned if you do, damned if you don't situation for conservative Christians really.

hell, i'm actually not sure if abortion is winnable as an electoral issue -at least in the "repeal roe" sense that conservative christians are hoping it to be in the future-and the backlash from repealing it wholesale (which, irrc, is the question the mississippi case that they just took up is about) would notttttttttttt be a good situation for the republican party
and they know this, which is why they've been focused on piecemeal stuff at the state level and chipping away at the infrastructure of it at the federal
(though that's partly a result of partisanship as the unmoved mover, which could result in that calculus changing if the parties collapsed)

[Kowani]

Slavery was topped in much the same way, both by public outrage and the advancement of industrialization made Slavery more and more obsolete. Even if the civil war hadn't broken out, it likely would have been phased out of the south by the end of the 19th century.

It really wasn't.

So we should have just told African Americans to wait patiently to be treated like human beings?

this was quite literally most of american history tho
(though i do think the "slavery would have been phased out by the end of the 19th century" argument to be incredibly unconvincing)

[Salus Maior]

So we should have just told African Americans to wait patiently to be treated like human beings?

Not a very good take, Tars.

That's not what I said, but by all means twist my words to suit your agenda.

You implied that would have to be the case in the absence of the war. At least if we’re working with the logical conclusions of ‘people have to choose to do the right thing’.

[Salus Maior]

So we should have just told African Americans to wait patiently to be treated like human beings?

this was quite literally most of american history tho
(though i do think the "slavery would have been phased out by the end of the 19th century" argument to be incredibly unconvincing)

Yeah I know.

[Tarsonis]

So we should have just told African Americans to wait patiently to be treated like human beings?

this was quite literally most of american history tho
(though i do think the "slavery would have been phased out by the end of the 19th century" argument to be incredibly unconvincing)

No it would have, though the ethnic cleansing that would have occurred as the South transitioned to a more industrialized agricultural set up would have been horrific.

[Salus Maior]

this was quite literally most of american history tho
(though i do think the "slavery would have been phased out by the end of the 19th century" argument to be incredibly unconvincing)

No it would have, though the ethnic cleansing that would have occurred as the South transitioned to a more industrialized agricultural set up would have been horrific.

So then waiting around for people to all choose the right thing in legal process and respecting the existing structure isn’t always the best choice.

[Immortan Khan]

But we have to abide by the tenants of liberalism? This reasoning could be used in the event infanticide is legalized, that we should just come at it sideways instead of, you know, criminalizing murder. This libertarian approach to social issues has failed time and time again.

Slavery was topped in much the same way, both by public outrage and the advancement of industrialization made Slavery more and more obsolete. Even if the civil war hadn't broken out, it likely would have been phased out of the south by the end of the 19th century.

It really wasn't.

Slavery was made illegal and in many parts of the world stamped out forcefully. The Royal Navy dedicated a not insignificant amount of ships and men to curtail the slave trade. There is also very little reason to believe slavery would have ended in the South without force, it's an idea perpetuated predominately by Lost Causers as a way to delegitimize the cause of the Union. The South was already using a lot of its slave labour force in the industrial sector. Something like 70% of the South's railways were entirely or in large part built using slave labour. The South wasn't a society with slavery by the mid-19th century but a slave society defined by the system of slavery. That's why they held onto it so much, it was part of the Southern identity.

[Tarsonis]

That's not what I said, but by all means twist my words to suit your agenda.

You implied that would have to be the case in the absence of the war. At least if we’re working with the logical conclusions of ‘people have to choose to do the right thing’.

No, I was making the point to emphasize how quickly the country was industrializing, (and would have had we not completely obliterated the south in the Civil war.) Slavery was tolerated by the north in order to 1. keep the south in the union, but 2. Keep the south producing cash crops like cotton and tobacco to trade with Europe. The abolitionist movement was already emerging during the time of the revolution, but hadn't won over popular opinion because of the "necessary evil." The northern industrial revolution had a large hand in swinging popular opinion to finally dealing with the evils of slavery.


Swing back to the modern issues. Public opinion largely supports abortion being legal go varying degrees, of restrictions, only a minority think abortion should be completely illegal in all instances.

But less than half of Americans have a favorable opinion of abortion as a moral issue. Most Americans think Abortion is morally wrong, and that number fluctuates depending on scenario. Overwhelmingly they think it's morally permissible when the mothers life is in danger, but they overwhelmingly think it's wrong for something like sex selective.

You want to swing public opinion towards getting rid of abortion, eliminate the scenarios which they find it morally permissible. How do you do that? like I said: Health care, social services, maternity leave. Make birth and child rearing so safe that the notion of terminating a pregnancy becomes completely indefensible.

[Tarsonis]

No it would have, though the ethnic cleansing that would have occurred as the South transitioned to a more industrialized agricultural set up would have been horrific.

So then waiting around for people to all choose the right thing in legal process and respecting the existing structure isn’t always the best choice.

How did Harper's Ferry turn out again?

[Salus Maior]

So then waiting around for people to all choose the right thing in legal process and respecting the existing structure isn’t always the best choice.

How did Harper's Ferry turn out again?

Better than what the Supreme Court was doing. Which was affirming that not only were black people simply property, but also that rights to property was above state laws abolishing slavery.

[Atheris]

So then waiting around for people to all choose the right thing in legal process and respecting the existing structure isn’t always the best choice.

How did Harper's Ferry turn out again?

not well enough, john brown did nothing wrong

[Tarsonis]

How did Harper's Ferry turn out again?

Better than what the Supreme Court was doing. Which was affirming that not only were black people simply property, but also that rights to property was above state laws abolishing slavery.

That is an extremely short sighted analysis. It was an armed insurrection aimed at toppling slavery that not only ended in utter failure, but was a step back for the abolitionist movement. It gave the slavers all the material needed to cast abolitionist as extreme religious nut jobs.

It was abolitionists who were willing to work with and manipulate the system that ultimately were successful at toppling slavery, not those who want to work "outside" the system.

As bad as it may feel, with systemic issues you have to play the long game.

[Tarsonis]

How did Harper's Ferry turn out again?

not well enough, john brown did nothing wrong

morally perhaps, but practically he did a lot wrong

[The Reformed American Republic]

not well enough, john brown did nothing wrong

morally perhaps, but practically he did a lot wrong

He didn't deserve execution, and they avoided prosecuting him at the federal level to prevent him from possibly getting any mercy.

[Kowani]

Better than what the Supreme Court was doing. Which was affirming that not only were black people simply property, but also that rights to property was above state laws abolishing slavery.

That is an extremely short sighted analysis. It was an armed insurrection aimed at toppling slavery that not only ended in utter failure, but was a step back for the abolitionist movement. It gave the slavers all the material needed to cast abolitionist as extreme religious nut jobs.

It was abolitionists who were willing to work with and manipulate the system that ultimately were successful at toppling slavery, not those who want to work "outside" the system.

As bad as it may feel, with systemic issues you have to play the long game.

if i remember correctly, harper's ferry actually accelerated abolitionism by moving the schedule of the civil war up via the process of pushing everyone to the extremes
letting the slavers cast abolitionists as extremists helped speed up the process of secession-which led to abolition

[Tarsonis]

That is an extremely short sighted analysis. It was an armed insurrection aimed at toppling slavery that not only ended in utter failure, but was a step back for the abolitionist movement. It gave the slavers all the material needed to cast abolitionist as extreme religious nut jobs.

It was abolitionists who were willing to work with and manipulate the system that ultimately were successful at toppling slavery, not those who want to work "outside" the system.

As bad as it may feel, with systemic issues you have to play the long game.

if i remember correctly, harper's ferry actually accelerated abolitionism by moving the schedule of the civil war up via the process of pushing everyone to the extremes
letting the slavers cast abolitionists as extremists helped speed up the process of secession-which led to abolition

That's not an unfair point. It was a step backwards, however for abolitionists who were trying to end the practice with out war.

[Tarsonis]

morally perhaps, but practically he did a lot wrong

He didn't deserve execution, and they avoided prosecuting him at the federal level to prevent him from possibly getting any mercy.

You guys are really missing the point here.