• You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

So I just told off an Evangelical Neoconservative and thought I'd share.

Ivy

Strongly Ambivalent
Joined
Apr 18, 2007
Messages
23,989
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
6
...but Jen agreed with NoahFence's assertion that "...it's not his or anyone's place to stop people from sinning."

"Anyone" includes government, does it not?

Sure, and it's not the government's place to stop people from sinning, which is a religious concept. It's totally the government's place to stop people from committing crimes. Crime and sin are not the same thing at all.
 
O

Oberon

Guest
Sure, and it's not the government's place to stop people from sinning, which is a religious concept. It's totally the government's place to stop people from committing crimes.

So tell me again why polygamy is a crime?
 

Ivy

Strongly Ambivalent
Joined
Apr 18, 2007
Messages
23,989
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
6
So tell me again why polygamy is a crime?

I'm guessing because of the Mormons or something. Doesn't matter- enacting or overturning laws of behavior is a legal matter, not a religious matter. Mixing the two is dangerous, IMO.
 
O

Oberon

Guest
I'm guessing because of the Mormons or something. Doesn't matter- enacting or overturning laws of behavior is a legal matter, not a religious matter. Mixing the two is dangerous, IMO.

The truth is that while "crime" and "sin" are distinct concepts, there is considerable overlap between what is a sin and what is a crime. Most criminal acts are also considered sinful by Judeo-Christian standards. The reason there are laws against prostitution and polygamy is because these acts violate Judeo-Christian morals, and the morality was written into law in some bygone era in which such laws were not just tolerated, but expected.

One may try to assert a utilitarian basis for criminal law (murder is a crime because it impairs the function of the society and the state) or a rights basis for criminal law (murder is a crime because it violates the victim's right to not be murdered), but to do so ignores the fact that our criminal code is heavily grounded in English common law, which (among other things) has the Bible as its basis (murder is a crime because God said not to do it).

In one sense, it's absolutely true that you cannot legislate morality...but in another sense, legislated morality is all that the law ever was, or will be.

And while it may in fact be dangerous to mix law and religion, I submit to you that secularism is itself a religion, and its principles have been mixed with the law for some time now. The secular urge to pass laws for the good of all mankind is at least as dangerous as anything the Inquisition ever coughed up.

So pick your poison.
 

Totenkindly

@.~*virinaĉo*~.@
Joined
Apr 19, 2007
Messages
50,258
MBTI Type
BELF
Enneagram
594
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
How just like an ENTP! :D

Seriously, if y'all want to continue the topic, we should probably bump it all to another thread so as not to distract from Brendan's vent.
 

Brendan

Guerilla Urbanist
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
911
MBTI Type
ENFJ
Still, Brendan, it sounds to me like you have a chip on your shoulder against this person. Is it worth all of this conflict to the point of physical violence? Why let this experience shape you like that?
I know that the reason I have a chip on my shoulder in relation to him is not because I dislike him personally, but because he is almost like a sent-from-above embodiment of everything I have to fear, dislike, fight against in my world, and if I let this symbol get away with treating me like im nothing, I'll never be able to fight the real thing.

I won't punch him unless he initiates a physical conflict, I was just angry, but I'm not going to sit there and take it.
 

runvardh

にゃん
Joined
Jun 23, 2007
Messages
8,541
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
6w7
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
As serious as you are, Brendan, for some crazy reason Twisted Sister started playing in my head... Anyway, do what you feel you need to, I just hope nothing to stupid erupts. :hug:
 

Totenkindly

@.~*virinaĉo*~.@
Joined
Apr 19, 2007
Messages
50,258
MBTI Type
BELF
Enneagram
594
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
I know that the reason I have a chip on my shoulder in relation to him is not because I dislike him personally, but because he is almost like a sent-from-above embodiment of everything I have to fear, dislike, fight against in my world, and if I let this symbol get away with treating me like im nothing, I'll never be able to fight the real thing.

I won't punch him unless he initiates a physical conflict, I was just angry, but I'm not going to sit there and take it.

All right. I don't know what's right for you in this situation, and I didn't want to see you cause unnecessary trouble for you and for Sean or go down a path that will make things harder later for you; but I do very much understand the part that I bolded up above in your comment.
 

Mempy

Mamma said knock you out
Joined
Jul 29, 2007
Messages
2,227
The truth is that while "crime" and "sin" are distinct concepts, there is considerable overlap between what is a sin and what is a crime. Most criminal acts are also considered sinful by Judeo-Christian standards. The reason there are laws against prostitution and polygamy is because these acts violate Judeo-Christian morals, and the morality was written into law in some bygone era in which such laws were not just tolerated, but expected.

One may try to assert a utilitarian basis for criminal law (murder is a crime because it impairs the function of the society and the state) or a rights basis for criminal law (murder is a crime because it violates the victim's right to not be murdered), but to do so ignores the fact that our criminal code is heavily grounded in English common law, which (among other things) has the Bible as its basis (murder is a crime because God said not to do it).

In one sense, it's absolutely true that you cannot legislate morality...but in another sense, legislated morality is all that the law ever was, or will be.

And while it may in fact be dangerous to mix law and religion, I submit to you that secularism is itself a religion, and its principles have been mixed with the law for some time now. The secular urge to pass laws for the good of all mankind is at least as dangerous as anything the Inquisition ever coughed up.

So pick your poison.

I agree.

In Simple Christianity, CS Lewis proposed that all human societies are fundamentally alike. Ideas like burying your dead, treating your neighbor like you want to be treated, starting families, and freedom are universal. Humans are much more alike than not. "Treat your neighbor as you want to be treated" is a simple truth, and most societies and religions sing that chorus. I think many laws and morals are just an embodiment of universal human values. It's like a guide for human behavior that says "don't kill or hurt each other," which most humans know is the right way to behave. For example I don't think there's a society that eats their own babies and values murdering each other.
 

Usehername

On a mission
Joined
May 30, 2007
Messages
3,794
Thank you! This is exactly what I was trying to get across. I don't care if someone doesn't like what I do, I don't care if they don't like me, but that doesn't make it okay to treat me like a second class citizen.

Yeah, Brendan, a few words for some perspective from someone with many friends with conservative christian views (I'm more liberal with my Christian views; I've had many a heated discussion about "biblical facts" that they assume are universal interpretations... although I'm straight, so i can't relate to the depth that you do on this issue).

One thing to keep in mind is how some of these people were raised, like Cafe said. And not just that they were taught this--that, for some people, this "biblical fact" (that homosexual acts are a sin) is one part of a very tall and skinny castle they have built for themselves to live above. They look down from it and are fearful for all the action and commotion that they see going on around them, and are very weary of the fact that should one part of the castle's weight-bearing pillars be torn apart, the whole thing will fall.

What I'm trying to say is this: for many conservative Christians, the issue with homosexuality is not that they interpret it as a sin. The issue for them is that any non-literal interpretation of the bible means that the entire belief system that they live their lives by would crumble.

The battle you wage in discussion with many people (although, admittedly, not all. Just most) like Sean is not a battle over homosexuality as you interpret it to be. In reality, it's a self-preserving all-out war from these literal biblical interpretors... you're dissecting the specific issue of homosexuality, they're fighting with every bit that they have over the truth of their faith. And, by extension, themselves.

Worst of all, most don't know this. It's taken me years of debate to figure this one out. Whenever you have a discussion with one of them, if they are calm enough to go deep enough to the "why's" behind their beliefs, I've found the common link that they're either a) convinced that the entire bible is literal, and therefore have no fear proclaiming every literal interpretation that they have, or b) they're sweating over the fact that just possibly the bible can be not literally correct. Which, for a Christian like me, is just plain obvious. The metaphors and bigger picture are glaringly obvious to me. But to them, it's all or nothing.

This is what they live by. This is what they live for. God. And they do this through God's word. So while you're debating homosexuality, they're fighting for God.

This perspective has got me way further than any specific issue with homosexuality ever has in discussions with firmly-entrenched conservative Christians.
 

Usehername

On a mission
Joined
May 30, 2007
Messages
3,794
For example I don't think there's a society that eats their own babies and values murdering each other.

Not to devalue your point in the previous words before this sentence...

but there totally are cultures like that. I think they were natives of the Amazon; I'll see if I can find that from my religions of the world notes tomorrow.
 

Usehername

On a mission
Joined
May 30, 2007
Messages
3,794
a quote from someone else having this discussion with me on another board (but, framed about a literal vs. non-literal interpretation of Genesis) fits well for what I described in my longer, previous post.

If the Bible is 100% true and error-free then it has to be literal if that is how we read it independent of outside influences. If we go and change the Bible because of some evidence it places us on an unstable footing. It means that we could believe that the resurrection did not occur if there was some evidence refuting it. If we reinterpret Genesis why not the rest of the Bible? How do we rely on any of the Bible?
 

Mempy

Mamma said knock you out
Joined
Jul 29, 2007
Messages
2,227
Not to devalue your point in the previous words before this sentence...

but there totally are cultures like that. I think they were natives of the Amazon; I'll see if I can find that from my religions of the world notes tomorrow.

Actually, I can see that. I have heard about things like that. That aside, I still think humans are more alike than not. In most societies you do see people building communities, raising families, instilling work ethic and survival skills in the young, making friendships, etc. Even if your society does eat their own babies and wage war every five minutes, it's probably in the interest of their own survival, right?

I am interested to hear about your savage, rapacious Amazonian society, haha. And also a bit frightened.
 
Top