How the Democratic Party opposes Christian Principles

[clirus]

A Discussion

I was interested to note that you are part of an ethics class. I propose the following for discussion for the ethics class.

Watch the PBS documentary, "Typhoid Mary" and discuss the ethical issues of what the government should do in similar situations.

Next, replace the word Typhoid with the word sin and discuss the ethical issues of what the government should do.

There is a lot of similarity between sin and disease, especially cancer. If cancer is not treated, it will kill the whole body, but if you do something early, the cancer can be removed and no longer effect the body. I believe sin destroys a nation, if the sin is not dealt with.

I believe the purpose of government is to protect the people from evil both domestic and foreign and not to provide services to the people.

A government cannot create an ethical society by imposing ethics, however an ethical society can be created when God imposes ethics on people and the people vote for ethical government leaders. A government can create an unethical/Atheistic society by opposing Christian ethics.

The Atheistic Lifestyle leads to disease, death and destruction, thus should be opposed by all people.

I believe in Democracy, Christianity and Capitalism. Democracy allows choice, Christianity defines the right choice and Capitalism produces the prosperity that allows Democracy and Christianity to work. Christianity is essential to prevent the excesses of Democracy and Capitalism from destroying society. Christianity deals with individual ethics, that collectively produce a ethical society. Laws are needed to punish people, but it is better to prevent than to punish.

 

[Flynmonkie]

I believe the purpose of government is to protect the people from evil both domestic and foreign and not to provide services to the people.

Your logic is invalid. Not only are you disregarding the reasons for disease ( or bad, or evil) exists in this world the Bible specifically teaches, you are also attempting to alienate elect and non elect -- shall I say, your "logic" seems to resemble the remnants of belief that the world is good and we are here to keep it good, or make it bad. This is clearly instructed that this will never happen until Christs return (if one believes this concept of Revelation). During Christs 15 year reign it is believed that the earth will again become paradise. Now, I believe when the Bible instructs us that God is in control of our government, which means good and bad. Knowing my Fathers character, and believing that He loved us so much He came in flesh to suffer the ails of this world for example to us, I know he rendered unto Caesar, I also know we have been instructed to "train our children, servants etc" With these combined verses, the most important factor I think we should glean is choice. Our Father who is like no other parent gives us choices, to which we suffer consequence good or bad. IN turn, I believe teaching is also along those lines. The grey areas seem to be to what extent for many Christians such as just war, to justifying war. There is nothing wrong with incorporating law that is just. If people want to go out and drink and drug themselves silly, dance naked in bars, sleep with every person they meet -- let ‘em. As long as it does not hurt anyone else. It does, but there is not much we can really do about it. There is an old street saying its “None-ya! None-ya biznez” When I say it does not hurt anyone else is because true Christians already have been told this will occur, not only will it occur, it will become worse. Our role is primarily to show there is another more peaceful way, not to condemn the world. Trust me; you will be at it for a very-very long time. Even more there is NOTHING you can do about it at this level but bring anger towards Christianity for forcing people into a choice. That will come back to haunt you, I think Christians should see this already. In the meantime, those things that we can look away from, those things that really have no consequence to us if we truly have faith.. Are not our business unless someone makes them so. So in short, Cancer, disease, or whatever thing you personally deem sinful will exist if you rant and condemn about it or not. Your focus should be on faith and setting a good example as best as you can with your attitude first. First develop humility. At the very least how seriously susceptible you are to any one of these "evils" you mention, then and only then will you be able to fully discern how to handle these situations.

I don’t know why I am wasting my time here because I can already see where your next comment is going to be.. so let me get one step ahead of you..
No, hookers should not be allowed on every street corner
No drug pushers should not be allowed.. Etc.. etc…
But being homosexual and looking at Playboy is not something I consider lawless. (Not that I do either one) But the point is, if you take away peoples rights to privacy in these matters, it sets precedence for taking yours too. Then what happens if you decide you wish to do things a different way than the majority of society.

Spanking is a good example (I mean really where Maedea is when you need her?) I had two very tall boys that once about every three months it would be like they asked to be spanked. They would fight over nintendo (which I am sure IS the root of all evil) and next thing you know blood would be drawn). So they both would get a good what for. But somehow society felt spanking for dicipine was violent. Because the majority of society hasn’t got a clue apparently. Irregardless, if they ever decided to take me to jail – I would have no defense. It is now called corporal punishment and punishable by law to discipline my child. Get it?

Something else, there is no such thing as a perfectly ethical candidate; I believe that God works even through our faulty candidates. If someone looks good and smells that good, there is seriously something wrong. I tell my boys this all the time; the “good” girls are the ones you need to watch the closest. I mean that.

 

[Nathan Poe]

I believe the purpose of government is to protect the people from evil both domestic and foreign and not to provide services to the people.

The founding Fathers disagree with you. Government serves the people -- not vice versa.

A government cannot create an ethical society by imposing ethics, however an ethical society can be created when God imposes ethics on people and the people vote for ethical government leaders. A government can create an unethical/Atheistic society by opposing Christian ethics.

And if the people choose to oppose "Christian ethics," what should be done to them?

The Atheistic Lifestyle leads to disease, death and destruction, thus should be opposed by all people.

And yet it is not. What do you propose to do about it?

I believe in Democracy, Christianity and Capitalism. Democracy allows choice, Christianity defines the right choice and Capitalism produces the prosperity that allows Democracy and Christianity to work. Christianity is essential to prevent the excesses of Democracy and Capitalism from destroying society. Christianity deals with individual ethics, that collectively produce a ethical society. Laws are needed to punish people, but it is better to prevent than to punish.

Sounds to me like you're anti-Deomcracy. The people have made their choice. You don't like it, so you want to take choice away from them.

 

[tulc]

Next, replace the word Typhoid with the word sin and discuss the ethical issues of what the government should do.

uhmmm ones a disease and ones an opinion. How do the two compare?
tulc(has actually seen that documentary)

 

[GettinInTune]

A government cannot create an ethical society by imposing ethics, however an ethical society can be created when God imposes ethics on people and the people vote for ethical government leaders. A government can create an unethical/Atheistic society by opposing Christian ethics.

It is thoroughly upsetting when Christians think that they have a monopoly on ethics and god. Absolutism breeds intolerance.

Ethics and morality can exist outside of God!

The Atheistic Lifestyle leads to disease, death and destruction, thus should be opposed by all people.

This is a ridiculous statement. Do you have statistics and evidence to back this up? I can provide a evidence on religion, especially Christianity, causing disease, death, and destruction.

 

[clirus]

Flynmonkie quote

Our Father who is like no other parent gives us choices, to which we suffer consequence good or bad. IN turn, I believe teaching is also along those lines. The grey areas seem to be to what extent for many Christians such as just war, to justifying war. There is nothing wrong with incorporating law that is just. If people want to go out and drink and drug themselves silly, dance naked in bars, sleep with every person they meet -- let ‘em. As long as it does not hurt anyone else. It does, but there is not much we can really do about it. There is an old street saying its "None-ya! None-ya biznez" When I say it does not hurt anyone else is because true Christians already have been told this will occur, not only will it occur, it will become worse. Our role is primarily to show there is another more peaceful way, not to condemn the world.


So in short, Cancer, disease, or whatever thing you personally deem sinful will exist if you rant and condemn about it or not.

Response

These statements are basically statements that people have no control and that God condones whatever people do because they have no control.

I certainly do not agree with that.

Yes, God gave people a freewill do make choices, but then he wrote a whole Bible, explaining what was the best choice and the consequences of a bad choice. God sent Jesus Christ to die on the cross for the sins people commit because sin is evil and unacceptable to God. Without accepting Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior as payment for sin, God places people in Hell for eternity. When a person becomes a Christian, God provides the Holy Spirit to help the person avoid sin.

Even cancer is caused by the choices you make. If you smoke you get cancer. So now the government advocates that people do not smoke. Shouldn't Christians in like manner advocate that people do not sin?

People do not like to hear about sin, but I believe it is better that people be told the truth that be told a lie. The Bible states Christians will he hated by the world. Too many Christians are trying to have worldly friends by not alienating anyone instead of being the salt and light of the Bible

In nothing I have written do I use the word force. I use the word advocate. The only time the word force should be mentioned is when congress decides that force is necessary through Civil Law to prevent something that is a threat to society.

People cannot be controlled by the government. Good people do not need the government, it is the evil people that need government. When the sin of the evil people leads to disease, death and destruction, the evil people want the government to cure them. To which the government should say, "None-my! None-my biznez". It is evil people who want the government to force the righteous people to pay for the disease, death and destruction that has come upon them.

Social welfare programs benefit the sinful far more than they do the righteous. Any sin harms all people. There is no such thing as a sin that only harms the individual involved. Social welfare programs do more harm than good.

 

[clirus]

Nathan Poe quote

The founding Fathers disagree with you. Government serves the people -- not vice versa.

And if the people choose to oppose "Christian ethics," what should be done to them?

Response

If the government serves the people why does the government take money from some people and give it to others? Why not just let each person keep their own money?

There seems to be two questions being discussed.

1) Was Jesus sent to earth to be the perfect sacrifice for sin, or was Jesus sent to earth to help the sick and poor?

2) Is the purpose of the government to provide protection for the people or to provide services to the people?

When Israel opposed God, He sent them into captivity. Both the good and bad went in but only the good (remnant) came out.

 

[clirus]

GettinInTune quote

It is thoroughly upsetting when Christians think that they have a monopoly on ethics and god. Absolutism breeds intolerance.

Ethics and morality can exist outside of God!

This is a ridiculous statement. Do you have statistics and evidence to back this up? I can provide a evidence on religion, especially Christianity, causing disease, death, and destruction.

Response

Christians do not have a monopoly on ethics and God. Jesus Christ and the Bible are available to everyone.

The hope of every Atheist/Humanists is that they can do a better job than God.

Christianity has been involved in much death and destruction because Christians do fight evil when survival of society is at stake. Christians fought the Civil War, Christians fought in WW I and WW II., etc.

Can you provide evidence where Christians caused disease, death and destruction except in struggles of survival or wars authorized by congress?

 

[Flynmonkie]

Social welfare programs do more harm than good.

WOW now there is a Chritian thought.

You are an extremist with very narrow views and mindset. There is no discussing with you. Until you study your scripture starting with what you need to change in YOU, then learn a bit of humility... along with experiences that open your eyes to realities of life.. there is no reasoning with you.

Example:
Fact - not all lifelong smokers get cancer
Fact: Not all homosexuals get AIDS

Yet you have no answers for those facts now do you? Why isn't God punishing those people -- oh thats right, they must be elect and will be saved anyway, when it comes time? Come on.

Back to "nun-ya" again. You have no idea, and will not know that persons heart condition?

Again, government is an establishment of structure in disagreement. It is to set a level playing feild, both in economics and ideas. I believe God instructed us as He has because He does have control, and even in those times we believe He does not - Guess what?? BAM.

Do you not have faith that God will overcome those whom are lying, cheating or stealing against a Government He has established? Just how much DO you trust the same Word of God your "preaching"? God gives us choice, right or wrong we suffer consequence. All in all we suffer consequences that might not even be our fault, just a product of living in this sinful world. Does that mean everything is bad? I think intent has much to do with that. God created everything for Good. If it is not being used that way, we then get into an area where we weigh the consequence of what we choose. Fact is, people have some basic rights that have nothing to do with if they do or do not believe in God. Until you understand that, conversing is useless.

 

[YoungJoonKim]

Forget it, governments in USA is addicted to lobbyists money, PAC money, and contribution money.
They are slaves of industry.
A few regulation that keeps businesses accountable is only an illusion to keep American think businesses are following rules...rules...*...rules?*
We need dictator to do this job since people are brainwashed by capitalistic propaganda.
I'm sorry for being "freedom-hater" but government isn't going to work for people, they work for industry.

 

[Nathan Poe]

If the government serves the people why does the government take money from some people and give it to others? Why not just let each person keep their own money?

Because the government serves the people who need help as much as the people who don't.

 

[YoungJoonKim]

Okay, I have an idea.
How about make a simulation, let everyone who don't want to pay for tax and those who want to pay for tax.
Those who don't want to pay tax, they have to pay Fire Department, Police department, library, Medicare, health care, school, public services such as postal service,
Let see how that sums out for average middle class American or Canadian.

 

[mpok1519]

Clirus>> You still not have answered the questions presented to you.

According to the prescribed Biblical law, offendors, such as idolators, adulterers, drugs abusers, smokers, alcoholics, theives, etc, etc, etc, should all be punished by the state as prescribed by God's law. These punishments include stonings, hangings, and various other methods of execution.

So, if you agree with the prescribed law, does that mean you agree with the execution of said offendors, as prescribed by the Bible?

If you say yes, then you are a radicalist, which in Christianity, there is no room for, and infact, Christ goes AGAINST such radicalism as it would lead to way more death, diseae and destruction.

If you say no, then does that mean you believe the Bible is a bit over radical in some places?

If we punished and executed people such as cigar smokers, beer drinkers, and homosexuals, don't you think Christ would oppose such radicalism?

 

[GettinInTune]

Christians do not have a monopoly on ethics and God. Jesus Christ and the Bible are available to everyone.

If anyone defines god differently, will you be open to explore? Would you recognize different ethical systems as viable options?

The hope of every Atheist/Humanists is that they can do a better job than God.

This is so wrong. We do not believe in god, so how can we hope to do a better job than god?

Christianity has been involved in much death and destruction because Christians do fight evil when survival of society is at stake. Christians fought the Civil War, Christians fought in WW I and WW II., etc.

Can you provide evidence where Christians caused disease, death and destruction except in struggles of survival or wars authorized by congress?

I see that you avoided my question on providing statistics and evidence that atheism leads to disease, destruction, and death.

Throughout history there is documentation that Christians tortured and killed non-believers, American Indians, Europeans, Africans, South Americans, Middle East, and Asia in the name of the Bible.

Do not worry, since those involved in torture, death, and destruction could still go to heaven if they repented. Others such as Edison, Jefferson, Lincoln, Ghandi, Einstein, Franklin, Sagan, Galileo, Mill, and many other people who made the world a better place go to Hell since the Good Book monopolizes on God and ethics.

 

[clirus]

mpok1519 quote

According to the prescribed Biblical law, offendors, such as idolators, adulterers, drugs abusers, smokers, alcoholics, theives, etc, etc, etc, should all be punished by the state as prescribed by God's law. These punishments include stonings, hangings, and various other methods of execution.

Response

Your statement is not correct.

The Old Testament is the law for the Jews. If a nation desires to have perfect purity, it could incorporate the Old Testament Law into Civil Law, but there is no requirement for that to be done.

Christians are required to follow the Law of Love of the New Testament.

I believe the Bible teaches all things should be dealt with by the following three levels of action;
1) If it is good - accept it and nourish it.
2) If it is evil - reject it but tolerate it.
3) If it threatens your existence - destroy it before it destroys you. This is self defense, which both the individual and society have a right and responsibility to do.

The first two are from the New Testament of the Bible and represent the Law of Love. The third is from the Old Testament of the Bible and represents the Law of Purity/Self Defense. The New Testament deals more with personal responsibility and the Old Testament deals more with the preservation of society. The Old Testament and the New Testament together present God's Law, a means of survival for a person, a nation and a world.

The process used in America to insure that the correct people are executed (the decision to go from tolerance to destruction) is the jury process and the authorization of war by congress. No process is ever perfect, but the choice is society/civilization or an imperfect jury/congressional process.

Christians should warn people (be salt and light), Civil Law should control, restrict, destroy, force, etc. people. Christians should advocate that which is good and healthy for society as described in the Bible. Civil Law should control, restrict, destroy, force, etc. that which is harmful (disease, death and destruction) to society. Congress (as the representatives of the people) defines Civil Law. If the laws that Congress defines are consistent with the Christian Lifestyle (God's Law), the people who practice evil will suffer. If the laws that Congress defines are consistent with the Atheistic Lifestyle, everyone will suffer. Civil Law consistent with the Atheistic Lifestyle cause suffering for everyone because the Christens suffer under the law, and the Atheists suffer because of the sin they practice. Romans 6:23 states, "For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord."

Separation of Church and State means the Church should not execute, control, restrict, destroy, force, etc. and the State should not legalize sin by legalizing those things that the Bible clearly calls evil.

Even though evil can be tolerated, advocating evil should be rejected. Advocating evil can be anything from portraying an evil activity as fun with no consequences to the attitude that "I would not do it, but I would not be bothered if others did it". Pornography should be rejected because it advocates evil.

America was founded on these concepts where Civil Law was equivalent to the Law of Purity. A major problem in America is that Civil Law has now been so perverted that sin is now legalized and civil rights are more important than civil responsibility. Civil Law is no longer protecting/preserving society thus it is useless unless it is returned to its original intent. .

If all would live in accordance with the Law of love, there would never be a need to invoke the Law of Purity, but many do not live in accordance with any law. America is best served when religion prevents evil by defining evil and showing the disease, death and destruction of evil, and when Civil Law executes those who will not follow any law.

I believe that about 50% of the things of the world are good and about 49.9% of the things are evil and about 0.1% represent things that represent a threat. Some may think the evil should be eradicated, but I think evil eradicates itself because evil has disease, death and destruction associated with it. Evil requires outside assistance to survive. Good is self sufficient.

Anything should be considered evil if both the Bible says it is evil and physical reality shows that it leads to disease, death and destruction. Homosexuality is an example. The Bible says homosexuality is evil, and the AIDS is the physical reality of disease, death and destruction.

 

[clirus]

Flynmonkie quote

Do you not have faith that God will overcome those whom are lying, cheating or stealing against a Government He has established? Just how much DO you trust the same Word of God your "preaching"? God gives us choice, right or wrong we suffer consequence. All in all we suffer consequences that might not even be our fault, just a product of living in this sinful world. Does that mean everything is bad? I think intent has much to do with that. God created everything for Good. If it is not being used that way, we then get into an area where we weigh the consequence of what we choose. Fact is, people have some basic rights that have nothing to do with if they do or do not believe in God. Until you understand that, conversing is useless.

Response

If God will overcome those whom are lying, cheating or stealing, then why do we have laws, a judicial system and a police force? Some may assume God takes care of every detail, but I believe God gave humans a brain and the Bible. With the brain, humans are to understand the Bible and govern in accordance with the Bible. I believe Christians will be judged on how well they use their brain to govern in accordance with the Bible.

I believe God did create everything for good, but I also believe that Satan desires to pervert all the good things God created and make them into evil. The perversion of love is lust. The perversion of charity is socialism.

What are the basic rights that people have that have nothing to do with if they do or do not believe in God?

Some Atheists think they are not under God's Law because they do not believe in God, but I believe God created all things and that there are no basic rights outside of God's Law. All people will be judged by God in accordance with God's Law as stated in the Bible.

 

[Nathan Poe]

The Old Testament is the law for the Jews. If a nation desires to have perfect purity, it could incorporate the Old Testament Law into Civil Law, but there is no requirement for that to be done.

So, are you suggesting that the God of the Old Testament will accept anything less than purity?

Christians are required to follow the Law of Love of the New Testament.

And what has that to do with Non-believers such as us?

I believe the Bible teaches all things should be dealt with by the following three levels of action;
1) If it is good - accept it and nourish it.
2) If it is evil - reject it but tolerate it.
3) If it threatens your existence - destroy it before it destroys you. This is self defense, which both the individual and society have a right and responsibility to do.

I think a lot of cultures have come to the same similar conclusion. The question is what -- the Bible or some other source -- is used to determine what is good vs. What is evil.

Christians should warn people (be salt and light), Civil Law should control, restrict, destroy, force, etc. people. Christians should advocate that which is good and healthy for society as described in the Bible.

Well, as a Christian, you've warned us.

As non-believers, we've chosen to ignore your warnings.

What now, clirus?

Civil Law should control, restrict, destroy, force, etc. that which is harmful (disease, death and destruction) to society. Congress (as the representatives of the people) defines Civil Law.

So, in the end, it is the people -- both Christian and Atheist, who define Civil Law (by electing representatives) and thus determine good and evil, and how to react to them.

This is what is being done -- the system is working as it should -- albeit not to your satisfaction, since Atheists are allowed a voice in government.

If the laws that Congress defines are consistent with the Christian Lifestyle (God's Law), the people who practice evil will suffer. If the laws that Congress defines are consistent with the Atheistic Lifestyle, everyone will suffer. Civil Law consistent with the Atheistic Lifestyle cause suffering for everyone because the Christens suffer under the law, and the Atheists suffer because of the sin they practice.

This is your opinion and you are entitled to it, of course. But so long as Atheists vote, they who choose to ignore you (and that would be all of them) will vote accordingly.

Again, the system is working as it should -- for everybody, Christian and Atheist alike.

How will you change this, clirus?

Romans 6:23 states, "For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord."

A statement which, as a non-believer, I choose to reject as rubbish. Isn't freedom grand?

Separation of Church and State means the Church should not execute, control, restrict, destroy, force, etc. and the State should not legalize sin by legalizing those things that the Bible clearly calls evil.

Smoking, gambling, alcohol, prostitution (in Nevada, anyway), and the allowed existence of Atheism, homosexuality, and other assorted blasphemies. Our government is and has been in the "legalizing sin" business for quite some time, and will not change anytime soon.

Even though evil can be tolerated, advocating evil should be rejected. Advocating evil can be anything from portraying an evil activity as fun with no consequences to the attitude that "I would not do it, but I would not be bothered if others did it". Pornography should be rejected because it advocates evil.

And yet it is not. How are you going to change that?

America was founded on these concepts where Civil Law was equivalent to the Law of Purity.

Complete garbage. Where are you getting your history from?

A major problem in America is that Civil Law has now been so perverted that sin is now legalized and civil rights are more important than civil responsibility. Civil Law is no longer protecting/preserving society thus it is useless unless it is returned to its original intent. .

You call it a problem -- the rest of us call it the way it should be.

"Government governs best which governs least" -- Henry David Thoreau.

If all would live in accordance with the Law of love, there would never be a need to invoke the Law of Purity, but many do not live in accordance with any law. America is best served when religion prevents evil by defining evil and showing the disease, death and destruction of evil, and when Civil Law executes those who will not follow any law.

Sounds like you're in favor of mass executions in the name of "purity."

Where have I heard that before?

I believe that about 50% of the things of the world are good and about 49.9% of the things are evil and about 0.1% represent things that represent a threat. Some may think the evil should be eradicated, but I think evil eradicates itself because evil has disease, death and destruction associated with it. Evil requires outside assistance to survive. Good is self sufficient.

Then religion is not "good." It is hardly self-sufficient if it needs civil law to enforce it.

Consider this, clirus: You said that America is best served when religion prevents evil, but then it's plainly obvious that religion is failing in its task.

To fix this, you want the government to step in and help religion do its task through civil law -- you're asking the government to help religion when it cannot help itself, and for the rest of us, Christian and Atheist alike, to foot the bill.

Sounds to me like you want the government to put religion on welfare..

Anything should be considered evil if both the Bible says it is evil and physical reality shows that it leads to disease, death and destruction. Homosexuality is an example. The Bible says homosexuality is evil, and the AIDS is the physical reality of disease, death and destruction.

Except we all know that homosexuality is not the cause of AIDS. And the wrath you would unleash on the homosexual community as a result of propagating this lie would cause far more death and destruction than the AIDS epidemic itself.

So you tell me, clirus: Where's the true evil?

 

[Nathan Poe]

I am not a Christian. Regardless of how many "laws of purity," you railroad through Civil Law, it will not stay God's hand against this nation for allowing such as me to live in it. "Purity" doesn't allow for any compromise.

 

[dlamberth]

The perversion of love is lust. The perversion of charity is socialism.

Wow.

.

 

[dlamberth]

All people will be judged by God in accordance with God's Law as stated in the Bible.

God's Law is "Love". That sounds like a pretty good law to live buy. Following the law of Love, I tend to get different answers than what you are coming up with. Are you following God's law of Love?


.