No, I'd rather live my life as I choose and not how anyone else chooses.
Anyone else? As in God? You don't believe in God?
Upvote
0
No, I'd rather live my life as I choose and not how anyone else chooses.
I don't believe in God.
It makes more sense but regardless, as a non-theist I would rather not be subject to the rules and regulations of a religion I do not believe in.OK maybe you haven't read the Bible then because it's all in there.
Anyway, this topic makes the most sense if you believe in God...
It makes more sense but regardless, as a non-theist I would rather not be subject to the rules and regulations of a religion I do not believe in.
OK maybe you haven't read the Bible then because it's all in there.
Anyway, this topic makes the most sense if you believe in God...
That would depend on what God wanted.No, it makes absolutely no more or less sense whether you believe in God or not. The crucial variable is whether God exists or not. If God(s) existed and formed an active, tangible part of life, then a theocracy would make sense. If God doesn't exist, then a theocracy is just crazy people telling other crazy people what to do.
No, it makes absolutely no more or less sense whether you believe in God or not. The crucial variable is whether God exists or not. If God(s) existed and formed an active, tangible part of life, then a theocracy would make sense. If God doesn't exist, then a theocracy is just crazy people telling other crazy people what to do.
You're convinced by the Bible.OK, I normally don't discuss God in this forum because it's a politics forum, but whether God exists or not is not up for question. He exists. All you have to do is read the Bible, there's all the truth you need. That's a fact right there if you need facts. The Bible is a real book, it's not imaginary, and the truth about God's existance is in it.
You're convinced by the Bible.
We're not.
So what now? A Theocracy is still an abrogation of people's rights whether or not God exists.
To be more accurate.
Some early colonies were founded by believers, but the earliest ones were chartered by various kings for profit.
So oppressing others is entirely appropriate if voted for on a local level, but inappropriate if done on a national level?I would never want theocracy on a national level, but if people decide on a local level they want one, then they should have that right. I would support one 100%.
I voted yes.
For the record, I don't want a theocracy either...
However, I don't think it's accurate or fair to pick a nation with a muslim theocracy and imply that every other theocracy would end the same way.
OK, I normally don't discuss Krishna in this forum because it's a politics forum, but whether Krishna exists or not is not up for question. He exists. All you have to do is read the Bhagavad Gita, there's all the truth you need. That's a fact right there if you need facts. The Bhagavad Gita is a real book, it's not imaginary, and the truth about Krishna's existance is in it.
OK, I normally don't discuss God in this forum because it's a politics forum, but whether God exists or not is not up for question. He exists. All you have to do is read the Bible, there's all the truth you need. That's a fact right there if you need facts. The Bible is a real book, it's not imaginary, and the truth about God's existance is in it.
No one's insulting your faith. Calm down.