Unity.

[GreatLakes4Ever]

I’m talking about actual believers in Christ, not just church goers.

There were people in those wars in Europe who absolutely the believed that Christ was on their side as they fought the heretics on the other side (who just so happened to absolutely believe Christ was on their side). Christianity has rarely ever been united. There were already divisions happening in the Book of Acts.

 

[Speedwell]

Someone (and I can't remember who I need to give credit for this) once opened a thread with this as theme: suppose we give you full power to enact whatever laws you want against abortion, what are you ready to support?

• tighter gun control?
• definitive ban on death penalty?
• universal health care?
• the Green New Deal?
• statehood for DC and Puerto Rico?
• better protection of gays?

Or feel free to make your own suggestions.


Edit: adding KCfromNC's suggestions

That was me, and I never got a straight answer.

 

[driewerf]

That was me, and I never got a straight answer.

It was a great idea, and I want to give you credit for that.

 

[Speedwell]

If that were true, there’d be no abortions.

Yes, there would still be abortions. Destruction of a viable fetus is illegal in 42 states, a restriction that the courts have deemed consistent with Roe v. Wade. There are still abortions in those circumstances (roughly from late in the second terms onwards with today's medical technology) but no murders.

 

[durangodawood]

See, all this shows why we cant expect unity around the various religious beliefs. You can have those on your own perfectly well.

Instead we should aim for unity in a few key "earthly" respects.
*liberty and justice for all
*2+2 = 4
*some daily exercise is good for you
*lizard people dont walk among us

Stuff like that.

 

[Hammster]

Again, that is what you believe.

Yes, I believe the truth.

 

[Hammster]

Good. It's beginning to sound as if you want to actually evangelize, rather than having the government do that work for you. But keep in mind that the Gospel of Christ says nothing specific about how we are supposed to deal with climate change, the Covid pandemic, gun control, international trade or Central American refugees, or other "Christian" issues which the religious right have taken a definite position on.

The plan is, when enough people are saved and following Christ, we won’t have the lies that come from the enemy, and things will be dealt with better.

 

[Hammster]

Abortion isn't murder.

When you deliberately kill a child, in or out of the womb, it’s murder.

 

[Lg2000]

First Amendment of the US Constitution says I don’t have to if I don’t want to. If submission to Christ is what you believe it will take to have unity, you are going to have to repeal the First Amendment to get it.

god gave us free will.
I see no reason why the religious want to force people to obey in Christ or laws to revolve around what they believe in. That's not how it works. That's just forcing things on them and I say that as a believer and follower.

Mainstream christianity and what it represents in this country isn't about god. It's weak

 

[durangodawood]

Yes, I believe the truth.

OK. But right or wrong, thats within your own head.

People cant come together around whats in your head. We can come together around things that are objectively demonstrable to each other.

 

[Hammster]

It works better, than not wearing a mask. I know a people , that didn't believe in mask, They got COVID-19 , and 2 people I know died of COVID-19. And I wont even get into transgenders, since it's none our business.

Certainly you don’t think that only non-mask wearers who catch COVID.

 

[Hammster]

Yes, there would still be abortions. Destruction of a viable fetus is illegal in 42 states, a restriction that the courts have deemed consistent with Roe v. Wade. There are still abortions in those circumstances (roughly from late in the second terms onwards with today's medical technology) but no murders.

Making murder legal doesn’t make it not murder.

 

[Hammster]

OK. But right or wrong, thats within your own head.

People cant come together around whats in your head. We can come together around things that are objectively demonstrable to each other.

How do you determine what’s true?

 

[Speedwell]

Making murder legal doesn’t make it not murder.

So an abortion in which the fetus is saved is still murder?

 

[durangodawood]

How do you determine what’s true?

I dont think we have to go deep into the epistemological jungle for the purpose of this topic. We'll end up at "but maybe I'm a brain in a vat". (As a site advisor, maybe you can re-open the Philosophy subforum and we can go deep there).

For an American Politics context, its good enough to talk about the the things we can observe with our senses and the values we share as natural human organisms.

 

[Hammster]

So an abortion in which the fetus is saved is still murder?

When they are murdered it is.

 

[Hammster]

I dont think we have to go deep into the epistemological jungle for the purpose of this topic. We'll end up at "but maybe I'm a brain in a vat". (As a site advisor, maybe you can re-open the Philosophy subforum and we can go deep there).

For an American Politics context, its good enough to talk about the the things we can observe with our senses and the values we share as natural human organisms.

How do determine that those values are the right ones?

 

[super animator]

How do determine that those values are the right ones?

I find these line of questioning to be disingenuous here, as you never ask the same line of questions to yourself, and just assert that it is true.

 

[Speedwell]

When they are murdered it is.

So abortion isn't always murder, which was my point.

 

[durangodawood]

How do determine that those values are the right ones?

There are values upon which we differ. We can skip those for the purpose of unifying.

But there are even more that we naturally share. Right/wrong is irrelevant for values that are natural (or God given) to the human being. Having these values is simply a fact about us.

 

[natitude]

Someone (and I can't remember who I need to give credit for this) once opened a thread with this as theme: suppose we give you full power to enact whatever laws you want against abortion, what are you ready to support?

tighter gun control?

I don't know enough about the issue to comment on the current laws and enforcement of said laws.

definitive ban on death penalty?

There are some crimes that are so heinous that only the death penalty is the appropriate response.

universal health care?
the Green New Deal?

Both of these topics are generally promoted by politicians who want to control the lives of others through Big Government, not by those motivated by genuine care and compassion. If I were laying on my death bed and there were an expensive miracle cure available that I could not afford, I would not want my follow citizens to be forcibly burdened by my distress. However, I would be extremely grateful for any voluntary assistance.

I see only a down side in the government requiring buildings be retrofitted with "green" technology to address a non-issue.

statehood for DC and Puerto Rico?

I believe that Puerto Rico ought to be a state if it so chooses. However, I think Puerto Ricans like their tax-exempt status. I believe that the majority of DC ought to be annexed by Maryland so that those citizens have full representation in Congress. (Last century a portion of DC was given to Virginia.) I believe there ought to remain a location where the US Federal Government can be unhampered by state power. Usually DC statehood is an issue promoted by Democrats when they are out of power, but not when they hold power.

better protection of gays?

What protections don't they have now?

Or feel free to make your own suggestions.

One thing the pandemic has demonstrated is that state legislators are unwilling to step up to the plate during an emergency. US governors have powers to declare a state of emergency and during the pandemic have frequently done do. It's one thing if there's an earthquake and immediate decisions are needed regarding access and so forth. But any legislature ought to fulfill its lawmaking role once sufficient time has passed for it to reconvene and make decisions. US governors have been exercising emergency power during the pandemic long after the public has learned to navigate the pandemic. State legislatures ought to be deciding when businesses need to open and close for public protection, not governors.