Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
A classic "both-sides" argument. Hmm.
"traditional" and "progressive/liberal" sure, but the "traditional" is not as "established" in this country as you imply.
matthew 10:34
The US is largely a liberal order. That does not make liberalism defiance of the authority.
This might be the most broken thing I've seen you write about history (and that says a lot). The notion of "Christ's liberty" is at most 2000 years old. Civilization was well more than 2000 years old when Jesus lived.
A continual process...
No thanks. Luke 14:26
Replacing one human ideology with another. Nothing new here.
Progressives are not at the extreme end of the political spectrum.
It isn't. You are only assuming that the traditional/conservative position should be the status quo.
There are many ways to be liberated from God and liberalism is not necessary for that.
Why are you so cynnical lol. You question everything lol.
Not now but was.
lol This verse is not about physical conflict, but about a spiritual conflict between Christs truth and opposing ideaologies.
Not automatically. But of the two positions liberalism is more likely to support violence as a means for achieving change. Its more related to liberation and revolution from oppressive regimes.
Ok lol. I was speaking of the west and the influence Christianity had. Obviously we can't be influenced by Christs liberation from sin before Christ lol.
Yes of course like every institution. But I was referring to a watershed moment in the church that exposed abuse and from that changes had to be made. People had to become more accountable and safeguards put in place' Like when any organisation is busted. Make amends and take responsibility.
I realise you have no tolerance for Christians and don't think they can ever change lol.
Not all ideologies are the same. But the point is as you have just admitted. That its not a neutral game when it comes to belief about morality and how society should be ordered. The no religions who complain about the church are every bit as religious about their ideas and beliefs in the same way.
I said the extreme end of the political spectrum for progressive politics is violent uprisings. Just like the extreme end of the right is violent authoritarianism.
No I said nothing about assuming conservative or tradition is the norm. I am saying regardless of politics liberalism is more likely to want to change the status quo or established order.
onepeterfive.com
It seems to me today the meaning of liberalism is liberalism. It has so many meanings its lost its meaning. But certainly liberation in Christ cannot be violent in achieving its ends. It demands the complete opposite. But liberalism and especially related to individual and group human rights over all else can at its extreme be violent.
I am questioning your claims, not "everything".
We are talking a generation back at least.
Sure it is, sure it is.
Not "secularized". Religion.
This is your core claim. Don't repeat it. Demonstrate it.
So maybe it isn't just one side then?
The thread is about the modern US and US history in general. It is not about the entire history of the West dating back to Athens.
It was more dodge and avoid responsibility. And there are so many orgs just like that "first one".
There was no notable departures from the church at the time, nor from any of the other churches with the same problems.
Oh, Steve, it is not Christians I have no tolerance for. It is bad arguments. Bad analysis. Irrelevant claims. These things you post in spades.
Is that last sentence supposed to mean something? I can't make heads nor tails of it.
It really didn't help the church, now did it? (no need to answer, let's get back to the topic)
Again, you have mischaracterized "progressives" as the extreme of the left.
How does that work when the established order is a liberal one?
I don't care about your discourse about "marxism". This is ridiculously far from the topic of the thread.Marxism for example is part of the spectrum of Liberal ideologies. At its extreme its violent uprising against the percieved oppressors. This is well known. Liberalism is about being being freedom and individual and group Rights to challenge and change the world order by its very nature.
“Cultural Marxism is Consistent with Liberalism”
Liberalism, following Danilo Castellano, is the affirmation of “negative” freedom, that which has no rule other than itself, meaning without a rule. The political-legal formulations of Hobbes, Locke, Rousseau, Kant, or Hegel demonstrate the reformulations of man’s liberation, culminating in self-determination. Certainly, during the time of the so-called “Strong Modernity,” the ownership of “negative” freedom remained in the hands of the State as an indirect guarantee of individual freedom. After World War II, “Weak Modernity” shifted the focus to individual self-determination, to which politics and law became subordinate. Nonetheless, the Liberal core of all ideologies is undeniable, as they all have liberation as their goal, with the revolutionary subject changing from the individual to the State, passing through the proletariat or the Nation.
“Cultural Marxism” is, therefore, consistent with Liberalism. Gender ideology, transhumanism, the dissolution of the family, etc., as contemporary phenomena, are directly related to individual autonomy, inherited from ideological Liberalism.
“Cultural Marxism is Consistent with Liberalism”: Interview with a Carlist
The duty of the layperson is, pre-eminently, political.
As is all of this. TL;DR.
Yes thats right. A complete change in the public square from acceptance and even promotion of God and Christian values. To anti God, Christ and Christian values to whoevers gods and values manages to be pushed. All fighting in the market place. Even to the point of taking out those who disagree.
Are you saying the verse tells Christians to take up arms against others.
I am talking about belief. The beliefs behind political ideology for example. Do you think thats based in objective fact and reality. They are all beliefs about how we should order society. Thus making them also moral which is also not something we can objectively determine.
Already did in this post.
Never said it was one side.
This is silly. How can you know what todays US is like if you don't compare it to its history. Its history is what makes it what it is today lol. It did not just pop into existence out of nowhere.
There you go, your belief is coming out. Your cynnical of Christianity. You only see the negative. All along even when abuses were happening this did not define Christs church. We have ample examples of the very best of humans within the church. But cynnics ignore all that.
You don't know the church. You are outside the church looking in. Yet you seem to know everything about them.
No I think its Christians perse lol by the obvious bias you have in only seeing bad and always looking for it. You just proved that above. I don't think you could see the good of Christianity if it was starring you in the face. Which it is but you never notice it or wich to say it. Any reasonable person would see that there are many examples of Christlike Christians who have changed the world.
Yes. That even 'No religions' or any human or society of humans will have their own set of beliefs about how society and the world should be ordered. You don't have to be an organised religion to impose an ideological belief as the basis for how society and the world should be ordered metaphysically and morally. Its part of the fabric of being human and reality itself.
No it damaged it a lot. But heres the thing. The church is certainly capable of being like Christ and have done it before and can do it again. But the world cannot because it relies on itself which we know will always decend into evil as by nature humans are fallen creatures.
Is the Left more progressive ie more likely to support progressive ideas and values from the tradition or conservative ie pro abortion, SSM, LGBTIQ+ ideas and beliefs, green policiies. Generally open to modernising and alternative ideas and beliefs.
Lol its never liberal enough for liberalism. Besides do you really think the system is as liberal or liberated as you think. We have never been more bound up in regulations, policies and laws restricting everything and even our private and social lives now.
Hum, thats you opinion and that you say you don't care about my opinion only supports what I am saying.
Americans. One day it will have to acknowledge that as a country Americans are a violent people prone to killing each other as a way of settling disputes.
This did not happen in my lifetime and probably not in yours either, at least not in the US (the subject of the thread). The only thing that has changed is that there is less *presumption* that everyone else is also Christian. The "public square" did not directly promote Christianity in the 40+ years I can remember clearly. And there is *still* a significant deference to Christians in US society.
Which is not persecution or suppression of Christians.
That is how it spread.
The thread is not about religion, but about politics.
The US state is not aligned to religion and has not been.
You have at best made an argument that politics are leading to violence, but not to the question of imbalance in the directionality of that violence.
You haven't.
Then why are you arguing with me as you apparently disagree with the claim that "liberals" are more violent.
It didn't, but the understanding of American politics and current affairs you write here is very poor and the historical background you write is, if anything, worse. It is best we keep it to the near present.
No, Steve, this isn't about my cynical view or distaste for your religion. When the RCC got caught hiding abusers there was condemnation in the public sphere, but there was no mass exodus from the pews. No glance at membership numbers or attendance counts will show the obvious signal of a mass rejection of active Catholics of their church when the truth became known. There was no rush to other churches or disconnection from religion. It is an undetectable effect on the slow and continuing decline of the Church in the US. When modern ex-Christians (particularly those who came of age after or during these revelations) indicate why they left, when there is a non-theological/belief reason, it is the Churches treatment/attitude of LGBT people, which wasn't a significant emphasis before the scandals. Abuse scandals in other church organizations also don't seem have impacted their adherents either, though there is less adherence to a specific sub-branch, so some smaller entities have been wrecked by scandals.
No Steve, it is you and your posts.
And water is wet. None of this says anything about violence, just how you'd like organized religion forced on society. I don't. I never have.
Not relevant and covered above to the extent I wish to discuss it.
Summarized: "American culture is violent because it doesn't have enough Jesus." I can refute this easily by pointing out that American society clearly had *more* civil violence during the 1950s and 60s when Christian religiosity in the US was at a peak (and likely an all time historical peak).
None of these things, either for or against them, leads directly to violence. Well, with one notable exception: There is a history of violence against abortion providers going back about 50 years that has included terrorism.
All religions and beliefs are not equal. Some are clearly worse than others (more harmful, less true). What *is* equal is the rights of persons in the US to *hold* those beliefs. That has not changed and I will not let it. Come to my country and worship whatever you want. I don't care. Try to force me or anyone else to join you, and I will oppose you.
"be killed"? Seriously, get real dude.
You have gotten more than you deserve.
I learned about freedom at school and Jesus in CCD. There was no overlap. Jesus wants obedience, which is not "freedom".
With the human trafficking allowed by the Biden administration the cartels and gang involved gained a much stronger foothold here in the United States. In Chicago ICE was reminded of that fact:
www.washingtonexaminer.com
Then you don't understand how culture develops and changes. Its not a case of once there was the church and Christian norms and values and then next theres secular values and norms.
Do you think the State can be biased against Christian beliefs and morals. Like we have seen with individuals and organisations being descriminated for their Christians beliefs. For example if a Christian organisation only wanted to adopt to traditional couples.
I don't care how it spread. People say all sorts of things but its not reality. I am asking you what the verse means. Are you saying that this means Christ supported taking up arms.
Lol, its about commiting violence against opponents because they disagree. This is a moral issue and the most obvious connection to morality is religion. Is ethical systems or a belief about how the world should be ordered. Its fundementally the same as religious belief. Whatever belief system that replaces religion will act in everyway like that religion.
Really. Do you remember Woke. It was very much like a religion. Still in in its other personificationsl. Humans are religious creatures and we cannot have a society without some form of religious basis for meaning and morality.
Whats at the foundation of politics. Is this about morals or how we should order society and the world. The political became the personal and spiritual long ago. Thats why now according to many that simply holding the opposing view is enough to disown and wish harm on them. Thats more than politics.
I have lol. If you can just make two word claims so can I. We could go on and on if you want.
No your arguing with me because I mention that the Left is commiting violence. I said both sides commit violence and its the Left who are rising in the violence right now with their rhetoric and actions. You don't like that I pointed this out.
This is still an fallacious reasoning. It is common practice fullstop that we look at the history leading up to understand the present. Whether thats a a culture or individual.
Hum when you give stereotypical and constant negative views I am not sure. Never a positive and always a negative.
Even this explanation shows the lack of understanding and stereotypical ideas about religious belief. People did not rush to change religion because they did not blame the religion. You can't seem to fathom that despite the abuses this did not make the belief itself wrong. It just meant some bad actors breached their own religion.
If then the majority of good then why would people abandon a good religion.
No one is saying there needs to be a religious forced society. That was tried years ago and failed. The point is whats come in its place is like a religious forced society while not having a religion.
No it does not have a unified belief in morality and how society and the world should be ordered. It is a battle or ideologies about morality and how the world is and should be ordered. That automatically brings religion and Christianity in. Listen to the rhetoric about Christian white nationalism being touted. If it wasn't about religion and Christianity the language sure sounds like it.
Yes this was the other side of the coin. The abuses of the church and power. What we see today is the extreme end result of that. Every action has an equal and opposite reaction. The church abused and it was rejected and pushed to the fringes. Irrelevant. Then the new religious ideologies were cultivated to fill the void.
Why did they put on their money, "in God we Trust" as a nation. There must have been a national consciousness about God in society and as a nation at one point to even consider this. Its more or less saying we trust God over money. God is the supreme being in Americans belief.
Do you think that a society can realistically allow different beliefs and ideologies to co exist with equal rights. Won't one groups rights breach anothers in applying those rights.
Being killed is the extreme end. But certainly we have seen a glut of cancellations, lives destroyed witch hunts on those who have said the wrong thing or held the wrong beliefs. Its there is the real life situations.
Just more evidence of how outdated and stereotypical you views are on this.
What's really weird, Steve, is that the reason is literally in the sentence prior to the one to which this was your reply as I stated in that sentence (paraphrased) "religiosity in the US was at a peak in the 1950s/early-60s". The reason for that was general post-war religiosity and the start of the Cold War. This is when the "X-Nats" pushed hard to plaster their dominance on the whole of the country by smearing "God slogans" all over the place.
Gee, one insurrection more than covers all those allegations. Policemen killed ane beaten. Federal police...extreme vandalism and destruction of the Capitol. And the treasonous traitors were pardoned.
