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.
Never have cared for "anglo-protestant" cultural domination. They act like the US is some sort of british colony.
Not by "religion."
Or you can just define them out of existence.
Good.
Because I don't consider them a threat to Constitutional government.
Not at the groups, only at their public policy agenda.
Not a chance. You'll just have to define them as non religious because they are progressives.
They mave have started out as moral precepts but the state has no power to make a moral judgement, only a legal one.
They were all protesting the actions of the state, not its ideology.
You think all of that is anti-Christian?
Injustice is what they are protesting. The immorality of it is for the clergy who also oppose it to consider..
And somebody later added, "Be careful they don't hate Him because of Christians."
Which Trump is trying to turn the US into, at the behest of his Christian Nationalist base.
AOC is a devout Christian and Mandami is a Shia Muslim with a version of the Ten Commandments tougher and more specific than yours.
I think this is unreal. We know theres a continual power struggle with groups maneuvering to influence and socially engineer society to how they want it ordered. Even the church does this lol.
So what were the social norms based on during most of the 20th century. What was the basis for say the anti abortion laws or the marriage laws before they changed around the 1960's and 70's. Coincidently the same time soon after the cultural revolutions that formed the catalyst for those changes that were held by society for generations.
My understanding of humans is far superior to yours. You may know physics and I give you that credit. But I know the behavioural sciences.
Yes it does. You just don't understand it. If laws and policies are underpinned by morals. They they are also underpinned by beliefs because morality is a belief. Comes from a philosophical belief.
But each timer it does change it is declaring one moral and belief position about abortion is it not. If the State is anti abortion then its denying the beliefs and morals of pro abortionist and choice. If it makes abortions legal then its sideing against the belief that abortion is wrong. It cannot take a neutral position.
Where else are you going to mix them lol. You have to so you can imagine the scenario. Its like saying Catholics and Communist is a strange mix.
Yes of course, thats obvious in that the government changes between the Left and the Right of politics. I am saying its become more polarised so that when there is a change from Left to Right its far more dramatic.
Yes its been brewing for decades now since the cultural revolutions. The cultural revolutions were a reaction against the establishment which was basically the church. The Christian and other religious nationalist groups was a reaction to the counter culture revolutions.
So now your tripling down on denying the current situations for Christians. If this was any other group people would at least acknowledge that when they say that they are been affected that they are at least acknowledge. Your not even doing that. Just falling back on typical stereotypes and assumptions that Christians are always complaining.
Give me a break, you sound like a politician.
Influence and control are different things, Steve. You wanted to know who "controls" society. I gave the only answer that makes sense: No one. This is because no one person or group "controls" society, certainly not the government. Societies evolve under a wide variety of influences. When authoritarians *try* to control societies, their efforts break eventually. Now lets look at some other ways you were wrong about this:
There are popular movements, fads, celebrities, influencers (old style and new), propagandists, advertisers, etc. They all "influence" society, but they do not "control" it.
What are you talking about?!?
They kind of change a lot, and not just the parts that are freaking you out in the last half of the century, so the only short answer I can give is: various things that changed.
Assumptions that abortions were mostly had by sexually promiscuous unmarried young women. (That and "baby killing" were the two things they tried to sell us on in church in the 80s.)
Social norms and laws are very much not the same thing.
So many possible things to respond here. Can't make up my mind...
I'm not concerned about "the west" (unless you're talking hemispheres, then, like Jim Morrison wrote "the west is the best, baby".) only about discussing the US. I don't need to waste my time building meta-narratives that span so many different societies. You realize there are more actual atheists in the US than Muslims and Hindus combined, right, right?
In what way do you know "behavioral sciences"? I've never seen evidence of this and behavioral science isn't relevant to our topic as we are discussing history and political science which don't fall in that grouping.
I don't how you can say I don't understand when you are clearly wrong. Unlike you, I live in the land regulated by the US government, and I can say unequivocally that the US government does not regulate my beliefs. I get to decide those for myself.
They aren't.
Morality is subjective, but the government is not in control of it or controlled by it.
But they don't. The State is not an entities with moral opinions because it is not alive. It's just a big bag of laws, people trying to enforce the laws, and other people making the laws.
This is falsified by the two principle abortion decisions in the US Supreme Court in 1973 and 2023. The 1973 decision put the right of decision on the pregnant woman based on her personal privacy during the period when the fetus was not viable to live outside the uterus -- overriding the power of the individual states to have restrictions beyond those. The 2023 decision was that the states had the power to regulate abortion since women were free to exercise their privacy rights to abortion by going to other states. This is a legal decision based on personal rights versus devolution of powers to states (federalism) and as it has in both eras flipped from and then back to "states rights" in a manner roughly consistent with other rulings of the period.
I believe you are alluding to the clinic protection law. The right to protest abortion clinics is not taken away, but the protestors are prohibited from interfering with the rights of the patients to enter. Are you not aware of the "flying fist" analogy for the competition of individual rights. The short version goes like this: "my right to thrust my fist ends at your face".
Two? We've got more than two and all have the same legal status.
It sure can. (I assume you meant "without".)
This is the problem with your binary thinking. You speak as if there only two sides when there are many just as there are many gods worshiped by the people. This is why the best policy is religious neutrality in government. We try to keep it that way, though there are some...
On the flip side, the assumption that someone must be in control (despite the lack of viable visible suspects) leads straight into conspiracy theory territory.
