The decline of morality in America.

[rjs330]

You were talking about people that live by begging, though. You implied that anybody that would live off the generosity of others was a person of low moral character.

You attributed that to me. I just pointed out the facts. Those are facts that can't be argued with. 45% of homeless people are mentally ill. 60% are addicted to drugs and/or alcohol. It's a serious problem for people. And we should get them off the street. It's not good for them and it's not good for us to have this be an issue. They leave dirty needles, they deficate in the streets they commit other crimes. But much of that is due to the inability to take care of themselves, due to their illness or addictions. I think we should put them in facilities.

 

[eik]

Declining morality is due to a number of conflating causes acting together, particularly incessant left-wing media propaganda from TV & Hollywood, and now from mega-corporations too, which is unrelenting and much of it anti Christian, but also from the bad examples set by politicians and church leaders of many denominations. Churches have lowered their standards to preserve incomes and dwindling congregations, and to what the politicians demand be treated as acceptable, such that many churches are barely Christian at all and hardly recognizable from what they were only a few decades ago.
I think the tipping point was reached during the rock and roll era of the 1960s and a legacy of bad presidents. The freedom to sin has been prized above religion for too long. As the NT teaches, a freedom to sin is not real freedom but bondage when sin results. Society is being held captive by sin, by those who worship the creature more than the creator, "who change the truth of God into a lie" Rom 1:25.
What Christians need to do is to evangelize more and fight the good fight whilst keeping the faith.
No-one should have any problem with Christ, or with Christianity, as the OP seems to have. The USA is no theocracy, and it never was.

 

[VCR-2000]

That's right the USA technically was never a theocracy, but because our first immigrants in the colonial ages came from Europe to escape religious oppression to the modern Christian Right movement, Christian culture is the legacy of the USA and is still compared today to the rest of the developed countries. When the USA is also still far more "Christian" in culture relative to the other secular countries of Europe and Australia, et al. that still says a lot of it.

 

[Kaon]

That's right the USA technically was never a theocracy, but because our first immigrants in the colonial ages came from Europe to escape religious oppression to the modern Christian Right movement, Christian culture is the legacy of the USA and is still compared today to the rest of the developed countries. When the USA is also still far more "Christian" in culture relative to the other secular countries of Europe and Australia, et al. that still says a lot of it.

They came to escape religious persecution...

...by using slaves.

Early Americans were slave owners and believed that they could take everything as West as possible no matter who lived there first.

America is deluding itself by suggesting morals declined - as if they were high to begin with. We just distract from one immorality by highlighting an alleged principle of ethics exhibited. That is like saying, "I am not a bad person because I cheat on my wife... I feed the hungry!"

 

[VCR-2000]

They came to escape religious persecution...

...by using slaves.

Early Americans were slave owners and believed that they could take everything as West as possible no matter who lived there first.

America is deluding itself by suggesting morals declined - as if they were high to begin with. We just distract from one immorality by highlighting an alleged principle of ethics exhibited. That is like saying, "I am not a bad person because I cheat on my wife... I feed the hungry!"

Interesting. Even the Christians on here seem to knock on those who have a different argument.

 

[Kaon]

Interesting. Even the Christians on here seem to knock on those who have a different argument.

I'm not sure you can call someone Christian that does the things Americans/Columbians did to their slaves and the natives.

The delusion is that anyone who says they are Christian is a Christian; the Most High makes it clear to discern/judge the fruits of spirits that call themselves aligned with Him.

 

[JackRT]

They came to escape religious persecution...

...by using slaves.

Early Americans were slave owners and believed that they could take everything as West as possible no matter who lived there first.

A great deal of the history of the past 500 years involves what has come to be called the "Doctrine of Discovery". This originated as a series of papal bulls issued in the 15th and 16th centuries. Essentially this doctrine stated that if a man should discover a land in which none of the inhabitants were Christian then he had the right to claim this land for his (Christian) sovereign. If these people refused to be converted and resisted their new condition, it was justifiable to exterminate and/or enslave them. In a USA Supreme Court decision in 1823 a form of this doctrine was taken into US law. Sadly this decision formed the legal basis for the ethnic cleansing and attempted genocide of the aboriginal peoples and nations of the USA. We speak grandly of "the rule of law" but we broke almost every treaty we ever signed with these people. Is it any wonder that we are viewed with great suspicion?


https://newsmaven.io/indiancountrytoday/archive/deconstructing-the-doctrine-of-discovery-vAHfau_vOkCfps7rRGPhAw/

https://udayton.edu/directory/law/documents/watson/watson_2011_seattle_american_doctrine_of_discovery_on_native_land_rights.pdf

Note: the second document is lengthy.

"Again, were we to inquire by what law or authority you set up a claim [to our land], I answer, none! Your laws extend not into our country, nor ever did. You talk of the law of nature and the law of nations, and they are both against you."

—Corn Tassel (Cherokee, 1785)

 

[VCR-2000]

I'm not sure you can call someone Christian that does the things Americans/Columbians did to their slaves and the natives.

The delusion is that anyone who says they are Christian is a Christian; the Most High makes it clear to discern/judge the fruits of spirits that call themselves aligned with Him.

Well there you go then, only God can discern your fruits of your true spirit.

 

[Kaon]

Well there you go then, only God can discern your fruits of your true spirit.

The Most High knows where we will ultimately end up, but He has charged every one of us to test every spirit that we encounter - to determine, based on its fruits, whether or not it is substantive.

If Christians aren't looking at persons, and judging them by their fruits, then they are being deluded - as any deceiving spirit can come to them because they do not watch.

Likewise, only the people who do not watch do not know the day or hour of the coming of the Son of Man. Religion has lead many people astray, but ultimately every person has a responsibility to themselves, and to the Most High. This includes discernment.

In fact, discernment is considered a spiritual gift. And, people who treat others like Columbians treated American slaves and natives exhibit rotten fruit - therefore their declaration of being a Christian is a deception, or foolishness. I know nearly everyone thinks you can murder someone and still be a Christian as long as you claim it - which is fine to believe if you want to be deceived about the Most High.

Neither the Most High, nor the Son of the Most High would enslave humans, call them animals, tell them it was their fate to be slaves, genocide an entire people because of lust for land, and continue to subjugate the same people while claiming they have had no subjugation. Anyone who does these things and calls themselves a Christian is a liar, just like anyone who loves to do evil but claims righteousness is a liar. It is very simple spiritually; religion and dogma have trapped the minds into the diminutive thinking machines they have become for humanity.

 

[thecolorsblend]

They came to escape religious persecution...

...by using slaves.

What's really funny is we're not allowed to say who the true ringleaders of the slave trade actually were because that's some pretty inconvenient history.

Google the owners of those slave ships. It's an eye-opener.

 

[Kaon]

What's really funny is we're not allowed to say who the true ringleaders of the slave trade actually were because that's some pretty inconvenient history.

Google the owners of those slave ships. It's an eye-opener.

Of course, the non those people still participated in the activity, and had no problem executing the nastier practices of owning humans (rape, force breeding, buck breaking, etc.)

But, yes I also know who was was responsible for organizing and exchanging the money and contracts for the "services". The interesting part is they also likely know who the real "them" are as well - in blinding irony they are doing their own - which is why they did it. The people who did it are certainly not "themselves"; they were "disqualified" long ago.

 

[JackRT]

What's really funny is we're not allowed to say who the true ringleaders of the slave trade actually were because that's some pretty inconvenient history.

Google the owners of those slave ships. It's an eye-opener.

Jewish participation in the slave trade and in slave ownership was miniscule. That is to say, it was in proportion to their numbers.

https://www.tabletmag.com/jewish-arts-and-culture/books/137476/slave-trade-black-muslim

 

[thecolorsblend]

Jewish participation in the slave trade and in slave ownership was miniscule. That is to say, it was in proportion to their numbers.

https://www.tabletmag.com/jewish-arts-and-culture/books/137476/slave-trade-black-muslim

Um, okay?

 

[ananda]

Most of them are mentally ill, which isn't anyone's fault. Another great number if them are heavily addicted to alcohol and/or drugs, which is their fault. Very few are that way because if the demands of the system, whatever that means.

What we need to do to be humane us get them off the streets, into facilities that can care for them. Give them, food, shelter, medical attention etc. Get them on medications that can help them and get them clean if their addictions. For their sake.

In Buddhism, (with the exception of the fully enlightened) we are all mentally ill - to various degrees. Why do people get addicted to alcohol and/or drugs? To cope with the stress of life is almost always the answer, IMO. They cannot handle the excessive demands of the system, and I don't blame them. Is everyone suited to code?

 

[Kaon]

In Buddhism, (with the exception of the fully enlightened) we are all mentally ill - to various degrees. Why do people get addicted to alcohol and/or drugs? To cope with the stress of life is almost always the answer, IMO. They cannot handle the excessive demands of the system, and I don't blame them. Is everyone suited to code?

It's not just Buddhism.

Christians call the mental illness "sin," or iniquity. People fall short because of, as you said, the cares of this world. This is especially the case for people who have been blacklisted, terminated, financially abased, veterans who cannot "fit" into "normal" society, etc.

It says more about us as humans that we have a perpetual class of homeless that we accept. I know a lot of people do a lot for the needy, homeless, etc. But, it may be better to do this out of a genuine duty as opposed to so called charity. In other words, it should be our duty to prevent such situations from happening. Easier said than done, but I also don't like giving up and resorting to handing out a few dollars, or a hot plate. We (as humans) can do better.

 

[Dave Ellis]

I don't know, if you ask me the country as a whole is slowly become more moral. That is happening partially because the church is starting to lose its power.

The morality of the 1950s which people tend to look back upon with rose coloured glasses was anything but. It was a clean looking time, but racism, misogyny, bigotry, and oppression of virtually all minority groups was still in practice and widely accepted. Jim Crow was still in full swing, husbands could beat their wives and it wasn't super frowned upon, and any non-white or non-christian person was open season for oppression. Heck, even a lot of christian denominations didn't like each other.

It was a morally reprehensible time by modern standards. I think we've come a long way since then.

 

[VCR-2000]

In Buddhism, (with the exception of the fully enlightened) we are all mentally ill - to various degrees. Why do people get addicted to alcohol and/or drugs? To cope with the stress of life is almost always the answer, IMO. They cannot handle the excessive demands of the system, and I don't blame them. Is everyone suited to code?

I am self-studying how to code right now. I say I really like it, at least.

 

[ananda]

I am self-studying how to code right now. I say I really like it, at least.

Good luck! I'm trying to get out of the business.

 

[VCR-2000]

No, actually I think society is less collectively moral than it was several decades back. Even as recent as 15 or 20 years back was more tame compared to today, in average everyday experience.

 

[Speedwell]

No, actually I think society is less collectively moral than it was several decades back. Even as recent as 15 or 20 years back was more tame compared to today, in average everyday experience.

Who's average? There are "average" women and members of minority groups who might take issue with that.