Would you be interested in a Christian Democratic Party?

[Philip_B]

They usually don't become suicidal. Depression and suicidal ideation comes from self rejection, not bullying. IOW, it is the child's rejection of their own sex, aka their own self, that is at the root of their deep unhappiness.

I am sorry, I know the case well enough to conclude that this is not correct. The suppression of how they felt for a number of years had lead to real trauma that was being addressed very successfully through the acknowledgement of the transgender identity. The self rejection was the issue when they were trying to be a boy because that is how their body came out. This was a disaster. Let me also say, parents of transgender children need a mountain of prayer and practical support. These are the people who go more than the extra mile.

We have to start with the person, not the problem.

There is more than ample evidence of suicide following bullying in all manner of circumstances, especially among the young. Bullying is a real issue, and if we as Christians can't find space to acknowledge the struggle of transgender people, then maybe we are being part of the problem.

PS: I didn't say it was easy.

 

[Inkfingers]

Actually, the majority that are brutish, ignorant, and unreasoning seldom if ever vote. Thank goodness.

Alas they are far more vocal here in England; whether nominally on the "Right" or the the "Left". They vote for as much money as they can get from the exchequer and the greatest amount of social license for gambling, drinking, drug use, and state support for their sexual permissiveness.

There was a time when both Tory and Labour had to put forward a generally sociall conservative manifesto (people forget that even our Leftist party used to condemn intoxication, promiscuity, gambling, and idleness, where now they would never dare restrict such).

 

[Open Heart]

The suppression of how they felt for a number of years had lead to real trauma

I'm not advocating suppressing what's going on. It's always best to face one's own feelings. Our actions, however, should not be based on feelings.

 

[Philip_B]

I'm not advocating suppressing what's going on. It's always best to face one's own feelings. Our actions, however, should not be based on feelings.

Yeah but you did, because you suggested it was not the bullying that led to the attempted suicide. If you think that Christians should act without a consideration of the feelings of others, I would be very surprised. But hey! I've been wrong before, and no doubt I will be be wrong again sometime soon. I am not suggesting that feelings are the only factor, but I am not ready to throw them out completely just yet either.

Ask yourself, if you were the parent and this was your child, what would you realistically want for your child. Trust me these parents take up the cross day after day after day after day. Quite honestly I do not think I would have been strong enough, and my heart does go out to them.

 

[chevyontheriver]

I wasn't necessarily referring to children.

And I am not sure what harm to the majority we're talking about here. Are we still just talking about bathroom use, or wider issues?

We were talking about an American implementation of a Christian Democratic party. Oh well. This is so much more relevant to everyone. Not.

 

[Speedwell]

Restrooms are connected to religious liberty, how?

I think you have your answer. Traditional gender norms are supremely important to Christians and they regard having to tolerate the presence of those who depart from them as a violation of religious freedom.

 

[Hank77]

I think you have your answer. Traditional gender norms are supremely important to Christians and they regard having to tolerate the presence of those who depart from them as a violation of religious freedom.

There isn't anywhere that God commands that a Christian must use any of these facilities. So it is by personal choice that one does.
Neither does the secular laws require that a Christian use them.
So as far as Freedom to live by ones own religious convictions that principle is not being violated.

Does the law make it inconvenient for me if I choose not to use them, yes. But my inconvenience isn't anymore important than any other citizen's.

My objections to these laws is based on the safety and right to privacy of many other citizens not my religious convictions.

 

[Hank77]

We were talking about an American implementation of a Christian Democratic party. Oh well. This is so much more relevant to everyone. Not.

I apologize and will refrain from any other discussion.

 

[Speedwell]

Don't do that. I think it is the subject of restrooms is germane because it is an example of a serious divide in Christianity which would cause difficulties for a Christian Democratic party intended to include all Christians.

 

[chevyontheriver]

Don't do that. I think it is the subject of restrooms is germane because it is an example of a serious divide in Christianity which would cause difficulties for a Christian Democratic party intended to include all Christians.

It's a political party, not a church. If it doesn't fit you, belong to some other political party or no party at all. The idea is not to create a political arm of the Church. It is for lay people informed by the faith to present to their community a coherent option with positions based on identifiable Christian principles. If some Christians don't share those principles they can decide not to opt in.

 

[Speedwell]

It's a political party, not a church. If it doesn't fit you, belong to some other political party or no party at all. The idea is not to create a political arm of the Church. It is for lay people informed by the faith to present to their community a coherent option with positions based on identifiable Christian principles. If some Christians don't share those principles they can decide not to opt in.

Then how can it be called a "Christian" party? There are serious issues which divide Christians--the death penalty, for example.

 

[chevyontheriver]

Then how can it be called a "Christian" party? There are serious issues which divide Christians--the death penalty, for example.

It's a Christian party because it derives it's positions from Catholic social teaching and Calvinists like Abraham Kuyper.

About the death penalty, they would tow the following line: The death penalty can only be used to protect society and not to punish the criminal. Since modern prisons are mostly adequate to contain convicts, actually putting a convict to death should be very rare, only used where it is otherwise impossible to prevent a convict from continuing to do harm to others. This is more or less exactly the Catholic position as found in the Catechism of the Catholic Church.

If your 'Christian' position is that you reject all capital punishment you wouldn't want to be in a Christian Democrat party. If your position is more 'off with their heads' you certainly wouldn't want to be in a Christian Democrat party. You can have any position you want, and pick your party that way, but Christian Democrats have taken their position from once common principles that Catholics and believing Protestants would agree on. It's not all that open to argumentation because you can always be a Democrat or Republican or Socialist or something.

A very short synopsis of Catholic social teaching is found here: http://www.usccb.org/beliefs-and-te.../seven-themes-of-catholic-social-teaching.cfm

Turning that into political positions still requires work, hammering out how to apply principles to reality. But the principles aren't up for grabs. It's not like this forum where people argue about the righteousness of abortion. The Christian Democrats have that figured out already. If you don't like it you can always belong to some other party.

 

[Aldebaran]

We were talking about an American implementation of a Christian Democratic party. Oh well. This is so much more relevant to everyone. Not.

Even if such a party was created, it would only be relevant if it got the funding the Reps and Dems have. Otherwise, it just ends up being another of what is referred to as a "3rd party", and there are already a lot of those: http://www.politics1.com/p2016.htm and what good are they doing? They give themselves nice-sounding names that seem to be what a great number of people would vote for, but that never seems to help. Constitution Party??? Who wouldn't vote for that? That's what the Republicans talk about all the time, so you'd think that would be the winning choice. But even that one is just one of many that are hardly even noticed.

 

[chevyontheriver]

Even if such a party was created, it would only be relevant if it got the funding the Reps and Dems have. Otherwise, it just ends up being another of what is referred to as a "3rd party", and there are already a lot of those: http://www.politics1.com/p2016.htm and what good are they doing? They give themselves nice-sounding names that seem to be what a great number of people would vote for, but that never seems to help. Constitution Party??? Who wouldn't vote for that? That's what the Republicans talk about all the time, so you'd think that would be the winning choice. But even that one is just one of many that are hardly even noticed.

The difference this year is that the Republican Party has been blown up by Donald Trump. If he wins, it is the Trump Party and many of us will simply not be a party to that. If he loses, they blew it so bad in picking him that recovery, although possible, is not a sure thing. That gaping hole will be filled by something. The Repblicans are looking like the Whigs 150 years ago. In this case a self-inflicted wound.

 

[Aldebaran]

The difference this year is that the Republican Party has been blown up by Donald Trump. If he wins, it is the Trump Party and many of us will simply not be a party to that. If he loses, they blew it so bad in picking him that recovery, although possible, is not a sure thing. That gaping hole will be filled by something. The Repblicans are looking like the Whigs 150 years ago. In this case a self-inflicted wound.

I understand what you're saying. I don't like any of it either. By the looks of things, liberal Democrats are going to be in control, liberal agendas are going to be passed at breakneck speeds, and 4 years from now will be too late to turn back. Look what happened with Obamacare. Everyone said that once it passed and was implemented, the Dems could then use the "They want to take away your health care!" argument to scare people into voting for the Dems. Now the high cost of "affordable health care" is about to skyrocket by another 25%. Now Hillary wants to give us "Free college tuition". Just another thing they can use to keep themselves in power, since Republicans will want to "take away your education and ability to get a job" in the 2020 election. After all, nobody should want to vote against free college and the free health care that taxpayers will be on the hook for. (Free health care paid for by the single-payer system they want, which of course is the government. The V.A. already has experience with this)

 

[Open Heart]

Yeah but you did, because you suggested it was not the bullying that led to the attempted suicide.

Saying that a person should come to terms with the fact that they are NOT a "boy born into a girls body" is the opposite of suppressing it. It means acknowledging the feelings of being a boy, of being out of sink with one's biological sex, of feeling trapped, wrong, etc. It means taking all of that out of the shadows and dealing with it in the open light with the help of a non-judgmental caring person.

 

[Speedwell]

If your 'Christian' position is that you reject all capital punishment you wouldn't want to be in a Christian Democrat party. If your position is more 'off with their heads' you certainly wouldn't want to be in a Christian Democrat party.

As practical matter, what would you do about the Off-with-their-heads Christian Right, who don't think either one of us belongs to a "real" Christian church?

 

[chevyontheriver]

As practical matter, what would you do about the Off-with-their-heads Christian Right, who don't think either one of us belongs to a "real" Christian church?

The same thing I do with them now. Politely disagree with them and do what I can to keep my state death penalty free. As to them wanting to be part of a Christian Democrat party, it's up to them if they want to claim that they affirm the party platform. Maybe they would on everything else. I know in my years a a Democrat I had trouble with platform issues. Then as a Republican I had less issues but still some. I don't expect anybody is 100% for any political party platform.

 

[Philip_B]

a non-judgmental caring person.

it takes a village!

 

[Kalevalatar]

Then how can it be called a "Christian" party? There are serious issues which divide Christians--the death penalty, for example.

Death penalty doesn't divide Christians. When it comes to supporting state-sanctioned murder, US Christians stand far apart from the rest of the world's Christians and shoulder-to-shoulder with the world's dirtiest non-Christian dictatorships: China, Iran, Iraq, Pakistan, Saudi-Arabia, Somalia, Sudan, Yemen...Tell me who you go with and I'll tell you who you are!

As to the word "Christian" in the name of the Christian Democratic Party:

The word "Christian" in the party name refers to a deliberate attempt to further basic Christian values and act on them in societal decision-making. The Christian faith is not a political ideology, but Christian democracy is. The Christian Democrats aim to justify their views in such a way that everyone, regardless of their world view, can understand their reasoning.

In politics our emphases are different from those of the churches. As a political party, the Christian Democrats do not take a stance on doctrines of the churches or other religious groups. The Christian Democrats pay attention to the societal-ethical statements made by Christian churches and congregations but remain independent in political decision-making.

Christian Democracy
Basic Principles:

1.1. Lasting value base of Christian democracy

The Christian Democrats want to ensure that our democratic society is built on Christian values. By Christian values we mean the universal and lasting values which arise from the Bible and the Christian heritage, and form the basis of a good, functioning community.

The value base of the Finnish Christian Democrats defined in this programme emphasises respect of human dignity, the importance of family and close communities, defending the weak, encouraging resourcefulness and individual and collective responsibility, not just for themselves but also for their neighbours and the rest of creation. Membership of Finland's Christian Democrats is open to everyone who agrees with these values and aims.

1.2. Principles of the Christian Democrats

Political decision-making is all about our values. The decision makers' values are seen in the choices they make which are then reflected both in laws passed and in economic decisions. Experience has shown that society doesn't function healthily if it rejects the universal ethical base of the Ten Commandments and the golden rule of loving one's neighbour.

1.3. Every human being is unique

The central value of the Christian Democrats is human dignity, based on God's work of creation. Everyone is a unique and indispensable individual. Human dignity is based on a person's being, not on their doing or abilities. It is priceless, regardless of gender, age, position, religion, origin of birth or other criteria.

Human life and dignity is to be respected right from conception to natural death.

1.4. Family - society's basic unit
1.5. Joint responsibility for our neighbours
1.6. Citizens' activity promotes well-being
1.7. The ground rules of a just economy
1.8. Responsibility for the environment is an obligation
1.9. International co-operation brings peace

To those interested, you can read the whole statement of CD principles here.