Re: OT - "lie" vs "error"

Chuck Stevens wrote: 
"LX-i" <lxi0007@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:68711$42608114$45491f85$23458@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Chuck Stevens wrote:

"LX-i" <lxi0007@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:58999$425f14c0$45491f85$9259@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx



I still, for the life of me, don't understand how someone saying what
they feel "ought to" be amounts to "cramming their religion down our
throats".  I guess to those folks, open debate only extends so far.


If someone works to get what "ought to" be, on the basis of their 

particular

theology/religion (in contrast to other patterns of theology) passed as 

the

Law of the Land, they work to establish a particular theology/religion 

as

state-approved, and to denigrate other theologies/religions as inferior 

in

the eyes of the state. I'm *really* uncomfortable with that. 

Name me a single religion (to the exclusion of *all* others) that is
opposed to abortion and/or gay marriage.  Can't do it?



Why the challenge?  I'm not sure why the *count* of religions that hold a
particular precept is important to you.  And I can't name a single religion
that is opposed to having their members simply walk away from the teachings
and the precepts of their organization, either; what I don't see is any of
those religions (*yet*) enlisting the aid of the Federal Government in
requiring its members to toe the line as a matter of law!  What's your
point?


My point is that it's not just "Christians" that feel the way I do.

I know lots of religious groups who think abortion is a Bad Thing and would
counsel their members most strenuously against it, but would not dream of
considering the idea of convincing the Federal Government to make sure
nobody had the right to act on their disagreement.

Well, these religions are being hypocritical on the issue, then. If they feel it's wrong, why is it wrong? (One would assume, "because it takes innocent life".) So, they're not interested in the government preserving innocent life? What's the point of having the belief if you're not going to act on it?

I disagree; your premise appears to be that if one denomination decreed
Sunday as the Lord's Day on which no righteous Christian would either work
or cause another person (Christian or otherwise) to work, and succeeded in
getting laws passed preventing anyone from doing any work on Sunday, it
would represent the establishment of a "state religion", but if *three* or
*five* denominations agreed on this point of doctrine and got laws passed,
that would *not* be in violation of the strictures against a "state
religion".

By your reasoning, it would *not* be appropriate for the state to require
that all males be circumcized on the sole basis that Judaism requires it,
because that's only *one* religion.  But because *Islam* has a similar
requirement, such a law would be entirely appropriate, because that's not
*just one* religion that holds that circumcision is a Good Thing.

I'm not saying "take every precept where two or more religions agree and make a law", and you *know* that's not what I said. You just don't seem to get that it's not just that abortion is a "bad thing". (Or maybe you do...)

And, if "someone works" on their side, then the other side
better be working too.


Why should *anyone* have to *work* to ensure that your Karma doesn't  run
over their Dogma when it's chained up in their own back yard?  Or, for that
matter, that their Catma doesn't get a chunk taken out of them by your Dogma
(no matter what fence the Catma is sitting on)?

It's give and take - that how things get done. You want "this", and write a letter to your Congressman and Senators. I want "that", and I do the same. Somehow I have no right to do that because what I wrote had some basis in my religious beliefs?

Republicans/pro-lifers/etc are the only ones lobbying for change. 

Republicans/pro-lifers/etc. weren't the only ones lobbying for change during
the civil rights era, either.  What's your point?   Might makes right?
Majority rules and anyone who disagrees deserves to be treated like the
dirty filthy pigs that they so obviously are?

Where did I say to treat someone like a dirty, filthy pig? One side lobbies for *their* views, the other side lobbies for *theirs*. My point is that the lobbying comes from both sides.

In the case of almost
every bad judgment call in the last three decades, look at the judicial
branch that thinks it's a legislature...

The judicial branch that decided that Separate but Equal wasn't good enough? 

They were superseded, were they not?

Judicial review has been the Law of the Land since Marbury v. Madison.
You've got a whole lot of undoing to do if you're going to complain about
the judiciary overriding the legislature.

Judges these days are making laws out of whole cloth. Anyone who feels that a law document is "living" has no business claiming their judgments are in the spirit of such a document. That's the appeal of laws - they're static until changed by the legislature, or overturned on Constitutional grounds.

See - "they" fight/push/etc for what "they"
believe, other people will fight/push/etc back.


I see.  God forbid that someone should seek to have the same rights and
protections that you claim you deserve!

You're right - I don't want those reprobates to have *any* rights, until they learn where that penis is *supposed* to go...

(You wouldn't have any problem believing I was serious when I wrote the above, would you? You just don't understand my position, and from your responses to my questions, you don't seem to want to. For the record, the above was a joke.)

On either side, an offensive by the other side is going to draw fire. 

What's the comparison you're trying to draw here?  That anyone who thinks
there are circumstances under which abortion should be a matter between an
individual, her conscience, and her spiritual advisors deserves to be
treated like the Taliban?

Yep - that's what I said. OF COURSE NOT!!!!!!!! It was analogy of stirring up a hornet's nest.

[snipped remainder]


--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~   /   \  /         ~        Live from Montgomery, AL!       ~
~  /     \/       o  ~                                        ~
~ /      /\   -   |  ~          daniel@thebelowdomain         ~
~ _____ /  \      |  ~      http://www.djs-consulting.com     ~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~ GEEKCODE 3.12 GCS/IT d s-:+ a C++ L++ E--- W++ N++ o? K- w$ ~
~ !O M-- V PS+ PE++ Y? !PGP t+ 5? X+ R* tv b+ DI++ D+ G- e    ~
~ h---- r+++ z++++                                            ~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Ms Palins bookery
    ... Constitutionally enumerated power for the Federal government to fund ... Law Congress chooses to pass. ... the "courts have found in the matter". ... in this thread argued *for* more religion in politics. ...
    (rec.woodworking)
  • Re: same sex regulations - discrimination against Christians?
    ... sell to me because they disagree with my religion or lifestyle, ... It can be very unpleasant, ... unpleasant is not normally a matter where the law should intervene. ...
    (uk.religion.christian)
  • Re: Bowing Out of Debate
    ... > enjoy it is that I was raised a very strict Christian, ... The requirement for faith is not just appropriate for Religion. ... Law, personal religious belief should be no defence for not observing it. ... But I understand your point of view and the reasons why you hold it. ...
    (comp.lang.cobol)
  • The Fallacy of Shared Values
    ... application of sharia law in Britain in the interest of social ... Western or Judeo-Christian societies reveals very little evidence of ... religion holds in matters of state. ... Muslims are viewed as superior to and more privileged than ...
    (alt.politics.bush)
  • Re: Minneapolis Bridge Collapse Blocks from Bobs Old Haunts
    ... the SCLC had a right to get their beliefs incorporated into law. ... Christian groups to get their beliefs incorporated into law. ... Religion can be used in a variety of ways. ... couples to marry each other and the Rabbi has performed several marriage ...
    (rec.music.dylan)