We Are In Trouble Now

[Lewis]

Christian Sharia Law in America
The question isn’t: Will conservatives push to enact laws based on the Bible? We are way beyond that. The real questions are: 1. How many more of these laws do they want to impose? And, 2. What will our nation look like if their crusade is successful to bring America’s laws into agreement with “God’s law”?


To some on the right, America is a “Christian nation”—like Saudi Arabia is a Muslim nation—meaning that our nation’s laws should be based on their religious text. These forces aren’t moved by Thomas Jefferson’s famous letter in which he spoke of the need to create, "a wall of separation between church and state.” Nor will they be swayed by citing Ronald Reagan’s words, "Church and state are, and must remain, separate.”
Read the rest of this story here
http://news.yahoo.com/christian-sharia-law-america-104500940--politics.html

 

[Gary]

The consequence of meddling in the affairs of the world.

The Gospel was never meant to be forced upon anyone. Instead of being sowers of the Word, certain members of the congregation took it upon themselves to exercise their 1st amendment rights and make demands of those who are foreigners regarding the Word we preach.

I think it's funny that some will get up in the devils face making demands and when the devil stands his ground making demands of his own, they scream persecution.

Romans 2
24 For “the name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles because of you,” as it is written.

.

 

[eng35]

I don't necessarily think that conservatives strive to enact laws based on the Bible anymore than liberals do. Sure, some of the laws that they strive for seem to line up with Biblical principles, but there are many Biblical laws, such as forbidding divorce, which aren't even a thought by conservatives. As a result, it seems that really the Bible is just used as a political tool when establishing laws rather than a true foundation for those laws. Just my 2 cents..

 

[evenifigoalone]

I am personally not in favor of enforcing religious (Christian or otherwise) laws on everyone. If we want to preserve freedom of religion, religion has to be separate from government and up to the individual's conscience. It's not the government's place to dictate people's lives or actions in every area, that gives them too much power since government is run by corrupt men and will continue to be run by corrupt men. The government's role is to protect the rights of it's citizens, and to punish those that infringe on the rights of others. As someone who has always believed that the government should have as little power as possible, it makes sense that this should apply socially as well as economically. Why in the world would I want to give the government the power to dictate things in my life as if they would determine my entire worldview for me?

At least that's my opinion. It's why I no longer identify as a neo-conservative. Right wing, yes.


Where my agreement with the article stops is when it starts to cite specific examples of "Christian Sharia law". First example, I believe any person of any religion should be allowed to refuse to participate in something based on what they consider religious or moral grounds. It's called the freedom to make your own choices, which in my political theory the government is not to interfere with.
Second example...well, I'm very pro-life and this is not based on my Christian views (so far as government is concerned), but on science, logic, and the libertarian political theory that the government's role is to protect the rights of it's citizens.

 

[Gary]

I am personally not in favor of enforcing religious (Christian or otherwise) laws on everyone. If we want to preserve freedom of religion, religion has to be separate from government and up to the individual's conscience. It's not the government's place to dictate people's lives or actions in every area, that gives them too much power since government is run by corrupt men and will continue to be run by corrupt men. The government's role is to protect the rights of it's citizens, and to punish those that infringe on the rights of others. As someone who has always believed that the government should have as little power as possible, it makes sense that this should apply socially as well as economically. Why in the world would I want to give the government the power to dictate things in my life as if they would determine my entire worldview for me?

At least that's my opinion. It's why I no longer identify as a neo-conservative. Right wing, yes.


Where my agreement with the article stops is when it starts to cite specific examples of "Christian Sharia law". First example, I believe any person of any religion should be allowed to refuse to participate in something based on what they consider religious or moral grounds. It's called the freedom to make your own choices, which in my political theory the government is not to interfere with.
Second example...well, I'm very pro-life and this is not based on my Christian views (so far as government is concerned), but on science, logic, and the libertarian political theory that the government's role is to protect the rights of it's citizens.

Wisdom and maturity. A good combination. Good post.

 

[Barbarian]

The consequence of meddling in the affairs of the world.

This is what Madison pointed out. Such mingling of Church and state always results in a corruption of the church.

As questdriven points out, there are certainly points at which the concerns of the state and religious values match up, such as theft, assault, and so on. In those cases, we are not enforcing "thou shalt not steal"; we are merely protecting the public as laws should do.

Edit: One of the valid functions of government is to protect the individual from those who would use economic or physical coercion against them.

 

[exmormon]

If they do bring the old testament law back, then are concubines ok?

 

[Obadiah]

If they do bring the old testament law back, then are concubines ok?

It would seem so. Polygamy as well.

 

[exmormon]

It would seem so. Polygamy as well.

Yes, well if God is ok with it who can argue.

 

[agua.]

It would seem so. Polygamy as well.

From the first marriage I think God initially wanted one man one woman = one flesh. There will be reasons Yahweh allowed polygamy later on and one possibility is that the female population has mostly been greater than the male and during the times of the Patriarchs it was very difficult for women to be self sufficient.

I don't see that problem today ( the self sufficiency ).

 

[Obadiah]

From the first marriage I think God initially wanted one man one woman = one flesh. There will be reasons Yahweh allowed polygamy later on and one possibility is that the female population has mostly been greater than the male and during the times of the Patriarchs it was very difficult for women to be self sufficient.

I don't see that problem today ( the self sufficiency ).

Yeah, I kind of meant that as a tongue in cheek humorous response to Exmormon's post. I thought he meant his humorously at the time too, but maybe he didn't.

 

[4billonyear]

I really don't want laws to based around religious texts. It possibly could take away some freedoms from Non-Christians like me. I am fully ok with a separation of church and state. We aren't "A Christian Nation" yes christians are a majority but the Freedom of Religon makes the point against the constitution. My city is actually a really non- Christian community. I just think it would be against the nation.

 

[Obadiah]

I really don't want laws to based around religious texts. It possibly could take away some freedoms from Non-Christians like me. I am fully ok with a separation of church and state. We aren't "A Christian Nation" yes christians are a majority but the Freedom of Religon makes the point against the constitution. My city is actually a really non- Christian community. I just think it would be against the nation.

But you do understand that a lot of the laws that we do have today are based on Christian scripture already, right? But you are right that we need to maintain separation of church and state in that we can't use the force of law to enforce any religion on anyone who doesn't want to be part of it. I have a childhood friend who is now a Messianic Jewish rabbi. He strongly believes that the answer to all of our problems would be to return to a strict following to the letter of ancient Jewish law. This includes for example the mandatory stoning to death of anyone caught having sex outside of marriage and mandatory beards on all men, etc, etc. It does somewhat resemble Muslim Sharia law. He doesn't believe this will ever happen in the U.S. but he says he would support it if it ever did. Pretty scary that there are modern day "Christians" who actually support these ideas.

I think most American cities are primarily non-Christian. Even some where a large percentage go to church on Sundays. I've always suspected a lot of them go only because "that's just what we do here" rather than because they are truly Christians.

 

[4billonyear]

But you do understand that a lot of the laws that we do have today are based on Christian scripture already, right? But you are right that we need to maintain separation of church and state in that we can't use the force of law to enforce any religion on anyone who doesn't want to be part of it. I have a childhood friend who is now a Messianic Jewish rabbi. He strongly believes that the answer to all of our problems would be to return to a strict following to the letter of ancient Jewish law. This includes for example the mandatory stoning to death of anyone caught having sex outside of marriage and mandatory beards on all men, etc, etc. It does somewhat resemble Muslim Sharia law. Pretty scary that there are modern day "Christians" who actually support these ideas.

I think most American cities are primarily non-Christian. Even some where a large percentage go to church on Sundays. I've always suspected a lot of them go only because "that's just what we do here" rather than because they are truly Christians.

I'm curious on what laws are. They may even be based on common sense only. Also my city is rater small, 20,000 to be exact. I live in a place that If you drive 10 miles in any direction you will be hard pressed not to find the word jesus, god, or church. I don't know why I wrote it in the first place. I just wanted to make a point that some places may not enjoy having laws that are literally pulled out of a the bible.

 

[evenifigoalone]

My opinion--the rule that ends up making the most sense, when it comes to living where people are allowed to pursue their own path and life, including choosing religion or lack thereof, is that anybody is free to live their own lives and do as they wish with their life so long as they don't infringe on the rights of others. In a world where different trains of thought and philosophies clash, that's the best compromise. But then, hey, I'm very much for the freedom of the individual. Personal freedom, individual responsibility.

I'm not in support of a theocracy until Jesus Himself comes and sets one up. I trust Him to do it right. I don't trust the government, or the people, to do it.

 

[Obadiah]

I'm curious on what laws are. They may even be based on common sense only. Also my city is rater small, 20,000 to be exact. I live in a place that If you drive 10 miles in any direction you will be hard pressed not to find the word jesus, god, or church. I don't know why I wrote it in the first place. I just wanted to make a point that some places may not enjoy having laws that are literally pulled out of a the bible.

What you say is common sense many times does come from Christian scripture since much of Christian scripture is what we consider common sense today. For example, if you read the last section of the 10 commandments where God tells us how to relate to each other you find things such as not stealing, murdering, telling lies, etc. Other laws we have concerning things such as marriage, drug abuse, and many other things can be traced back to Christian principles from other sections of scripture as well. While we consider many things like this to be common sense because we've lived with them for so many generations in what we call "the civilized world", these kind of things are not always considered common sense in some non-Christian societies. Many of our laws that just seem to be common sense or normal secular laws are actually rooted in Christian principles. That doesn't mean our forefathers ever meant to create a theocracy. I'm just saying that we shouldn't discount the influence of scripture on the founders of our nation just because they believed religion shouldn't be forced on anyone.

 

[Barbarian]

I'm not in support of a theocracy until Jesus Himself comes and sets one up. I trust Him to do it right. I don't trust the government, or the people, to do it.

Exactly so. As Madison observed, where state and church have been joined, it has led to horrors and the decline of faith.

 

[Mike S]

My opinion--the rule that ends up making the most sense, when it comes to living where people are allowed to pursue their own path and life, including choosing religion or lack thereof, is that anybody is free to live their own lives and do as they wish with their life so long as they don't infringe on the rights of others. In a world where different trains of thought and philosophies clash, that's the best compromise. But then, hey, I'm very much for the freedom of the individual. Personal freedom, individual responsibility.

I'm not in support of a theocracy until Jesus Himself comes and sets one up. I trust Him to do it right. I don't trust the government, or the people, to do it.

Wow, I'm impressed! Very libertarian.

 

[Deborah13]

My opinion--the rule that ends up making the most sense, when it comes to living where people are allowed to pursue their own path and life, including choosing religion or lack thereof, is that anybody is free to live their own lives and do as they wish with their life so long as they don't infringe on the rights of others. In a world where different trains of thought and philosophies clash, that's the best compromise. But then, hey, I'm very much for the freedom of the individual. Personal freedom, individual responsibility.

I'm not in support of a theocracy until Jesus Himself comes and sets one up. I trust Him to do it right. I don't trust the government, or the people, to do it.

Good post and I agree.

We can see in the Bible how even the Jewish leaders changed laws to read they way they wanted them to read, rather than how God intended. Such as 'Korbin'. They were always after Jesus trying to say He was breaking the Law when really it was them twisting the Law.

 

[jasonc]

good luck with the people making the right choices. I kid you not when is say this but I have seen it.

its bad if the government binds a man up, and its ok if the business does and you pay them do that. I know a man who has allowed a smart meter to control his usage of hot water and how long he gets it. its less then 15 minutes a day. that's it. it also does the same with other appliances. I thought that was about saving you money. nope while it does save you money they deny you the right to consume power as they must then provide power for those that don't do that.okayyy. so they make money off of usage.. hmm. I don't get that.