We Are In Trouble Now

[evenifigoalone]

True enough that people won't automatically make the right choices. We do need a government for some things. I'm no anarchist. I am a minarchist, though. Government is run by people just as corrupt and human as anyone else; plus power tends to corrupt. Neither extreme, no government as opposed to big government, is wise.

 

[jasonc]

True enough that people won't automatically make the right choices. We do need a government for some things. I'm no anarchist. I am a minarchist, though. Government is run by people just as corrupt and human as anyone else; plus power tends to corrupt. Neither extreme, no government as opposed to big government, is wise.

I understand that but it works in cycles. my problem with that concept of minimal intervention. is planning for roads. Im big into the history of my town. I was just at the old local dairy farm and man it brought back memories. people had a vision for this county. they put into the laws. the very railroad that was brought her was down by one man who assisted Henry Flagler. yet if we just the market do that. all that was envisioned by the private men for a town would be lost.

 

[jasonc]

I understand that but it works in cycles. my problem with that concept of minimal intervention. is planning for roads. Im big into the history of my town. I was just at the old local dairy farm and man it brought back memories. people had a vision for this county. they put into the laws. the very railroad that was brought her was down by one man who assisted Henry Flagler. yet if we just the market do that. all that was envisioned by the private men for a town would be lost.

like this. I go there daily. its a morning routine.

http://insidevero.com/2014/03/21/pl...hop-on-original-town-neighborhood/#more-19879

old homes , some with fireplaces and others modern.

 

[Deborah13]

True enough that people won't automatically make the right choices. We do need a government for some things. I'm no anarchist. I am a minarchist, though. Government is run by people just as corrupt and human as anyone else; plus power tends to corrupt. Neither extreme, no government as opposed to big government, is wise.

I think the authors of our constitution got the Bill of Rights, right.

 

[evenifigoalone]

We haven't actually had a truly free market in a very, very long time (if at all?), so not sure if we've ever seen what it can really do. But I don't know enough to really argue economics. I get the basics, that's about it.

 

[Claudya]

Obviously I'm against law being based on religious texts. There are five major arguments against theocracy:
1. Separation of church and state is quite a good idea. History has shown how religion is likely to be used by the powerfull to maintain their status and discourage/ supress opposition and democratic movements.
2. If we establish law based on the Old Testament, what reading or interpretation of the OT? There are so many different denominations and opinions within Christianity that sometimes churches of 200 people split up due to disagreement - so how would you hope to run a nation of 300 million?
3. Some things just didn't exist during OT times, but exist now, and need legislation. E.g. everything concerning the internet and other modern mass media. Or street traffic laws. How do you want to derive those laws from the OT??
4. Even though I'm a christian I prefer to live in a modern secular nation, because that way noone but God Himself may tell me when/ how/ where/ with who to worship. Religion being a private matter is giving me a lot of freedom for my spiritual life. If the government would propose religious laws, our own spirituality would be restricted.
5. We must accept that there's a number of people that have a different faith than ours, or no faith at all. So whatever we base our law on should be a common denominator of all or at least most people. Thus it's better to base legislation on profane things like necessity or common sense, or generally agreed upon things like human rights, than on a holy scripture half the people don't believe in.

Anyway, since many of you defend the seperation of church and state I'd love to know what you thihnk the Bible says about that separation. Especially the old testament. Because in the OT it always seems the political fate of Israel is closely tied to their faith in God and their obedience to God's law. So I wonder whether separation of church and state are compatible with christianity at all?

 

[jasonc]

We haven't actually had a truly free market in a very, very long time (if at all?), so not sure if we've ever seen what it can really do. But I don't know enough to really argue economics. I get the basics, that's about it.

we did. in the founding of the constution till say about the 30's but remember some laws and regulation are needed. some libertarians are actually against zoning laws and that level of common sense planning. it can be abused but well the constution has the federal government to build roads. us1 if you know what that is on the east coast of the nation is the oldest landmark is use when I look at black white topos of my county. it hasn't changed its shape nor width until these last decades.federally built. just like us 66 aka route 66.

 

[evenifigoalone]

we did. in the founding of the constution till say about the 30's but remember some laws and regulation are needed. some libertarians are actually against zoning laws and that level of common sense planning. it can be abused but well the constution has the federal government to build roads. us1 if you know what that is on the east coast of the nation is the oldest landmark is use when I look at black white topos of my county. it hasn't changed its shape nor width until these last decades.federally built. just like us 66 aka route 66.

There are issues even libertarians disagree on among themselves. Many of which I'm undecided on. Though overall I think I side with the libertarians more than other political parties. I am for the free market, I have to say, though Im not yet well equipped to debate on it.

 

[agua.]

Anyway, since many of you defend the seperation of church and state I'd love to know what you thihnk the Bible says about that separation. Especially the old testament. Because in the OT it always seems the political fate of Israel is closely tied to their faith in God and their obedience to God's law. So I wonder whether separation of church and state are compatible with christianity at all?

Claudia I suppose we need to look at the difference between Israel and Christianity. Israel was a Nation in which the citizens mostly lived inside distinct boundaries while Christianity has no such Earthly "home soil". We have been called out of the world and the ruling bodies ie. governments are part of the world. We can see the instruction Paul gives concerning the ruling body of his time in Titus and 1 Timothy.

Tit 3:1-4 Put them in mind to be subject to principalities and powers, to obey magistrates, to be ready to every good work, (2) To speak evil of no man, to be no brawlers, but gentle, shewing all meekness unto all men. (3) For we ourselves also were sometimes foolish, disobedient, deceived, serving divers lusts and pleasures, living in malice and envy, hateful, and hating one another. (4) But after that the kindness and love of God our Saviour toward man appeared,

1Ti 2:1-4 I exhort therefore, that, first of all, supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks, be made for all men; (2) For kings, and for all that are in authority; that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty. (3) For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour; (4) Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth.

So it seems it's our responsibility to live within our "non- Christian" governments rule and pray that they will come to the knowledge of the truth.

 

[evenifigoalone]

Obviously I'm against law being based on religious texts. There are five major arguments against theocracy:
1. Separation of church and state is quite a good idea. History has shown how religion is likely to be used by the powerfull to maintain their status and discourage/ supress opposition and democratic movements.
2. If we establish law based on the Old Testament, what reading or interpretation of the OT? There are so many different denominations and opinions within Christianity that sometimes churches of 200 people split up due to disagreement - so how would you hope to run a nation of 300 million?
3. Some things just didn't exist during OT times, but exist now, and need legislation. E.g. everything concerning the internet and other modern mass media. Or street traffic laws. How do you want to derive those laws from the OT??
4. Even though I'm a christian I prefer to live in a modern secular nation, because that way noone but God Himself may tell me when/ how/ where/ with who to worship. Religion being a private matter is giving me a lot of freedom for my spiritual life. If the government would propose religious laws, our own spirituality would be restricted.
5. We must accept that there's a number of people that have a different faith than ours, or no faith at all. So whatever we base our law on should be a common denominator of all or at least most people. Thus it's better to base legislation on profane things like necessity or common sense, or generally agreed upon things like human rights, than on a holy scripture half the people don't believe in.

Anyway, since many of you defend the seperation of church and state I'd love to know what you thihnk the Bible says about that separation. Especially the old testament. Because in the OT it always seems the political fate of Israel is closely tied to their faith in God and their obedience to God's law. So I wonder whether separation of church and state are compatible with christianity at all?

I would point out that God was leading them pretty much directly, even if he did all low them to set up a king later.
That's hardly the case today.

 

[jasonc]

There are issues even libertarians disagree on among themselves. Many of which I'm undecided on. Though overall I think I side with the libertarians more than other political parties. I am for the free market, I have to say, though Im not yet well equipped to debate on it.

I have to be. since well my lifelyhood depends on it. Im also not found of the way we in America level homes and lands that are historical for the new way of zero lot homes. I would have to use google earth and topos of the 80's. but you don't know my county.

 

[evenifigoalone]

Also I believe that if God intended for us to set up theocracies there would be some command to that affect in the letters to the churches in the New Testament.

 

[jasonc]

Also I believe that if God intended for us to set up theocracies there would be some command to that affect in the letters to the churches in the New Testament.

most Christians don't believe in theocracies, but well going to the America is isreal that is still prevalent in the church today would be most off topic . the puritans saw that and also believe in what is called posmillenism. we have them to thanks for Harvard , and on other school.

 

[evenifigoalone]

I'm familiar with that. It becomes so entrenched in one's understanding of Christianity that for some questioning it is like questioning the gospel.
I had to do some rethinking to get to where I am now.

 

[jasonc]

I'm familiar with that. It becomes so entrenched in one's understanding of Christianity that for some questioning it is like questioning the gospel.
I had to do some rethinking to get to where I am now.

the problem I have with that is how does one compartilize our worldview.

ie bioethics. does man have the right to kill another man ie euthanasia,abortion. if so what is the difference then a two year old. already being argued by some.its called after birth abortion.

 

[evenifigoalone]

the problem I have with that is how does one compartilize our worldview.

ie bioethics. does man have the right to kill another man ie euthanasia,abortion. if so what is the difference then a two year old. already being argued by some.its called after birth abortion.

IMO respecting the life of the unborn fits into the libertarian theory, which states that infringing on the rights of the individual is wrong. But the party itself has no official stance on it, last I heard.

 

[jasonc]

IMO respecting the life of the unborn fits into the libertarian theory, which states that infringing on the rights of the individual is wrong. But the party itself has no official stance on it, last I heard.

actually that party is very pro abortion. most libertarians are. they don't believe in government funded abortions.

 

[evenifigoalone]

Okay, maybe so. I stand corrected, I guess. Although the person whose blog introduced me to libertarianism is pro-life.
You can be libertarian and stand for traditional values, just they don't believe it's wise or effective for the government to enforce them. Putting it very basically. As for laws restricting or limiting abortion, well, as I said, I believe that would fall under the same category as laws against rape and murder--the government protecting the rights of the individual.

 

[jasonc]

Okay, maybe so. I stand corrected, I guess. Although the person whose blog introduced me to libertarianism is pro-life.
You can be libertarian and stand for traditional values, just they don't believe it's wise or effective for the government to enforce them. Putting it very basically. As for laws restricting or limiting abortion, well, as I said, I believe that would fall under the same category as laws against rape and murder--the government protecting the rights of the individual.

that is in general what my friend who says who you see me argue with or agree with on fb a lot. gay rights is limited there and I know the libertarian position on that but as I said with the laws under az. how does on just stop with making cakes?

 

[evenifigoalone]

I respect the right of any person to refuse to do something if they feel it conflicts with their values and/or religion. Anyone. (Although that's not to say that if you, for example, refuse to sell alcohol due to your values, your boss doesn't have the right to fire you. He does. IMO.)