"freedom Requires Religion"

[Msterbeau]

Oh really?

Nice soundbite Mr. Romney.

EDIT: OK. Why the fuck doesn't the thread title start with a capital letter???

[creatureofthenyte]

I think that's bullshit.

Its just my opinion, but I think religion should have nothing to do with politics. I mean, I don't care what religion Mit Romney practices. If he got in, I would only care about how well if at all, he made this country better.

[Hellion]

Don't Get Me started!!(leaves thread at mach 10)

[SuZQZ]

Ah-Aah-ahDouchebag.... Oh! Sorry. Couldn't stop the sneeze.

..."Religion is seen as merely a private affair with no place in public life...." He almost makes this sound like a bad thing. Ok, my humble, insignificant opinion is that yes, religion is a private affair, and yes, it does have a place in public (not civil) life to an extent, and yes, how wonderful that we live in a nation where religous freedom is cemented in the Constitution, but I do not believe should have a place in politics. Oh, and I noticed he missed referencing Hinduism, Wican and Buddhism, along with several other religions. Quite a missed opportunity to schmooze.

[AntiHero]

Ummmmmmmm. Hmm. Yeah. This is kind of awkward. Anybody else care to join me for a cup of coffee? (backs out of room)

[Steven]

"Almost 50 years ago another candidate from Massachusetts explained that he was an American running for President, not a Catholic running for President. Like him, I am an American running for President. I do not define my candidacy by my religion. A person should not be elected because of his faith nor should he be rejected because of his faith.

"Let me assure you that no authorities of my church, or of any other church for that matter, will ever exert influence on presidential decisions. Their authority is theirs, within the province of church affairs, and it ends where the affairs of the nation begin.

...... seems to me some degree of balance was offerred up in this peice.

it also seems to me that hte suggestion is being made the he personally, beleives that the founding fathers and himself - would utilize their core fiaths to equip them during difficult periods fo leadership, and thiat in this particular case, in this particular country, with these particular historical representatives....yes, Judeo Christianity was the faith drawn upon.

But I dont see an imperialistic overtures here, not at all.

He's not a Hindu, he's nto a Buddist, he's not a Wiccan.....he therefore would not draw upon those reserves, he simply used what was his....I've no problem with that.

[Msterbeau]

Yeah... But "Freedom requires religion"? Since when? Freedom requires discipline and maturity, amongst other things. But religion? That's just pandering.

[phee]

Yeah... But "Freedom requires religion"? Since when? Freedom requires discipline and maturity, amongst other things. But religion? That's just pandering.

He is a politician....

[Steven]

Yeah... But "Freedom requires religion"? Since when? Freedom requires discipline and maturity, amongst other things. But religion? That's just pandering.

I understand your argument Marc but I don't think he's selling the notion that your taking offense to....(I could be wrong - for example Im definately not a card carrying memeber of the christian coalition).

I think he's simply stating his beleif that to be the most effective leader for this particular nation, and as was blueprinted by the founding fathers, that you need some form of relationship with God to be best equipped. Its a personal opinion stated publically, its sort of like saying that the root of our societal ills boils down to the corrosion of the family unit - you get plenty of naysayers but its really just an opinion, a collection of reflections. I agree with it personally (the religion thing he's stumbling thru) , but I have not seen a Godly man in the white house in a very very long time if ever.

[phee]

I agree with it personally (the religion thing he's stumbling thru) , but I have not seen a Godly man in the white house in a very very long time if ever.

That is true... but A LOT that claim to be so.....

[creatureofthenyte]

but why does freedom require religion ?

If a terrorist were to launch a missle at us, all the faith in the world isnt gonna stop it from hitting us, a counter strike against it will, not faith.

[Onyx]

Ack. I promised myself I'd stay out of the politics forum since things tend to get heated and I have not got much time lately, but can't keep quiet on this. I'm really really puzzled why it's not obvious to all that our country was founded on freedom of religion, and would that not include the freedom to have no religion at all?

It's like this current wave of politicians want to reverse every single principle this country was founded upon. What happened to separation of church and state?

Since he claims to worship Jesus - "render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and unto God the things that are God's." Luke 20:24

Mixing religion (ANY religion) and government has always led to tragedy.

[Steven]

That is true... but A LOT that claim to be so.....

and I am in total agreement with you Mr Phee on this one.

bear in mind that Im not neccesarrily stating that this position is a mandatory thing - I am simplystating that I understand his mindset and agree with it "on paper".

and what I mean by that is that in general, I beleive that Godly men, principled men, devotional men, disicplined me, etc....make for better leadership and handle pressure filled situations better.

and again thats just an opinion - which someone can take offense to and think that Im stating that say....person A (me) being a God beleiver/practioner is "better equipped" than person B.

But its not that simple.

I suppose I could best exemplify it by saying that if I had two seemingly equally qualified candidates in front of me for leadership, but I knew that one of them was a Godly man, i would lean in that direction, simply because it resonates with me personally in a way that communicates somethign that I understand.

now does freedom "require" religion?

first - I wish that it was not stated in that manner because in general I am anti-religeous and pro God to Man relational.....there is a difference.

But I do think freedom is best served from a faith based foundation. The same way that I think having a shared faith greatly enhances, protects, and equips a marriage. yes you can do it without it - but I simply see the merits fo having it and I lean in this way.

I also think however - that YOU and I should have the final say so.

[Gaf The Horse With Tears]

You need religion in order to have true Freedom... Religion is a choice. If you are not allowed to make that choice, you are not Free.

If people would just shut the fuck up about his religion then he would not have had to make this speech. Divert the people away from his politics by focusing on his faith, dirty politics. They did it to Kennedy and he made a similar speech to this one.

OK, Where exactly does it say you can have religion or talk about your beliefs in you hold public office? When has it ever said that?

btw, Atheism is a religion.

If you believe in anything, you have a religion because religion is just a system of belief.

I will note that people are still focusing on the minor fact that he is a religous man and missing the whole point of the speech.. which was the part where he said over and over that his religion would not rule his term.

[phee]

You need religion in order to have true Freedom... Religion is a choice. If you are not allowed to make that choice, you are not Free.

If people would just shut the fuck up about his religion then he would not have had to make this speech. Divert the people away from his politics by focusing on his faith, dirty politics. They did it to Kennedy and he made a similar speech to this one.

OK, Where exactly does it say you can have religion or talk about your beliefs in you hold public office? When has it ever said that?

btw, Atheism is a religion.

If you believe in anything, you have a religion because religion is just a system of belief.

I will note that people are still focusing on the minor fact that he is a religous man and missing the whole point of the speech.. which was the part where he said over and over that his religion would not rule his term.

With the exception of the first scentence.... I agree

[Steven]

With the exception of the first scentence.... I agree

this was very good, and I too agree.

[Msterbeau]

Mark. Part of that sentence in the speech also said: "religion requires freedom". and that I can agree with.

Steven - I hear what you're saying about men of principle, etc... but I can't equate that to a religious person. I've met many religious people who had very little "real" honor or goodness to them. Likewise, I've met many non-religious people who, in my opinion, were the very essence of the high ideals we hold in this country.

And I agree that this is a speech he should not have had to make. Judge him by his actions and his record not what faith he belongs to.

And I disagree with about atheism being a religion. Religion's are organized groups of people following a particular system of faith. I don't think atheists qualify, other then that they don't believe in the concept of god.

[phee]

And I disagree with about atheism being a religion. Religion's are organized groups of people following a particular system of faith. I don't think atheists qualify, other then that they don't believe in the concept of god.

Atheism is a belief... not necessarily a religion

[Head Wreck]

what is religeon any more than belief?

[Msterbeau]

what is religeon any more than belief?

Maybe I'm wrong:

Websters:

1 a: the state of a religious <a nun in her 20th year of religion> b (1): the service and worship of God or the supernatural (2): commitment or devotion to religious faith or observance

2: a personal set or institutionalized system of religious attitudes, beliefs, and practices

3archaic : scrupulous conformity : conscientiousness

4: a cause, principle, or system of beliefs held to with ardor and faith

[phee]

what is religeon any more than belief?

I can believe that a ham sandwich is good.... doesn't make it my religion...

[Steven]

Steven - I hear what you're saying about men of principle, etc... but I can't equate that to a religious person. I've met many religious people who had very little "real" honor or goodness to them. Likewise, I've met many non-religious people who, in my opinion, were the very essence of the high ideals we hold in this country.

so have I, and I understand this.

this is another reason why I consider myself non religeous and yet pro relational when it comes to God and spdituality in general....to me religion is centered on doctrine and dogma...and while I beleive that certain specifics of doctrine should be in order......it can become a God unto itself and thus becomes a form of impotent idolatry.

but to offer balance - everythign I am today (uh oh - divided room) has everythign to do with honorable people, especially honerable men and in my case they were found within the church or the body of christ in general.

I've been watching leaders and technique since I was a kid.....since my days running the streets to my time in the military to social situations to work related fields.....and to me the best leaders always had a common spiritual thread that allowed them to last, as leadership in general is exhausting. Opinions are not, but true leadership is.

[Steven]

what is religeon any more than belief?

hmmmm...."beleif" does not neccesarily develop into a lifestyle.

[Msterbeau]

hmmmm...."beleif" does not neccesarily develop into a lifestyle.

True. But neither does religion. Some of the Catholics i went to school with were the worst kind of judgmental, racist, dishonorable, jerks ever. It was like their religion lived in a separate box in their head, which they pulled out when they needed to "prove" their worth or something... but really didn't have anything to do with how they actually went about living life.

[Steven]

True. But neither does religion. Some of the Catholics i went to school with were the worst kind of judgmental, racist, dishonorable, jerks ever. It was like their religion lived in a separate box in their head, which they pulled out when they needed to "prove" their worth or something... but really didn't have anything to do with how they actually went about living life.

yes you are right and this is a good example of the fallacy of religion in and of itself.

the hard thign is - how to exactly define religion/religeous.....because websters does neither any true justice. many of my friends consider me to be religeous, but im not. and likewise some fo my firends consider themselves to be religeous, and yet I do not consider them to be.

the term itself has many shades of gray....and I think all of us (all) tend to translate it with our own emotions.