"freedom Requires Religion"

[Msterbeau]

People often equate spirituality with religion. Or a belief in a higher power with religion. I guess it depends on how you define each.

[Gaf The Horse With Tears]

exactly. I have great Faith in God but I practice no particular religion system other than trusing in God's will and God's plan.

Heck, I would have to say science is more my religion than anything else.

[Steven]

People often equate spirituality with religion. Or a belief in a higher power with religion. I guess it depends on how you define each.

exactly, and its the definition itself that can make it tough sometimes, because we have individual needs and ideas and therefore individual definitions......I suppose I am a bit of a mixture (aint we all???)

for example I beleive that Jesus was the whole shebang, God man, ManGod, Messiah, Mediator, supernatural, yet completely human, intercessor, mediator, prophet, healer, dead raiser, etc and I also beleive that he was singular in his purpose and provision (ie that there are no other messiahs)

BUT - I often disagree with how doctrine is presented, how impotent the american church can prove to be, how pointeless rhetoric is, how over traditional the catholic church has become, etc etc etc....

[Head Wreck]

to counter phee. he knows that the pineapple has been declared a holly fruit by my religeon as the head has deemed its goodness so

[phee]

to counter phee. he knows that the pineapple has been declared a holly fruit by my religeon as the head has deemed its goodness so

Hence why I would not form a religion based on the ham sandwich... weren't you LISTENING????!!!!???? GAWD

[SuZQZ]

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.

I was referring to where he states areas from various Christian faiths and Judaism that he admires.

I have no problem electing an official who has a strong sense of faith and belief in their religion, as long as that is not what their platform is based on. I don't care that Mitt is a Mormon. He doesn't seem to be pushing his religious views as part of his election campaign. I vote for the individual and what I think they can and will do. I simply maintain that Church and State should remain seperate. I do not agree with the statement that freedom requires religion. Freedom allows you to practice your religion without fear of persecution or condemnation.

[Winter Steele]

Freedom is freedom religion has nothing to do with it . We are free to chose to worship someone or thing as long as we don't impose our views on others.

Common bounds of morality, the golden rule, and don't judge a book by its cover ect....

[Steven]

I was referring to where he states areas from various Christian faiths and Judaism that he admires.

I have no problem electing an official who has a strong sense of faith and belief in their religion, as long as that is not what their platform is based on. I don't care that Mitt is a Mormon. He doesn't seem to be pushing his religious views as part of his election campaign. I vote for the individual and what I think they can and will do. I simply maintain that Church and State should remain seperate. I do not agree with the statement that freedom requires religion. Freedom allows you to practice your religion without fear of persecution or condemnation.

I understand this, and again I dont beleive that hes intending what yrou possibly receiveing.

lets look at the seperation fo church and state - in all honesty - it si my personal beleif that this seperation was intended and created by teh founding fathers to prevent what happene din Europe and what happeign in CHina now - the insertion and opression and controll of a faith based lifestyle by the Governemnt. thats it. all of this other stuff around (like removing the ten commandments form courthouse walls) was never the intention - we simply started changing and rewriting the ORIGINAL intention as it suited us, but the problem with that is that we can continue to forever do this, and we will.

I understand that Christianity/Judaism offends people, I get that, I respect that. But we did not start a multi faith based country here - the hard truth is that we created a christian coutry here - and now that certain groups are trying to maintain that which has been so deteriorated, we have re-written the original intentions of our foundational tenants. Thats what bugs me. Not that you want dioversity - if you want it go gt it - fine. But in time - we end up creating a national revulsion for that which was our beginning. I dont like to deny history to create a new legacy - and I think we do that here in spades. Its disgusting to me.

ok so lets be real for a moment - very bottom line nitty gritty:

SuzyQ - if you were an elected official you would inevitably defend and adhere to certain principles that resonate with you - ALL humans are this way - all of us, we simply choose our sides. It is impossible to be completely 100% public minded, because the public is diverse - and ultimately if you are a leader then you MUST choose (and then be judged for - which is why people shy from leadership) what you FEEL - will best serve the community at large.

I have certain values and beleifs and a lense that I look thru that are faith based - straight up.

I would challange ANY of you - that you do the same. Faith is simply action on belifs people - it is NOT founded on judeo christianity and never was - faith is simply faith and every one fo you have it. Faith in ideals, principles, government models, social programs, environemntal considerations, financial provisions, health ideas, entertainments sources, etc etc etc. All of that requires faith for it to be sustained or it simply goes away.

everyone's platform Susy - is based on what they believe. You never build a platform on what you think is a failed system, or a corrupt process, nobody does that.

[SuZQZ]

Steven,

I think I am not coming across very well in my communication. You are making responses to things I did not state, nor did I mean to imply. I agree that everyone has faith in something, in some form or another. I also agree that it is finding individuals that share the same beliefs on moral issues, etc., that attracts us to various candidates. When a candidate's platform is the one we feel best represents our feelings and thoughts, they get our vote. I also agree that it would be very difficult, due to diversity, to be successful in maintaining 100% public mindedness. Agreed. No questions, no arguements.

Romney's statement that "freedom requires religion" does not agree with my view. Religion may help mold an individual into who they are and help form their beliefs and moral character, but I believe it should remain private and not become a force in politics. I don't care what religion any candidate follows as long as when it comes to politics, religion is kept out of it and the Constitution is upheld. Simply, I believe in seperation of Church and State.

This mornings This Week with George Stephanopoulos discussed Romney's speech in the Round Table segment. Very good segment with all different angles and opinions along with historical look backs. Just checked the site and they don't have a video link up for it, of course. It would have been great to be able to share it as much of how I feel was more articulately stated than I seem capable of doing.

I doubt if this clears anything up, but I tried. Regardless, we have different points of views and how glorious it is that we have the freedom to disagree.... and religion isn't required for that freedom.

[Steven]

Steven,

I think I am not coming across very well in my communication. You are making responses to things I did not state, nor did I mean to imply. I agree that everyone has faith in something, in some form or another. I also agree that it is finding individuals that share the same beliefs on moral issues, etc., that attracts us to various candidates. When a candidate's platform is the one we feel best represents our feelings and thoughts, they get our vote. I also agree that it would be very difficult, due to diversity, to be successful in maintaining 100% public mindedness. Agreed. No questions, no arguements.

Romney's statement that "freedom requires religion" does not agree with my view. Religion may help mold an individual into who they are and help form their beliefs and moral character, but I believe it should remain private and not become a force in politics. I don't care what religion any candidate follows as long as when it comes to politics, religion is kept out of it and the Constitution is upheld. Simply, I believe in seperation of Church and State.

This mornings This Week with George Stephanopoulos discussed Romney's speech in the Round Table segment. Very good segment with all different angles and opinions along with historical look backs. Just checked the site and they don't have a video link up for it, of course. It would have been great to be able to share it as much of how I feel was more articulately stated than I seem capable of doing.

I doubt if this clears anything up, but I tried. Regardless, we have different points of views and how glorious it is that we have the freedom to disagree.... and religion isn't required for that freedom.

well let me preface by saying that I often find myself in this same scenario (its frustrating, no?) where I am rebutting accusatiuons that are not really mine, so in that regard Suzy.............. sorry about that - I respect what you are trying to say here and will go back and re read your psots to see if I can get a better feel. I did not mean to take the thread into a place of friction and I'm not trying to reduce your perspective - I just misunderstood it.

What I think Romney did was impassioned, and technically a "mistke" in this present day and age, because he did exactly that - he took his private view public ijn a manner that made it appear that religiosity would be the weapon of choice. Romney may also have been unintentionally been pleading the cause of the demise of our foundational christian identity as a nation, becasue we obviously no longer are united in that idea. And again I would insert that leadership in general is extremely diificult, all of us have the ability to judge but none of us share in the incredible repsonsibility....

I would still argue on past tense versus present tense understandings and intentions on the seperation of church and state - and how that is represented constitutionally, but thats prolly another thread altogethor.

[Shade Everdark]

I understand this, and again I dont beleive that hes intending what yrou possibly receiveing.

lets look at the seperation fo church and state - in all honesty - it si my personal beleif that this seperation was intended and created by teh founding fathers to prevent what happene din Europe and what happeign in CHina now - the insertion and opression and controll of a faith based lifestyle by the Governemnt. thats it. all of this other stuff around (like removing the ten commandments form courthouse walls) was never the intention - we simply started changing and rewriting the ORIGINAL intention as it suited us, but the problem with that is that we can continue to forever do this, and we will.

I understand that Christianity/Judaism offends people, I get that, I respect that. But we did not start a multi faith based country here - the hard truth is that we created a christian coutry here - and now that certain groups are trying to maintain that which has been so deteriorated, we have re-written the original intentions of our foundational tenants. Thats what bugs me. Not that you want dioversity - if you want it go gt it - fine. But in time - we end up creating a national revulsion for that which was our beginning. I dont like to deny history to create a new legacy - and I think we do that here in spades. Its disgusting to me.

I'm sorry, but I'm going to call some serious bullshit here, on a couple of points.

First, we did not create a 'Christian country'. Nope, no way, no how. Were the Founding Fathers influenced by the long tradition of Christianity that has affected pretty much all of Western culture and thought in some form or another? Obviously. Because the founding of our nation was influenced by a certain amount of Christian thought or doctrine, however, does NOT make it a Christian country. That would be tantamount to saying that all the Jews and all the atheists in this country are Christians because they were raised in a society that has been heavily influenced by Christianity. It just doesn't make any damn sense. Further, a goodly number of the people responsible for what we now call the United States of America didn't really consider themselves much in the way of Christians at all. There exists a strong argument that this minority of the Founding Fathers rejected religion in favor of either a more free-form, personal relationship with their god, or eschewed any relationship with god altogether. There are also numerous records that clarify their position on the idea of religion: the Founding Fathers envisioned America as a haven for people of every religious persuasion, and bespoke that everyone, including Muslims and atheists by name, should expect to feel welcome here. So, the rhetoric about America being a Christian nation is ultimately no more than that: blind, revisionist rhetoric.

Second, from a more personal perspective, I don't personally know anyone who finds Christianity offensive. Really, what is there to hate in, "Love thy neighbor", right? As with much else, it's the small minority that makes itself loud and obnoxious and takes every opportunity to reveal their ignorance, hatred, and fear. I'm talking about the Jerry Falwells, the Pat Robertsons, the Roy Moores, and the Fred Phelpses, who use a veneer of Christianity to veil their true ugliness. You (the aspecific 'you') do not offend me by being a Christian; you offend me if you listen, agree with, or look up to men like the aforementioned.

ok so lets be real for a moment - very bottom line nitty gritty:

SuzyQ - if you were an elected official you would inevitably defend and adhere to certain principles that resonate with you - ALL humans are this way - all of us, we simply choose our sides. It is impossible to be completely 100% public minded, because the public is diverse - and ultimately if you are a leader then you MUST choose (and then be judged for - which is why people shy from leadership) what you FEEL - will best serve the community at large.

I have certain values and beleifs and a lense that I look thru that are faith based - straight up.

I would challange ANY of you - that you do the same. Faith is simply action on belifs people - it is NOT founded on judeo christianity and never was - faith is simply faith and every one fo you have it. Faith in ideals, principles, government models, social programs, environemntal considerations, financial provisions, health ideas, entertainments sources, etc etc etc. All of that requires faith for it to be sustained or it simply goes away.

everyone's platform Susy - is based on what they believe. You never build a platform on what you think is a failed system, or a corrupt process, nobody does that.

Not everyone comes from the same place you do, Steven, and you really, really need to learn that. What needs to happen more, though, is a clarification of terminology. Belief is used in a variety of contexts, and the way you use belief in these last two paragraphs is not belief of the faith/religion variety. You're using it more as a synonym for 'expectation'. For example, when I flip the light switch up in my home, I could say that I 'believe' a light will go on, and it works as a valid definition of the word. But what I really mean when I say that is that I EXPECT that when I flip the switch, a light will go on, because I have large amounts of direct, empirical evidence (flipping that switch many times before) that indicate that the light goes on when the switch is flipped. That's how some of us form that lens through which we view the world. We form ideas and expectations from what we experience and observe, and when we can't experience or observe it directly, through what we read and watch and hear that seems most logical, rational, or reasonable to us.

[Steven]

1) I'm sorry, but I'm going to call some serious bullshit here, on a couple of points.

2) First, we did not create a 'Christian country'. Nope, no way, no how. Were the Founding Fathers influenced by the long tradition of Christianity that has affected pretty much all of Western culture and thought in some form or another? Obviously. Because the founding of our nation was influenced by a certain amount of Christian thought or doctrine, however, does NOT make it a Christian country. That would be tantamount to saying that all the Jews and all the atheists in this country are Christians because they were raised in a society that has been heavily influenced by Christianity. It just doesn't make any damn sense. Further, a goodly number of the people responsible for what we now call the United States of America didn't really consider themselves much in the way of Christians at all. There exists a strong argument that this minority of the Founding Fathers rejected religion in favor of either a more free-form, personal relationship with their god, or eschewed any relationship with god altogether. There are also numerous records that clarify their position on the idea of religion: the Founding Fathers envisioned America as a haven for people of every religious persuasion, and bespoke that everyone, including Muslims and atheists by name, should expect to feel welcome here. So, the rhetoric about America being a Christian nation is ultimately no more than that: blind, revisionist rhetoric.

3) Second, from a more personal perspective, I don't personally know anyone who finds Christianity offensive. Really, what is there to hate in, "Love thy neighbor", right? As with much else, it's the small minority that makes itself loud and obnoxious and takes every opportunity to reveal their ignorance, hatred, and fear. I'm talking about the Jerry Falwells, the Pat Robertsons, the Roy Moores, and the Fred Phelpses, who use a veneer of Christianity to veil their true ugliness. You (the aspecific 'you') do not offend me by being a Christian; you offend me if you listen, agree with, or look up to men like the aforementioned.

4) Not everyone comes from the same place you do, Steven, and you really, really need to learn that. What needs to happen more, though, is a clarification of terminology. Belief is used in a variety of contexts, and the way you use belief in these last two paragraphs is not belief of the faith/religion variety. You're using it more as a synonym for 'expectation'. For example, when I flip the light switch up in my home, I could say that I 'believe' a light will go on, and it works as a valid definition of the word. But what I really mean when I say that is that I EXPECT that when I flip the switch, a light will go on, because I have large amounts of direct, empirical evidence (flipping that switch many times before) that indicate that the light goes on when the switch is flipped. That's how some of us form that lens through which we view the world. We form ideas and expectations from what we experience and observe, and when we can't experience or observe it directly, through what we read and watch and hear that seems most logical, rational, or reasonable to us.

sigh.

1): okie dokie. if bullshit must be called, then the serious type is probably the most endearing.

2): I can see your points Shade. So I will simplify by saying that I Steven (and many others) beleive that as a whole, as a majority, the original groups of leaders and their consequential following generations, shaped a nation, by way of general Judeo Christian idealism and zealousness. Yes we can tit and tat back and forth about whats "real" eveidence and what is not, but I'm still prone to look around at say things such as....missions and Native American religeous conversion efforts and national holidays and pop aret from earlier generations and such, or....the fact that as a general rule the majority of your modern day americans still consider themselves or identify themselves within their family traditions (which to me is again a form of generational measurable evidence) as being Christian. Hell even the incredible amoutns of sects within cristedom are heartidly represented within the walls of America and Im not just talking about Quakers. Your calling that revisionist.....I think thats a pretty good stretch Shade. Its an opinion sure, but I dont buy it as being a re-writing or a misrepresentation fo the truth. I simply call it uncomfortable.

but then again who cares? Because I was never arguing for America the Christian nation - you missed my points Bud.

onward:

3) No arguments on paragraph three. Excoet that I'd add that while "love your neighbor" may be a core Christian principle, it is not the foundation of Christianity and Im always amused at how often that passage is to me, mis-used to define Christianity. Christianity is about the NEED for a God to man mediative process that is completely seperatist, and thats what pisses people off about it.

4) I really do know that not everyone comes from the same place I do Shade and you really, really might want to consider that. I've been in here long enough to know that, trust me. YES I am using beleif (even faith) as a form of expectation, thats not a (or at lesst should not be) a revelation here at all. Your touching on exactly what Ive been talking about.

as for "We form ideas and expectations from what we experience and observe, and when we can't experience or observe it directly, through what we read and watch and hear that seems most logical, rational, or reasonable to us." I am again inclined to agree, and I am again inclined to agree that our definitions vary among our own worldviews and experiences, and I am just talkign about mine, and using them to perhaps shed some light on what was being discussed.

in fact Shade, I'm a loss to understand some of your points here, because I'm not opposing them.

[Hellion]

I just love it when they think religion should be forced into everything,and everyones lives.(being sarcastic)