Roy Moore and the belief in a Theocratic America

[Danmark]

Roy Moore is now the GOP candidate for a U.S. Senate seat from Alabama. Moore believes the United States should be a theocracy and that Christians should by law have advantages over other religions and that the Constitution should be subservient to his idea of the Christian God. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roy_Moore
Moore thinks homosexuality should be criminalized and has twice been removed as a judge for refusing to follow the Constitution and insisting that the Ten Commandments should be in the courthouse.

I'm wondering if there are any DCR members who agree with him. The question for debate is whether beliefs like Moore's are appropriate in the United States and whether his beliefs are good or bad for Christianity and for the country.

[Danmark]

Roy Moore is still correct that God and Christ need to over rule the Constitution.

That's anti-America.

So are you saying that you want to overthrow the free democracy of America in favor of a Theocratic dictatorship?

Who will rule this new Theocracy?

The Catholic Pope?

Nope?

Then who?

Roy Moore?

This idea that America should be overthrown by Christian Theocracy is truly nothing short of insane. Who would be the leader of this new Christian Theocracy?

Exactly!
Theocracy is incompatible with American ideals.
The central impetus guiding the founding of this country was religious freedom. Theocracy is religious slavery. Those who promote it necessarily are opposed to the free practice of all religions, except their own. But as you point out, it isn't even THEIR religion they want to promote. It is their personal version of their subcategory of their religion.

One need look no farther than the violent discord in Islam to see the danger of theocracy. "Sunnis and Shiites have long made war against each other, but they are united in one thing: Their hatred of Jews and Christians, and their determination to harm the United States and wipe Israel off the map."
https://standupforthetruth.com/2014/09/ ... one-thing/

We can add to this the violent conflict between protestants and catholics. The truth is, theocracies are not ruled by gods, but by men. They represent cultural differences that have nothing to do with any God. They are motivated by various human beliefs in gods. These beliefs have NOTHING to do with an actual God.

[Divine Insight]

But as you point out, it isn't even THEIR religion they want to promote. It is their personal version of their subcategory of their religion.

... {snip} ...

They are motivated by various human beliefs in gods. These beliefs have NOTHING to do with an actual God.

Exactly. And apparently they can't even see the folly of their desire:

Roy Moore is still correct that God and Christ need to over rule the Constitution.

The problem is that there is no God or Christ to do that.

So are you prepared to bow down and worship Roy Moore as the spokesperson for God and Christ?

If not, then this entire ideology is utterly absurd.

There is no God or Christ to become the ruler of the USA or any other country. In fact, if these characters actually existed and were interested in becoming the rulers of humanity they could have already done that.

Apparently they either have no interest in doing that, or they simply don't exist, and the latter is far more likely to be the case.

[brianbbs67]

I wouldn't be sure nothing above us exists. Because you can't get something from nothing. No to Theocracy we all get it wrong and always have. This universe came from something, not no thing.

[Danmark]

I wouldn't be sure nothing above us exists. Because you can't get something from nothing. No to Theocracy we all get it wrong and always have. This universe came from something, not no thing.

The problem with this is the supposition that what exists must have come from something else. This posits an infinite regression which solves nothing because if the universe came from 'something,' where did that 'something come from?

The only solution I can see is that the universe has always been. It did not 'come' from anything. It has always been. I have no problem with this concept. What I find surprising is that so very few seem able to entertain the concept.

I suppose it comes from the commonplace observation that everything else we know, including ourselves, came from something or had a cause. But why impose our limited experience on the universe?

[Danmark]

Tho' Jones has a lead in the polls overall, "Among white voters who identify as evangelical Christians, Moore leads, 73 percent to 20 percent."
https://www.politico.com/story/2017/11/ ... oll-245558
This poll was taken after the news of many women, including one who was 14 years old, naming Roy Moore as a child molester or serial sexual predator. It seems that for many evangelicals, political power is more important than religious principle.

[historia]

In the end, decency wins.

[brianbbs67]

I wouldn't be sure nothing above us exists. Because you can't get something from nothing. No to Theocracy we all get it wrong and always have. This universe came from something, not no thing.

The problem with this is the supposition that what exists must have come from something else. This posits an infinite regression which solves nothing because if the universe came from 'something,' where did that 'something come from?

The only solution I can see is that the universe has always been. It did not 'come' from anything. It has always been. I have no problem with this concept. What I find surprising is that so very few seem able to entertain the concept.

I suppose it comes from the commonplace observation that everything else we know, including ourselves, came from something or had a cause. But why impose our limited experience on the universe?

So you believe a random causation? That seems even harder to fathom. There is a lot we don't know. Which, if you are thinking about it, should included a superior mind. We stay on this earth by gravity, which we can measure the properties of, but can't figure, except it exists. We can't even predict the weather correctly as it plays by a set of rules or no rules, as the case may be. Our limited experience is indeed limited. I don't discount the existence of something more than me. In fact, life shows me this as others excel at things I can not. It might feel good to say all existed forever. But, its just a way to deal with what we don't know. Not an answer.

[Danmark]

brianbbs67:

So you believe a random causation? That seems even harder to fathom. There is a lot we don't know. Which, if you are thinking about it, should included a superior mind. We stay on this earth by gravity, which we can measure the properties of, but can't figure, except it exists. We can't even predict the weather correctly as it plays by a set of rules or no rules, as the case may be. Our limited experience is indeed limited. I don't discount the existence of something more than me. In fact, life shows me this as others excel at things I can not. It might feel good to say all existed forever. But, its just a way to deal with what we don't know. Not an answer.

"Random causation," I'm not even sure what that means. Why does 'Random' have to be thrown in? "Godless" origin would be more accurate. "Causation" is another word that is unnecessary. The universe just is. Nothing needed to 'cause' it.

[tam]

From your wiki link, this is not someone I would want to have any kind of authority over people:

In 1996, while presiding over a divorce case, Moore ruled that a mother who had had a lesbian affair would lose custody of her children to the father and that she could not be allowed see her children unless she was supervised.[211] Moore wrote in his ruling, "The court strongly feels that the minor children will be detrimentally affected by the present lifestyle of [Mrs. Borden] who has engaged in a homosexual relationship during her marriage, forbidden both by the laws of the State of Alabama and the Laws of Nature."[211]

In February 2002, as Alabama Chief Justice, Moore issued a controversial opinion that expressed his belief that the State should use its powers to punish "homosexual behavior". The case, D.H. v. H.H., was a custody dispute where a lesbian was petitioning for custody of her children, alleging abuse by her ex-husband. A circuit court in Alabama had ruled in favor of the father, but the Alabama Court of Civil Appeals overturned that verdict 4–1, saying that substantial evidence existed of abusive behavior by the father.[212] In a concurring opinion in the case, Moore stated that a parent's homosexuality should be a deciding factor in determining which parent gets custody over children: "Homosexual behavior is a ground for divorce, an act of sexual misconduct punishable as a crime in Alabama, a crime against nature, an inherent evil, and an act so heinous that it defies one's ability to describe it. That is enough under the law to allow a court to consider such activity harmful to a child."[213]

He cannot use the excuse that same-sex sexual activity was illegal in Alabama until 2003 (unbelievable); because he later told judges to disobey the law when same sex marriage was legal.

In 2016, Moore was suspended from the Alabama Supreme Court for instructing state probate judges to deny marriage licenses to same-sex couples, in contravention of Obergefell v. Hodges, in which the U.S. Supreme Court determined that same-sex couples have a constitutional right to marry.[214]

In 2017, Moore called for impeaching judges who have issued rulings supportive of homosexuality and same-sex marriage.[210]

**

In 2006, Moore wrote that Keith Ellison of Minnesota, the first Muslim to have been elected to the United States House of Representatives, should be barred from sitting in Congress because in his view, a Muslim could not honestly take the oath of office. Moore said that the Quran did not allow for religions other than Islam to exist,

So he hasn't actually read the Quran then?

Certain sects of Islam don't allow for religions other than Islam to exist; but the Quran does allow for religions other than Islam to exist. Not speaking in favor of any religion, but if you're going to make a statement, you should at least get your facts straight.


Peace to you!

[Divine Insight]

In the end, decency wins.

How did you know ahead of time?

Roy Moore, Steve Bannon, and Donald Trump lose "bigly" in Alabama as decency rises to center stage.

Is this prophesy fulfilled?

I personally think that Donald Trump was hoping to have another accused pervert in an elected position so he wouldn't be all alone in that role. Too bad for Trump. He's all alone now.