I'm a (insert religious identity here) and I vote... What's your point?

Two hot topics for the price of one

Moderator: Moderators

User avatar
bluegreenearth
Guru
Posts: 2014
Joined: Mon Aug 05, 2019 4:06 pm
Location: Manassas, VA
Has thanked: 768 times
Been thanked: 532 times

I'm a (insert religious identity here) and I vote... What's your point?

Post #1

Post by bluegreenearth »

We've all seen the bumper stickers: "I'm a Christian and I vote" or "I'm a Catholic and I vote" or other similar statements associating a religious identity with a political perspective. Do any of the theists who brandish these political statements ever take time to consider what is ultimately implied in those messages? When the political implication of such a message is acknowledged, it can be rewritten as follows: "I'm a theocrat and I vote." Before accusing that rephrased statement of being hyperbolic, recognize where a theocracy can be the only possible outcome when theocratic policies and politicians are granted that authority by the dominant religious majority who vote for them.

If the intention of this politically threatening message is to warn fellow citizens of someone's desire to have a particular religious doctrine imposed on everyone else by voting for policies and politicians that favor their theocratic ambitions, then these theists have seriously failed to comprehend how their religious freedom is contingent upon keeping church and state separate. What will it take to convince theists that they should be endorsing policies and political leaders that are more inclined to honor and respect the separation of church and state rather than pander to the theocratic ambitions of a dominant religious majority?

Obviously, from the theistic perspective, the difficulty resides with the fact that voting against a policy or candidate that seems to serve in their best interest is counter-intuitive. Nevertheless, anyone who values religious freedom needs to understand that it is sometimes necessary to vote against what you might perceive to be your own best interest for the sake of a maintaining a secular government. This is because religious freedom is only possible when the government and its representatives are prohibited from either endorsing or prohibiting a particular religious belief over any other religious belief or no religious belief.

Surprisingly, while a theocratic threat has always existed in America since its founding, it has never before received a sufficient amount of support from either political party to take root. This is because, until relatively recently, most politicians knew that for the government to legislate based on a theological perspective would be to open the door for future theocratic legislation which they couldn't guarantee would always be in line with their particular religious values. So, modern day politicians and their religious constituents who have theocratic ambitions would do well to consult the rationale of their predecessors who voted for bills and policies that didn't perverse the concept of religious freedom. What would it mean for religious freedom to have those secular laws and policies repealed or replaced by theocratic-leaning laws and policies that effectively function as an official government endorsement of a dominant religious tradition (i.e. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Blitz)? As the saying goes, "Be careful what you ask for." :no:

User avatar
bluegreenearth
Guru
Posts: 2014
Joined: Mon Aug 05, 2019 4:06 pm
Location: Manassas, VA
Has thanked: 768 times
Been thanked: 532 times

Re: I'm a (insert religious identity here) and I vote... What's your point?

Post #2

Post by bluegreenearth »

[Replying to bluegreenearth in post #1]

The lack of responses here is either an indication that no one has any objections to the OP, or the OP is not worth a response of any kind. :?

nobspeople
Prodigy
Posts: 3187
Joined: Wed Nov 11, 2020 11:32 am
Has thanked: 1510 times
Been thanked: 825 times

Re: I'm a (insert religious identity here) and I vote... What's your point?

Post #3

Post by nobspeople »

bluegreenearth wrote: Mon Jul 20, 2020 10:04 pm We've all seen the bumper stickers: "I'm a Christian and I vote" or "I'm a Catholic and I vote" or other similar statements associating a religious identity with a political perspective. Do any of the theists who brandish these political statements ever take time to consider what is ultimately implied in those messages? When the political implication of such a message is acknowledged, it can be rewritten as follows: "I'm a theocrat and I vote." Before accusing that rephrased statement of being hyperbolic, recognize where a theocracy can be the only possible outcome when theocratic policies and politicians are granted that authority by the dominant religious majority who vote for them.

If the intention of this politically threatening message is to warn fellow citizens of someone's desire to have a particular religious doctrine imposed on everyone else by voting for policies and politicians that favor their theocratic ambitions, then these theists have seriously failed to comprehend how their religious freedom is contingent upon keeping church and state separate. What will it take to convince theists that they should be endorsing policies and political leaders that are more inclined to honor and respect the separation of church and state rather than pander to the theocratic ambitions of a dominant religious majority?

Obviously, from the theistic perspective, the difficulty resides with the fact that voting against a policy or candidate that seems to serve in their best interest is counter-intuitive. Nevertheless, anyone who values religious freedom needs to understand that it is sometimes necessary to vote against what you might perceive to be your own best interest for the sake of a maintaining a secular government. This is because religious freedom is only possible when the government and its representatives are prohibited from either endorsing or prohibiting a particular religious belief over any other religious belief or no religious belief.

Surprisingly, while a theocratic threat has always existed in America since its founding, it has never before received a sufficient amount of support from either political party to take root. This is because, until relatively recently, most politicians knew that for the government to legislate based on a theological perspective would be to open the door for future theocratic legislation which they couldn't guarantee would always be in line with their particular religious values. So, modern day politicians and their religious constituents who have theocratic ambitions would do well to consult the rationale of their predecessors who voted for bills and policies that didn't perverse the concept of religious freedom. What would it mean for religious freedom to have those secular laws and policies repealed or replaced by theocratic-leaning laws and policies that effectively function as an official government endorsement of a dominant religious tradition (i.e. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Blitz)? As the saying goes, "Be careful what you ask for." :no:
I've always found religious people are, most of the time, by far the most cryin', loudest, most-complain' group ever. And, at times, the most ignorant of what's going on around them. I don't know how many 'religious' people I've talked to that didn't know a lick about many other religions, what they believe in, how the act, what they think, etc.

Basically, religious want THEIR religion to be in control, rather they say that or not. If ANYTHING threatens their religion, or their implied ability to worship their religion (how does the marriage of two women in Texas, for example, hamper the ability to a family in Arkansas to worship their god as they see fit?!? It doesn't. Period.) they scream and throw a fit, amassing to the one or two people in power who say they're even the smallest part Christian (aka donny trump).
It's ridiculous and very apparent, even if the religious person thinks they're smart enough to keep it on the DL.
Have a great, potentially godless, day!

User avatar
Purple Knight
Prodigy
Posts: 3755
Joined: Wed Feb 12, 2020 6:00 pm
Has thanked: 1199 times
Been thanked: 775 times

Re: I'm a (insert religious identity here) and I vote... What's your point?

Post #4

Post by Purple Knight »

bluegreenearth wrote: Mon Jul 20, 2020 10:04 pmIf the intention of this politically threatening message is to warn fellow citizens of someone's desire to have a particular religious doctrine imposed on everyone else by voting for policies and politicians that favor their theocratic ambitions, then these theists have seriously failed to comprehend how their religious freedom is contingent upon keeping church and state separate.
I think everyone votes this way, though perhaps it's more so for the religious, and I'll explain why.

You know those people who blow up Planned Parenthood? They're insane, aren't they? Extremists, the lot of them?

Well, no. They genuinely believe it's murder. And taking violent action is exactly what you ought to do, to defend people from being murdered.

Religiosos are the same when it comes to the political process, but increasingly everyone else is too so I can't really fault them. People aren't really interested in the equilibrium of everyone following the law and determining the law by some process other than the one that gives them their way. They very much ought to be this way though, and think this way, because they absolutely believe some policy is morally wrong, so they should act against it. The religiosos get extra credit here because they generally don't blow things up, but they still reject the equilibrium state of every religion being tolerated and policy being determined secularly because they believe some of those policies that result are morally wrong.

It makes me question the wisdom of having a country for all religions because each one thinks it is right and policy should of course be in line with that. Fundamentally, if each one believes that some policy is evil (for example, that abortion = murder) then they absolutely should be unwilling to accept a political result that causes abortion to be legal. They all ought to be working towards the destruction of the equilibrium, even if that eventually destroys it.

User avatar
JehovahsWitness
Savant
Posts: 22193
Joined: Wed Sep 29, 2010 6:03 am
Has thanked: 854 times
Been thanked: 1232 times
Contact:

Re: I'm a (insert religious identity here) and I vote... What's your point?

Post #5

Post by JehovahsWitness »

I have to say as one of Jehovah's Witnesses I dont vote or identify with and political party.

Politics is one of the things that has prove to be very divisive in this world.I believe God's kingdom is ultimately the only hope for mankind but in the meantime its best to treat all people, even those with opposing sides with love.
INDEX: More bible based ANSWERS
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 81#p826681


"For if we live, we live to Jehovah, and if we die, we die to Jehovah. So both if we live and if we die, we belong to Jehovah" -
Romans 14:8

User avatar
Tcg
Savant
Posts: 8591
Joined: Tue Nov 21, 2017 5:01 am
Location: Third Stone
Has thanked: 2230 times
Been thanked: 2331 times

Re: I'm a (insert religious identity here) and I vote... What's your point?

Post #6

Post by Tcg »

JehovahsWitness wrote: Mon Nov 23, 2020 5:00 am
Politics is one of the things that has prove to be very divisive in this world.I believe God's kingdom is ultimately the only hope for mankind but in the meantime its best to treat all people, even those with opposing sides with love.
Politics may be divisive, but at least we know politicians actually exist. That's a strong vote in their favor over a being that isn't know to exist at all except in the imaginations of it's followers.

Humans will continue to make mistakes, but we'll have some successes as well. That beats relying on an imaginary kingdom which of course is perpetually delayed in it's coming.


Tcg
To be clear: Atheism is not a disbelief in gods or a denial of gods; it is a lack of belief in gods.

- American Atheists


Not believing isn't the same as believing not.

- wiploc


I must assume that knowing is better than not knowing, venturing than not venturing; and that magic and illusion, however rich, however alluring, ultimately weaken the human spirit.

- Irvin D. Yalom

User avatar
JehovahsWitness
Savant
Posts: 22193
Joined: Wed Sep 29, 2010 6:03 am
Has thanked: 854 times
Been thanked: 1232 times
Contact:

Re: I'm a (insert religious identity here) and I vote... What's your point?

Post #7

Post by JehovahsWitness »

Your opinion has been duly noted. Thanks for sharing


Have a most excellent and joyful day

JEHOVAHS WITNESS
INDEX: More bible based ANSWERS
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 81#p826681


"For if we live, we live to Jehovah, and if we die, we die to Jehovah. So both if we live and if we die, we belong to Jehovah" -
Romans 14:8

User avatar
bluegreenearth
Guru
Posts: 2014
Joined: Mon Aug 05, 2019 4:06 pm
Location: Manassas, VA
Has thanked: 768 times
Been thanked: 532 times

Re: I'm a (insert religious identity here) and I vote... What's your point?

Post #8

Post by bluegreenearth »

JehovahsWitness wrote: Mon Nov 23, 2020 5:00 am I have to say as one of Jehovah's Witnesses I dont vote or identify with and political party.

Politics is one of the things that has prove to be very divisive in this world.I believe God's kingdom is ultimately the only hope for mankind but in the meantime its best to treat all people, even those with opposing sides with love.
Do you remain apolitical because it is very divisive or because the JW doctrines prohibit it?

User avatar
JehovahsWitness
Savant
Posts: 22193
Joined: Wed Sep 29, 2010 6:03 am
Has thanked: 854 times
Been thanked: 1232 times
Contact:

Re: I'm a (insert religious identity here) and I vote... What's your point?

Post #9

Post by JehovahsWitness »

bluegreenearth wrote: Tue Nov 24, 2020 8:10 am
JehovahsWitness wrote: Mon Nov 23, 2020 5:00 am I have to say as one of Jehovah's Witnesses I dont vote or identify with and political party.

Politics is one of the things that has prove to be very divisive in this world.I believe God's kingdom is ultimately the only hope for mankind but in the meantime its best to treat all people, even those with opposing sides with love.
Do you remain apolitical because it is very divisive or because the JW doctrines prohibit it?
I remain apolitical because I view taking part in politics incompatible with my relationship with God.

JW
Last edited by JehovahsWitness on Tue Nov 24, 2020 3:57 pm, edited 1 time in total.
INDEX: More bible based ANSWERS
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 81#p826681


"For if we live, we live to Jehovah, and if we die, we die to Jehovah. So both if we live and if we die, we belong to Jehovah" -
Romans 14:8

nobspeople
Prodigy
Posts: 3187
Joined: Wed Nov 11, 2020 11:32 am
Has thanked: 1510 times
Been thanked: 825 times

Re: I'm a (insert religious identity here) and I vote... What's your point?

Post #10

Post by nobspeople »

Tcg wrote: Mon Nov 23, 2020 6:36 pm
JehovahsWitness wrote: Mon Nov 23, 2020 5:00 am
Politics is one of the things that has prove to be very divisive in this world.I believe God's kingdom is ultimately the only hope for mankind but in the meantime its best to treat all people, even those with opposing sides with love.
Politics may be divisive, but at least we know politicians actually exist. That's a strong vote in their favor over a being that isn't know to exist at all except in the imaginations of it's followers.

Humans will continue to make mistakes, but we'll have some successes as well. That beats relying on an imaginary kingdom which of course is perpetually delayed in it's coming.


Tcg
Very true. It makes me wonder which is worse, politicians or religious people? Or are they the same? They both believe in something (or at least pretend to believe in something), both like control and money (though politicians like to spend it and religious people just dump in the laps of their leaders). Both tend not to like anyone other what white males being in charge.
Maybe they're equally bad? :?
Have a great, potentially godless, day!

Post Reply