Lets start a campaign to keep Religion out of Politics!!

[shropshire 0]

Personally I couldn't give a toss about your religious views - just keep them to yourself... ESPECIALLY if you are trying to run my country!!

(.)Y(.)
Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome

[jclalor 12]

Amen.

[shropshire 0]

(.)Y(.)
Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome

[lawrocket 3]

I'd prefer that the candidates' degree of religiosity be right out there in the open as opposed to unknown and unmentioned.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[shropshire 0]

Fair point but does that also go for their sexual orientation and fidelity and ... well, where does it end?

(.)Y(.)
Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome

[jclalor 12]

That is a good point, Lionel.

[klingeme 1]

Fine in theory but......is killing (unborn) babies a religious view?


How about not killing, not stealing, no adultery? Morality and Religion are hand in hand a lot of times.

[wmw999 2,589]

Many people with no religion are moral. Since many religious viewpoints include the opinion that all other viewpoints are invalid, it makes equating the two kind of divisive.

Wendy W.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[shropshire 0]

Well said. I don't believe in god(s) but consider myself a moral person. But I've also heard of apparently religious people with the morals of an alley cat (or worse).

(.)Y(.)
Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome

[steveorino 7]

Fine to those who religion/faith/spirituality means nothing or little to them. But to those who faith/religion or spirituality is an integral part of their being, that would be like asking them to keep their core beliefs out of their political view.

steveOrino

[shropshire 0]

Yes it would ..... but for the greater good



But seriously, those folks should NOT be imposing policy on the whole community based upon their Religious beliefs.

(.)Y(.)
Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome

[steveorino 7]

Then who should be imposing their core beliefs on the community?

steveOrino

[rushmc 23]

You should have
"I am a bigot and I agree"

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[shropshire 0]

The Citizens. In a true democracy the people's voice would be heard on all topics and they wouldn't defer that control to a single person (at a local level) or group (national).

Now, we don't live in a democracy so vote for the person based upon their presentation to us on the hustings of a package of policies (on balance we agree with their policies) but then when they get to parliament, they are often swayed by other agendas (Political, personal, yes religious even), party politics and corporate.

(.)Y(.)
Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

Then who should be imposing their core beliefs on the community?

According to many, it appears to be only "non-religious" people have the rigtht to impose their viewpoints.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[shropshire 0]

Absolutely NOT.

Actually, I don't want people imposing their views - Full Stop.

(.)Y(.)
Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome

[jakee 1,596]

Quote

Quote

Then who should be imposing their core beliefs on the community?

According to many, it appears to be only "non-religious" people have the rigtht to impose their viewpoints.

I don't see which viewpoints should be imposed on society that actually have anything to do with religion or lack of it.

Is the economy a religious matter? Is the justice system a religious matter? Is foreign policy a religious matter? Is welfare a religious matter? What exactly is there that the government should be sticking its nose into that could actually be influenced by religious beliefs?

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[n23x 0]

This is a hard one:

I absolutely am interested in a politician's personal views. However, I am more specifically interested in:

1.) To what extent they 'practice what they preach' ('Do as I say, not as I do' tends to piss me off something royal).

2.) To what extent they are able to separate their religious views that might be considered outliers for a majority of the general public.

In writing, the above 2 comments sound both similar, and contradictory, but let me elaborate.

For point 1, I am interested in their 'personal' (read: not as a public servent) actions. Examples: Those who demand the importance of heterosexual marriages, but who themselves have several divorces, problems with infidelity, or participate in homosexual acts. Likewise, those who complain about drugs, but abuse prescription drugs. Additionally, those that even consider abortion rights when it suits them, but take up the cause for 'every life, even those 1 minute post-conception'.

For point 2, I am interested in how well they can isolate portions of their religion that aren't applicable to the majority. Is eating red meat on friday bad? What about being in the same room as your wife when she's on her period? Some religious rules are a little extreme, and perhaps shouldn't be applied to the general public, but that public servent, in private, should absolutely be able to decide to not eat that red meat, agreed?.

I think people, athiest and thiest, can agree to certain moral standards. Stealing is bad. Killing is bad. To what extent we agree on these will always vary, however. For instance, I know many who are 100% against abortion, who believe life starts at conception, and yet have (what I believe to be) reduced moral qualms with taking lives in Iraq. Not to say that they are indifferent about those human lives, just that there is a disparity in the importance of those lives taken in war, vs. those aborted. Conversely, it does me, personally, no harm to stop a ball of cells, or even a small mass from turning into a baby, but I become far more irate at the thought of lost civilian and military lives over in Iraq.

Ultimately, I think the general backlash against religion within the realm of politics has more to do with perceived disingenuous behavior, more than anything else.

.jim

"Don't touch my fucking Easter eggs, I'll be back monday." ~JTFC

[airdvr 210]

Fat chance.

George H. W. Bush - August 18, 1988 - Thank you. God bless you.

William J. Clinton - July 16, 1992 - My fellow Americans, I end tonight where it all began for me- I still believe in a place called Hope. God bless you, and God Bless America.

William J. Clinton - August 29, 1996 - Thank you, God bless you, and good night.

George W. Bush - August 3, 2000 - Let us go forth, knowing that our cause is just, and elect George W. Bush the forty third president of the United States.

Thank you.

George W. Bush - Sept 2, 2004 - May God bless you, and may God continue to bless our great country. Thank you all.

Please don't dent the planet.

Destinations by Roxanne

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

This is a hard one:

I absolutely am interested in a politician's personal views. However, I am more specifically interested in:

1.) To what extent they 'practice what they preach' ('Do as I say, not as I do' tends to piss me off something royal).

I've found that a general rule among politicians is that they are actively involved in doing what they preach against. There are exceptions, but Spitzer is a prime example.

Quote

2.) To what extent they are able to separate their religious views that might be considered outliers for a majority of the general public.

Now THIS is the biggest question. I think you've nailed it. But I also think that to a certain extent, how a person's anti-religious views shape their policy ideals should also be included. I see just as much (if not more) anti-religious hatred as pro-religious hatred.

Quote

In writing, the above 2 comments sound both similar, and contradictory, but let me elaborate.

For point 1, I am interested in their 'personal' (read: not as a public servent) actions. Examples: Those who demand the importance of heterosexual marriages, but who themselves have several divorces, problems with infidelity, or participate in homosexual acts. Likewise, those who complain about drugs, but abuse prescription drugs. Additionally, those that even consider abortion rights when it suits them, but take up the cause for 'every life, even those 1 minute post-conception'.

For point 2, I am interested in how well they can isolate portions of their religion that aren't applicable to the majority. Is eating red meat on friday bad? What about being in the same room as your wife when she's on her period? Some religious rules are a little extreme, and perhaps shouldn't be applied to the general public, but that public servent, in private, should absolutely be able to decide to not eat that red meat, agreed?.

I think people, athiest and thiest, can agree to certain moral standards. Stealing is bad. Killing is bad. To what extent we agree on these will always vary, however. For instance, I know many who are 100% against abortion, who believe life starts at conception, and yet have (what I believe to be) reduced moral qualms with taking lives in Iraq. Not to say that they are indifferent about those human lives, just that there is a disparity in the importance of those lives taken in war, vs. those aborted. Conversely, it does me, personally, no harm to stop a ball of cells, or even a small mass from turning into a baby, but I become far more irate at the thought of lost civilian and military lives over in Iraq.

Ultimately, I think the general backlash against religion within the realm of politics has more to do with perceived disingenuous behavior, more than anything else.

.jim

I think this is very well-put.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[skydyvr 0]

Quote

I think this is very well-put.

And he didn't use the word "hillbilly" even once. Kudos on that.

. . =(_8^(1)

[rushmc 23]

Hmm

You did not post Obamas wall prayer

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[Gawain 0]

While I agree with a separation of church and state. I think it's pretty difficult to separate faith from politics.

So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh
Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright
'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life
Make light!

[shropshire 0]

I'm with you but it should stop us trying.

(.)Y(.)
Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome

[shropshire 0]

I think that you summed it all up rather well - thanks.

(.)Y(.)
Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome