Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 36 to 70 of 78

Thread: Violating one's faith as one takes the oath of office

  1. #36
    Join Date
    Jun 2000
    Location
    Douglasville, Ga
    Posts
    4,196

    Default Re: Violating one's faith as one takes the oath of office

    Religion doesn't force me to push those beliefs on others. That is not what "truly religious" person would do. That's my point. A truly religious follows those beliefs in their own life, but understands that in a society not everyone is of the same religion. She is violating her own religion by judging them. That isn't her place. She is welcome to pray for them, but if what they are doing is legal, she can't stop it.

    What she was doing seemed a bastardization of religion to me.
    Last edited by Tom Wilkinson; 11-14-2017 at 08:46 AM.
    Tom

  2. #37
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Fredericton, New Brunswick
    Posts
    32,015

    Default Re: Violating one's faith as one takes the oath of office

    Thanks Tom, I agree.
    If I use the word "God," I sure don't mean an old man in the sky who just loves the occasional goat sacrifice. - Anne Lamott

  3. #38
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Northeast
    Posts
    13,596

    Default Re: Violating one's faith as one takes the oath of office

    Quote Originally Posted by Tom Wilkinson View Post
    Religion doesn't force me to push those beliefs on others. That is not what "truly religious" person would do. That's my point. A truly religious follows those beliefs in their own life, but understands that in a society not everyone is of the same religion. She is violating her own religion by judging them. That isn't her place. She is welcome to pray for them, but if what they are doing is legal, she can't stop it.
    Well, let's look at it this way - religion is about your personal relationship with your deity of choice, so that may be part of how she sees her relationship.

    There are certainly plenty of folks who are willing to push their own religious beliefs upon others. You only need to look at the Hobby Lobby decision to know that this is true. If the company is providing money for heath care to its employees, what business is it for that company to know what medical treatment an employee is receiving? Just because things like contraception are offered, doesn't mean that ANY employees are receiving it, and an employer should NOT know what medical treatments an employee is receiving. To some degree, I have a problem with the detail that my wife's employer has requested regarding medical absences. It should suffice to receive a note from a doctor's office simply to say that "'employee A' was under my care on x/x/xx date and couldn't be at work on that day", and even that might be a violation of privacy because of that physician's particular specialization.
    "The pessimist complains about the wind; the optimist expects it to change; the realist adjusts the sails."
    -William A. Ward



  4. #39
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Fredericton, New Brunswick
    Posts
    32,015

    Default Re: Violating one's faith as one takes the oath of office

    There are certainly plenty of people willing to force their beliefs on others - and I entirely agree that this is improper. In a Government services context, it's worse than improper.

    What I'm objecting to is the use of words like "all" or "every" to make such points. Not least because right here on the forum, there are a not insignificant number of people who interact with other forumites every day who profess a faith, and are not in any sense attempting to force anyone to believe as they do. And who cry "foul" when an instance is discussed of someone trying to do such forcing.

    The logical error is the use of "all" or "every" to make an invalid generalization from specific cases. All lawyers aren't corrupt; all pro football players aren't concussed. All fiberglass boats aren't crap.
    If I use the word "God," I sure don't mean an old man in the sky who just loves the occasional goat sacrifice. - Anne Lamott

  5. #40
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Northeast
    Posts
    13,596

    Default Re: Violating one's faith as one takes the oath of office

    Oh, I agree that the use of "all" or "every" isn't appropriate. However, folks who are willing to use religion as an excuse or an exception (genuinely or in a calculated effort), or willing to use it as a club to force their beliefs on others is also inappropriate - in a big way.
    "The pessimist complains about the wind; the optimist expects it to change; the realist adjusts the sails."
    -William A. Ward



  6. #41
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Fredericton, New Brunswick
    Posts
    32,015

    Default Re: Violating one's faith as one takes the oath of office

    Quote Originally Posted by Canoez View Post
    Oh, I agree that the use of "all" or "every" isn't appropriate. However, folks who are willing to use religion as an excuse or an exception (genuinely or in a calculated effort), or willing to use it as a club to force their beliefs on others is also inappropriate - in a big way.
    We entirely agree.
    If I use the word "God," I sure don't mean an old man in the sky who just loves the occasional goat sacrifice. - Anne Lamott

  7. #42
    Join Date
    Jun 2000
    Location
    Douglasville, Ga
    Posts
    4,196

    Default Re: Violating one's faith as one takes the oath of office

    Quote Originally Posted by Canoez View Post
    Oh, I agree that the use of "all" or "every" isn't appropriate. However, folks who are willing to use religion as an excuse or an exception (genuinely or in a calculated effort), or willing to use it as a club to force their beliefs on others is also inappropriate - in a big way.
    Yes, people do that, but i don't believe the tenets of their religion require that. They are doing that on their own.
    Tom

  8. #43
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Northeast
    Posts
    13,596

    Default Re: Violating one's faith as one takes the oath of office

    Quote Originally Posted by Tom Wilkinson View Post
    Yes, people do that, but i don't believe the tenets of their religion require that. They are doing that on their own.
    As can be seen from certain (c)hristian groups, they create their own interpretations which don't strictly follow the teachings. Some do this individually, some do it in local churches or areas, but it isn't all individuals - of that we can be clear. Certainly the rejection of gay individuals would go against the teachings of Christ to love your neighbor as yourself.
    "The pessimist complains about the wind; the optimist expects it to change; the realist adjusts the sails."
    -William A. Ward



  9. #44
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Walney, near Cumbria UK
    Posts
    35,205

    Default Re: Violating one's faith as one takes the oath of office

    Quote Originally Posted by Tom Wilkinson View Post
    Religion doesn't force me to push those beliefs on others. That is not what "truly religious" person would do. That's my point. A truly religious follows those beliefs in their own life, but understands that in a society not everyone is of the same religion. She is violating her own religion by judging them. That isn't her place. She is welcome to pray for them, but if what they are doing is legal, she can't stop it.

    What she was doing seemed a bastardization of religion to me.
    I agree, but we are not discussing upright citizens like you. We are discussing the dingbats that the US elect to office. Kim Davies was an elected official, yes?
    And she is not the only one to state publicly that her interpretation of her religion would allow her to ignore US legislation. Hence the conflict when swearing an oath to uphold Article VI.
    It really is quite difficult to build an ugly wooden boat.

    The power of the web: Anyone can post anything on the web
    The weakness of the web: Anyone can post anything on the web.

  10. #45
    Join Date
    Jun 2000
    Location
    Douglasville, Ga
    Posts
    4,196

    Default Re: Violating one's faith as one takes the oath of office

    Quote Originally Posted by Canoez View Post
    As can be seen from certain (c)hristian groups, they create their own interpretations which don't strictly follow the teachings. Some do this individually, some do it in local churches or areas, but it isn't all individuals - of that we can be clear. Certainly the rejection of gay individuals would go against the teachings of Christ to love your neighbor as yourself.
    Which is why I say a truly religious person, one that actually follows the teachings of Christ (assuming that is the religion we are discussing) should not have a conflict between their religion and the constitution, they are not mutually exclusive by anything that I am aware of or have been taught. It is a good part of the reason that I have pretty well rejected religion since I moved to the south.
    Tom

  11. #46
    Join Date
    Jun 2000
    Location
    Douglasville, Ga
    Posts
    4,196

    Default Re: Violating one's faith as one takes the oath of office

    Quote Originally Posted by Peerie Maa View Post
    I agree, but we are not discussing upright citizens like you. We are discussing the dingbats that the US elect to office. Kim Davies was an elected official, yes?
    I am discussing the first sentence of the original post, a sentence that I believe is wholly incorrect. Those people are a bastardization of religion and from what I can tell go completely opposite the actual teachings of their chosen religion.
    Tom

  12. #47
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Walney, near Cumbria UK
    Posts
    35,205

    Default Re: Violating one's faith as one takes the oath of office

    Quote Originally Posted by Tom Wilkinson View Post
    I am discussing the first sentence of the original post, a sentence that I believe is wholly incorrect. Those people are a bastardization of religion and from what I can tell go completely opposite the actual teachings of their chosen religion.
    True as far as it goes. But the rub is that several people have claimed or put in action the view that their version of their religion absolves them from Clause VI.
    We are discussing people and politics, not perfection. I'll bet that there is a consensus that Kim Davies was truly religious and a martyr.
    It really is quite difficult to build an ugly wooden boat.

    The power of the web: Anyone can post anything on the web
    The weakness of the web: Anyone can post anything on the web.

  13. #48
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Northeast
    Posts
    13,596

    Default Re: Violating one's faith as one takes the oath of office

    Quote Originally Posted by Tom Wilkinson View Post
    Which is why I say a truly religious person, one that actually follows the teachings of Christ (assuming that is the religion we are discussing) should not have a conflict between their religion and the constitution, they are not mutually exclusive by anything that I am aware of or have been taught. It is a good part of the reason that I have pretty well rejected religion since I moved to the south.
    Whoa. Just a minute. Let's take a step back. Just because you say you are a (c)hristian, and hence "truly religious", has no bearing on whether or not they actually follow the teachings of Christ. It is all about what you choose to believe, and it is apparent that folks tend to pick and choose the beliefs that agree with their own pre-conceived notions and prejudices as they get to feel comfortable and shroud themselves in the armor of their belief. Because we have freedom of religion in this nation means that you can define your religion any way you damn well please - whether you're Christian, Jewish, Muslim, Bhuddist, Satinist, Pagan, Church of Scientology, Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster, or any other belief you may find to your liking - because religion all boils down to "belief", not following any strict teachings.
    "The pessimist complains about the wind; the optimist expects it to change; the realist adjusts the sails."
    -William A. Ward



  14. #49
    Join Date
    Jun 2000
    Location
    Douglasville, Ga
    Posts
    4,196

    Default Re: Violating one's faith as one takes the oath of office

    Quote Originally Posted by Canoez View Post
    Whoa. Just a minute. Let's take a step back. Just because you say you are a (c)hristian, and hence "truly religious", has no bearing on whether or not they actually follow the teachings of Christ. It is all about what you choose to believe, and it is apparent that folks tend to pick and choose the beliefs that agree with their own pre-conceived notions and prejudices as they get to feel comfortable and shroud themselves in the armor of their belief. Because we have freedom of religion in this nation means that you can define your religion any way you damn well please - whether you're Christian, Jewish, Muslim, Bhuddist, Satinist, Pagan, Church of Scientology, Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster, or any other belief you may find to your liking - because religion all boils down to "belief", not following any strict teachings.
    I used that religion as an example because it is prominent in US politics. The OP is stating that a truly religious person "by definition" cannot support the constitution. I have yet to see an actual definition where that holds true.
    re·li·gious
    rəˈlijəs/Submit
    adjective
    1.
    relating to or believing in a religion.

    What religion says that every person must believe as you do? And what prominent religion in the US says that (since we are dealing with US politics)? I am not aware of one. If the religion does not require that every person believes exactly what you do, then there is no reason you cannot support laws that allow different beliefs while believing something different yourself. if you cannot do that then you should not be in office, but I am not aware of a mainstream religion that teaches that. There may be individuals trying to make it so, but I believe they would be hard pressed to find that in the actual teachings of that religion.
    "both men were deeply religious, intelligent, and moralistic"
    synonyms: devout, pious, reverent, godly, God-fearing, churchgoing, faithful, devoted, committed
    "a religious person"
    noun
    1.
    a person bound by monastic vows.
    Tom

  15. #50
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Northeast
    Posts
    13,596

    Default Re: Violating one's faith as one takes the oath of office

    Quote Originally Posted by Tom Wilkinson View Post
    I used that religion as an example because it is prominent in US politics. The OP is stating that a truly religious person "by definition" cannot support the constitution. I have yet to see an actual definition where that holds true.
    re·li·gious
    rəˈlijəs/Submit
    adjective
    1.
    relating to or believing in a religion.

    What religion says that every person must believe as you do? And what prominent religion in the US says that (since we are dealing with US politics)? I am not aware of one. If the religion does not require that every person believes exactly what you do, then there is no reason you cannot support laws that allow different beliefs while believing something different yourself. if you cannot do that then you should not be in office, but I am not aware of a mainstream religion that teaches that. There may be individuals trying to make it so, but I believe they would be hard pressed to find that in the actual teachings of that religion.
    "both men were deeply religious, intelligent, and moralistic"
    synonyms: devout, pious, reverent, godly, God-fearing, churchgoing, faithful, devoted, committed
    "a religious person"
    noun
    1.
    a person bound by monastic vows.
    Again, as I agreed with Tom above in #40, the use of "any" or "all" isn't appropriate.

    To say that "none" or "few" do not believe that their religion places them above the law or that their religious beliefs fall above tenets of law is naive. I think, as you've found, there are pockets in this country where this is true.
    "The pessimist complains about the wind; the optimist expects it to change; the realist adjusts the sails."
    -William A. Ward



  16. #51
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Walney, near Cumbria UK
    Posts
    35,205

    Default Re: Violating one's faith as one takes the oath of office

    Quote Originally Posted by Tom Wilkinson View Post
    What religion says that every person must believe as you do? And what prominent religion in the US says that (since we are dealing with US politics)?
    Catholics are pretty clear on a common creed.

    OK, SamF was an outlier on some things. I often wondered about whether he debated his version with his priest.

    To say that "none" or "few" do not believe that their religion places them above the law or that their religious beliefs fall above tenets of law is naive. I think, as you've found, there are pockets in this country where this is true.
    This.
    It really is quite difficult to build an ugly wooden boat.

    The power of the web: Anyone can post anything on the web
    The weakness of the web: Anyone can post anything on the web.

  17. #52
    Join Date
    Jun 2000
    Location
    Douglasville, Ga
    Posts
    4,196

    Default Re: Violating one's faith as one takes the oath of office

    Quote Originally Posted by Peerie Maa View Post
    Catholics are pretty clear on a common creed.

    OK, SamF was an outlier on some things. I often wondered about whether he debated his version with his priest.

    This.
    Catholics will absolve nearly any sin through confession. They also do not believe in birth control or divorce but I don't know of any that have tried to outlaw it for a society nor would that believe prevent them from holding office in a country where such things are legal. They can still completely have those convictions while upholding the laws that allows for things that their religion does not approve of.
    Tom

  18. #53
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Walney, near Cumbria UK
    Posts
    35,205

    Default Re: Violating one's faith as one takes the oath of office

    Quote Originally Posted by Tom Wilkinson View Post
    Catholics will absolve nearly any sin through confession. They also do not believe in birth control or divorce but I don't know of any that have tried to outlaw it for a society nor would that believe prevent them from holding office in a country where such things are legal. They can still completely have those convictions while upholding the laws that allows for things that their religion does not approve of.
    Generally speaking in countries where they have/had a majority they do make such things illegal. However that is a non sequitur when discussing US wingnuts standing for office. There is plenty of evidence that you don't seem to want to accept that it is a real proven threat to your system of governance.
    It really is quite difficult to build an ugly wooden boat.

    The power of the web: Anyone can post anything on the web
    The weakness of the web: Anyone can post anything on the web.

  19. #54
    Join Date
    Jun 2000
    Location
    Douglasville, Ga
    Posts
    4,196

    Default Re: Violating one's faith as one takes the oath of office

    Quote Originally Posted by Peerie Maa View Post
    Generally speaking in countries where they have/had a majority they do make such things illegal. However that is a non sequitur when discussing US wingnuts standing for office. There is plenty of evidence that you don't seem to want to accept that it is a real proven threat to your system of governance.
    Where did I say that? I'm saying it shouldn't be, not that it isn't. My issue is with the statement that a truly religious person cannot uphold the constitution. They absolutely can. I'm quite concerned that the bastardization of such religions is an existential threat to US freedoms.
    Tom

  20. #55
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Northeast
    Posts
    13,596

    Default Re: Violating one's faith as one takes the oath of office

    Quote Originally Posted by Tom Wilkinson View Post
    They absolutely can. I'm quite concerned that the bastardization of such religions is an existential threat to US freedoms.
    Yup. America's own Taliban.
    "The pessimist complains about the wind; the optimist expects it to change; the realist adjusts the sails."
    -William A. Ward



  21. #56
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Walney, near Cumbria UK
    Posts
    35,205

    Default Re: Violating one's faith as one takes the oath of office

    Quote Originally Posted by Tom Wilkinson View Post
    Where did I say that? I'm saying it shouldn't be, not that it isn't. My issue is with the statement that a truly religious person cannot uphold the constitution. They absolutely can. I'm quite concerned that the bastardization of such religions is an existential threat to US freedoms.
    I suppose it all hinges on "truly religious". Holding all of the Ten Commandments as sacrosanct? That bit about sleeping with men? Then there is Da Noise on abortion?
    It really is quite difficult to build an ugly wooden boat.

    The power of the web: Anyone can post anything on the web
    The weakness of the web: Anyone can post anything on the web.

  22. #57
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Fredericton, New Brunswick
    Posts
    32,015

    Default Re: Violating one's faith as one takes the oath of office

    The problem, Nick, isn't with the examples which you or I or many of us could raise. The problem is with the opinion, oft expressed, that because this or that person does this or that thing, it says something universally true about all people who have a religious faith.

    We simply know from evidence - from empirical observation - that such universal statements are untrue. Just as the examples illustrate that someone trying to make the case the other way also could not say universally that every person with a faith could uphold the Constitution with no issues.
    If I use the word "God," I sure don't mean an old man in the sky who just loves the occasional goat sacrifice. - Anne Lamott

  23. #58
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    2 states: NJ and confusion
    Posts
    28,063

    Default Re: Violating one's faith as one takes the oath of office

    I don't hve time time, but later, I'm sure I can find a number of people saying our laws are based, or should be based, on religious beliefs, as do some of our court decisions.

    Hobby Lobby was decided on religious beliefs, not our constitution, no?
    May be some rough water ahead. We're getting new captain.

  24. #59
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Fredericton, New Brunswick
    Posts
    32,015

    Default Re: Violating one's faith as one takes the oath of office

    Quote Originally Posted by John Smith View Post
    I don't hve time time, but later, I'm sure I can find a number of people saying our laws are based, or should be based, on religious beliefs, as do some of our court decisions.

    Hobby Lobby was decided on religious beliefs, not our constitution, no?
    Sure. And folks like me decried it, no?
    If I use the word "God," I sure don't mean an old man in the sky who just loves the occasional goat sacrifice. - Anne Lamott

  25. #60
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Walney, near Cumbria UK
    Posts
    35,205

    Default Re: Violating one's faith as one takes the oath of office

    Quote Originally Posted by TomF View Post
    The problem, Nick, isn't with the examples which you or I or many of us could raise. The problem is with the opinion, oft expressed, that because this or that person does this or that thing, it says something universally true about all people who have a religious faith.

    We simply know from evidence - from empirical observation - that such universal statements are untrue. Just as the examples illustrate that someone trying to make the case the other way also could not say universally that every person with a faith could uphold the Constitution with no issues.
    I know that. It is an aspect of politics that would not fly in this country with the way we have things set up. I also accept that it would not apply across all of US politicians or in many states. That it happens at all, and that people like Kim Davies and others think it OK and could be considered for election is strange beyond belief.
    It really is quite difficult to build an ugly wooden boat.

    The power of the web: Anyone can post anything on the web
    The weakness of the web: Anyone can post anything on the web.

  26. #61
    Join Date
    Jun 2000
    Location
    Douglasville, Ga
    Posts
    4,196

    Default Re: Violating one's faith as one takes the oath of office

    Quote Originally Posted by Peerie Maa View Post
    I suppose it all hinges on "truly religious". Holding all of the Ten Commandments as sacrosanct? That bit about sleeping with men? Then there is Da Noise on abortion?
    They can hold those beliefs for themselves all they want. It's the forcing them upon others that I don't recall any religion doing. (at least not any mainstream us religion)

    Would someone that opposes abortion disown their own daughter were she to have an abortion or fall in love with a woman? Maybe, but I doubt it. Their religion should allow them to forgive the sin and move forward in some fashion from there, at least I would hope so.

    It's the my way or the highway approach that I have the issue with and I don't believe their are very many religions that actually have such a stance in their teachings. They nearly all have some allowance for non believers to co-exist peacefully.

    I guess my main issue with the first sentence is the assumption that Mr. Moore is "truly religious'. I actually find him to be an aberration of any religion I have known.
    Tom

  27. #62
    Join Date
    Jun 2000
    Location
    Douglasville, Ga
    Posts
    4,196

    Default Re: Violating one's faith as one takes the oath of office

    Quote Originally Posted by John Smith View Post
    I don't hve time time, but later, I'm sure I can find a number of people saying our laws are based, or should be based, on religious beliefs, as do some of our court decisions.

    Hobby Lobby was decided on religious beliefs, not our constitution, no?
    The fact that people are saying it does not make it so.
    Last edited by Tom Wilkinson; 11-14-2017 at 11:00 AM.
    Tom

  28. #63
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Entry Level
    Posts
    14,995

    Default Re: Violating one's faith as one takes the oath of office

    Quote Originally Posted by Tom Wilkinson View Post
    It is completely possible to put God first in your life and still uphold the constitution. The two are not mutually exclusive.
    Of course they need not be. The question is, are they, in a given case. That depends on the individual's religion. That fact that his may be different shows that all are not like him. Condemning a religion, or approving it, in the sense of all of it's professors, is irrelevant at best.

    OTOH it is possible that a given article of faith implies a duty of disobedience. No need to wait until the actual violation of oath. It's inevitable.
    He's a Mexican. -- Donald Trump.
    America cannot survive another four years of Barack Obama. -- Governor Chris Christie (R) New Jersey
    It wasn't racism, it was an attack on Christianity. -- Fox News
    This week, it is Robert E. Lee and this week, Stonewall Jackson. Is it George Washington next? You have to ask yourself, where does it stop?

  29. #64
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Walney, near Cumbria UK
    Posts
    35,205

    Default Re: Violating one's faith as one takes the oath of office

    Quote Originally Posted by Tom Wilkinson View Post

    I guess my main issue with the first sentence is the assumption that Mr. Moore is "truly religious'.
    There are 53 religious leaders who feel strongly enough on that to go into print.
    Fifty-three pastors in Alabama have signed a letter throwing their support behind Republican Senate candidate Roy Moore, who has been accused of sexually assaulting multiple women.

    “For decades, Roy Moore has been an immovable rock in the culture wars ― a bold defender of the ‘little guy,’ a just judge to those who came before his court, a warrior for the unborn child, defender of the sanctity of marriage, and a champion for religious liberty,” the pastors wrote. Their letter was posted to the Facebook page of Kayla Moore, the candidate’s wife, on Sunday and published Monday on Alabama news site AL.com.

    The letter detailed the two times Moore was suspended from court during his tenures as chief justice of Alabama ― first for refusing to take down a Ten Commandments plaque in his courtroom and later for defying federal orders on same-sex marriage.

    The pastors described these incidents as evidence of Moore’s “unwavering faith in God and his immovable convictions for Biblical principles.

    The letter did not address that multiple women have accused Moore of sexual misconduct when he was in his 30s and they were teenagers.

    “We are ready to join the fight and send a bold message to Washington: dishonesty, fear of man, and immorality are an affront to our convictions and our Savior and we won’t put up with it any longer,” the pastors wrote. “We urge you to join us at the polls to cast your vote for Roy Moore.”

    “The Washington establishment has declared all-out war on his campaign,” they added.
    From a thread posted by Mr Bernstein.
    It really is quite difficult to build an ugly wooden boat.

    The power of the web: Anyone can post anything on the web
    The weakness of the web: Anyone can post anything on the web.

  30. #65
    Join Date
    Jun 2000
    Location
    Douglasville, Ga
    Posts
    4,196

    Default Re: Violating one's faith as one takes the oath of office

    Quote Originally Posted by Peerie Maa View Post
    There are 53 religious leaders who feel strongly enough on that to go into print.

    From a thread posted by Mr Bernstein.
    Yet all those "truly religious men" completely overlook the other charges alleged. Hmmm...

    Less to do with religion than it does with power in my estimation. I'd also like to see the part of their religion that requires everyone in the country to follow their religious values. Would any of their actions be considered "Christ like"? Not from what I had been taught, but maybe that's why I have rejected the "southern" version of christianity.
    Tom

  31. #66
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Walney, near Cumbria UK
    Posts
    35,205

    Default Re: Violating one's faith as one takes the oath of office

    ^Just so.
    It puts the issue in the OP in context though.
    It really is quite difficult to build an ugly wooden boat.

    The power of the web: Anyone can post anything on the web
    The weakness of the web: Anyone can post anything on the web.

  32. #67
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    BC Coast
    Posts
    3,434

    Default Re: Violating one's faith as one takes the oath of office

    There are of course 'religions' that require their adherents to go out and spread the word. JW's are known for this, as are LDS Mormons. The Church of Rome has only relatively recently reduced the level of strict obedience to the doctrine of the church.
    Sadly today, we do have to be wary of religions that are all too willing to enforce their version of the truth on those around them. This means that most moderate Christians are as much at risk as persons who choose not to embrace a belief system.
    It is so easy to fall back on the argument that all or most (fill in the blank religion) are out to get you.....Some are, but to make blanket statements actually makes the problem worse.
    Part of the problem is that some religious groups gain momentum as more people join, and a form of group madness makes it almost impossible for individuals to hold on to the values that probably took them to investigate that religious group. we saw this in Nazi Germany, we see it happening in the US today, politically. We see some religions that officially use shunning to separate their adherents from other people in the same community...even the same family. So when you confront it person to person, you are not in fact confronting a person, but a part of the group.
    Persons very close to me expressed views I could not support, and used faith and studies of the Bible to push interpretations that to me were unconscionable. Their assumption was that I obviously had not done enough study and they could show me the way. I could not argue, nor have a conversation. I simply told this person my spiritual path was different, that I did not support in any way certain of these "obvious truths" and that I did not want to discuss it at all.
    It is not an easy problem, but simply clumping together people just because of a certain handle is just as wrong as trying to push your immutable truth on someone who is not actively seeking that truth.
    I have never seen evidence that showed a trend, suggesting a person's spiritual beliefs might actually stop them from being beastly to others around them.

  33. #68
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Fredericton, New Brunswick
    Posts
    32,015

    Default Re: Violating one's faith as one takes the oath of office

    Quote Originally Posted by gilberj View Post
    ...I have never seen evidence that showed a trend, suggesting a person's spiritual beliefs might actually stop them from being beastly to others around them.
    If you're interested, there are examples. I've a friend whose work heading up a food program (making sure that some street kids don't go hungry) has morphed into an interlinked set of about 5 different businesses ... with the shared objective of providing a venue for street people, ex-cons, and folks otherwise deemed unemployable to get employed. My friend wasn't "beastly" to start with, but it's a sure thing that a lot of folks would consider many of the folks who work in the businesses were that way, and now are less so. They weren't required to profess a faith to get a job either, btw., but it's something that has tended to emerge as their own lives are given some encouragement and firm ground to stand on ... by people whose motivation to provide that starting point is their faith.

    BTW, the firm's non-profit, with all proceeds folded back into the business to make it sustainable. It's won some awards for renovation and construction projects ...
    If I use the word "God," I sure don't mean an old man in the sky who just loves the occasional goat sacrifice. - Anne Lamott

  34. #69
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    BC Coast
    Posts
    3,434

    Default Re: Violating one's faith as one takes the oath of office

    Yes Tom, I know many spiritual people whose faith has inspired them to do great things. But I doubt most people change their stripes.
    The main person I was referring to was pushy and slightly abusive and domineering, before taking their faith, and remained pushy, slightly abusive and domineering after....Not every part of this person was bad or evil, actually a very good person in the community in most ways. But certain of the things espoused were unconscionable to me, and required on my part to be very clear when I would not accept or discuss the issue. I am not willing to debate, I will share my ideas in bits now and then, if someone is asking/seeking, they can then choose their own path. Certain of the religious mouth-pieces in the US right now are much more scary, if only because of the numbers of folks willing to listen. I am guessing most of them are not completely evil, and have redeeming qualities.

  35. #70
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Fredericton, New Brunswick
    Posts
    32,015

    Default Re: Violating one's faith as one takes the oath of office

    I think that you're right to observe that folks don't receive full-on personality transplants. At least, not that I've seen. I think that most of us find at age 50 that the things we find are the most annoying and durable issues we're dealing with in ourselves ... are variations of what they were at age 14. With any luck at all, we've gone 'round the cycle a couple of times and are approaching those things from a different perspective, but still.

    "Domineering and abusive" can soften into a gritty but generally respectful version of "energetic," just like "submissive and sycophantic" can harden into a version of "caring" that includes a spine. But it ain't easy, faith or no.
    If I use the word "God," I sure don't mean an old man in the sky who just loves the occasional goat sacrifice. - Anne Lamott

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •