Total Posts:14|Showing Posts:1-14
Jump to topic:

Christian Nation?

bubbatheclown
Posts: 1,258
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/26/2014 8:27:31 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
This forum is not about whether the Founding Fathers intended for America to be a Christian nation. In fact, it is not necessarily about America, though it probably is.
The million dollar question is: should there be a Christian Nation, somewhere in the world?

I will define this Christian Nation. Non-Christians are not prohibited from being in this country. Any religion is allowed. Nobody is required by law to attend church. However, Christian values would be followed in this country. For instance, if the Bible said it was a sin to eat donuts and the leaders of this country felt strongly about this, then donuts would be banned. But then again, other religions would still be tolerated. The Ten Commandments would be displayed in the courthouses of this country, because it would be an openly Christian nation.

By this point you're probably wondering why. I'll put it this way: there are Muslim countries. In these Muslim countries Islam is the rule. Other religions are barely tolerated, if they're tolerated at all. Discrimination against other religions is commonplace in these countries, and Islam is the rule of law. Yet nobody seems to complain about this.
There are colleges in the United States (a country that stands for freedom and equality) where the teachers pretty much force the students to believe in God. If they don't they're heavily ridiculed by their professors, or even failed from the classes. No one complains about this.

So somewhere in the world, shouldn't there be a place where Christian principles are applied, in the same way there are places in the world where Muslim principles are applied, yet on a way more tolerant scale? And believe me, since this state would tolerate non-Christians and treat them as people, with equal rights as the Christian population, it'd be quite tolerant compared to Saudi Arabia or Iran.

P.S. No, don't say the Vatican. The world's Christians are not moving in there, and it's not a real state anyway.

P.S.S. For some of you (the more radical Atheists) I know your atheist instincts are probably kicking in about now, but try to refrain from posting an anti-Christian rant or talking about atrocities that the Christians stopped committing over 100 years ago. And do not troll against me either. If Richard Dawkins is somehow on this site, then I'm asking him to stay far, far away from this forum. All he'd be able to do is rant anyway and call me an "intolerant bigot."
Skepticalone
Posts: 6,093
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/26/2014 9:57:20 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/26/2014 8:27:31 PM, bubbatheclown wrote:
This forum is not about whether the Founding Fathers intended for America to be a Christian nation. In fact, it is not necessarily about America, though it probably is.
The million dollar question is: should there be a Christian Nation, somewhere in the world?

I will define this Christian Nation. Non-Christians are not prohibited from being in this country. Any religion is allowed. Nobody is required by law to attend church. However, Christian values would be followed in this country. For instance, if the Bible said it was a sin to eat donuts and the leaders of this country felt strongly about this, then donuts would be banned. But then again, other religions would still be tolerated. The Ten Commandments would be displayed in the courthouses of this country, because it would be an openly Christian nation.

By this point you're probably wondering why. I'll put it this way: there are Muslim countries. In these Muslim countries Islam is the rule. Other religions are barely tolerated, if they're tolerated at all. Discrimination against other religions is commonplace in these countries, and Islam is the rule of law. Yet nobody seems to complain about this.
There are colleges in the United States (a country that stands for freedom and equality) where the teachers pretty much force the students to believe in God. If they don't they're heavily ridiculed by their professors, or even failed from the classes. No one complains about this.

So somewhere in the world, shouldn't there be a place where Christian principles are applied, in the same way there are places in the world where Muslim principles are applied, yet on a way more tolerant scale? And believe me, since this state would tolerate non-Christians and treat them as people, with equal rights as the Christian population, it'd be quite tolerant compared to Saudi Arabia or Iran.

P.S. No, don't say the Vatican. The world's Christians are not moving in there, and it's not a real state anyway.

P.S.S. For some of you (the more radical Atheists) I know your atheist instincts are probably kicking in about now, but try to refrain from posting an anti-Christian rant or talking about atrocities that the Christians stopped committing over 100 years ago. And do not troll against me either. If Richard Dawkins is somehow on this site, then I'm asking him to stay far, far away from this forum. All he'd be able to do is rant anyway and call me an "intolerant bigot."

So, your only reason for this is,"The Muslims do it,and Christians can do it SO much better!"? Is that right? I would argue this is absurd, and not a very good reason. Also, somehow, I managed to curtail my atheistic instincts, although I think my head may explode now. There are more significant reasons, IMO, but I am doing my best to hold the EVIL back!!
This thread is like eavesdropping on a conversation in a mental asylum. - Bulproof

You can call your invisible friends whatever you like. - Desmac

What the hell kind of coked up sideshow has this thread turned into. - Casten
biomystic
Posts: 606
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/26/2014 10:15:45 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
It would be nice to have a U.S. President the equivalent of Pope Francis in intestinal fortitude. Perhaps our Black man is afraid to get offed if he actually did something than be another Israel stooge placed in highest U.S. office, another Hillary in blackface, both of them selling the Democratic Party and America over to Israel and the world's richest minority group controlling the U.S. economy.
RoderickSpode
Posts: 2,371
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/26/2014 10:28:31 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/26/2014 8:27:31 PM, bubbatheclown wrote:
This forum is not about whether the Founding Fathers intended for America to be a Christian nation. In fact, it is not necessarily about America, though it probably is.
The million dollar question is: should there be a Christian Nation, somewhere in the world?

I will define this Christian Nation. Non-Christians are not prohibited from being in this country. Any religion is allowed. Nobody is required by law to attend church. However, Christian values would be followed in this country. For instance, if the Bible said it was a sin to eat donuts and the leaders of this country felt strongly about this, then donuts would be banned. But then again, other religions would still be tolerated. The Ten Commandments would be displayed in the courthouses of this country, because it would be an openly Christian nation.

By this point you're probably wondering why. I'll put it this way: there are Muslim countries. In these Muslim countries Islam is the rule. Other religions are barely tolerated, if they're tolerated at all. Discrimination against other religions is commonplace in these countries, and Islam is the rule of law. Yet nobody seems to complain about this.
There are colleges in the United States (a country that stands for freedom and equality) where the teachers pretty much force the students to believe in God. If they don't they're heavily ridiculed by their professors, or even failed from the classes. No one complains about this.

So somewhere in the world, shouldn't there be a place where Christian principles are applied, in the same way there are places in the world where Muslim principles are applied, yet on a way more tolerant scale? And believe me, since this state would tolerate non-Christians and treat them as people, with equal rights as the Christian population, it'd be quite tolerant compared to Saudi Arabia or Iran.

P.S. No, don't say the Vatican. The world's Christians are not moving in there, and it's not a real state anyway.

P.S.S. For some of you (the more radical Atheists) I know your atheist instincts are probably kicking in about now, but try to refrain from posting an anti-Christian rant or talking about atrocities that the Christians stopped committing over 100 years ago. And do not troll against me either. If Richard Dawkins is somehow on this site, then I'm asking him to stay far, far away from this forum. All he'd be able to do is rant anyway and call me an "intolerant bigot."
I would say the ideal nation would be a theocracy. By theocracy I don't mean a nation run by a specific religion or Christian denomination, but a nation run by the actual creator of the Universe. I don't think anyone can refute the logic in allowing for the actual creator of the Universe to literally guide a nation in it's key decisions.

I personally believe that such a nation would be a Christian nation. If God reveals Himself to an individual, or even corporately like to a nation, which God is going to show up? I would say there is logical reasons to believe that it will be Jesus Christ. Most other gods are impersonal. The impersonal aspect of God is an issue in Islam for instance. The ancient pagan gods are sometimes used as parodies in similar fashion to the Flying Spaghetti Monster, or are more symbolic to a particular culture.
RoderickSpode
Posts: 2,371
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/26/2014 10:33:36 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/26/2014 8:27:31 PM, bubbatheclown wrote:


P.S. No, don't say the Vatican. The world's Christians are not moving in there, and it's not a real state anyway.

The Vatican would be a tough place for anyone to move to. It's even impossible to spend a night there without an invitation. I'm curious as to what you mean by not a real state though. It technically is a real State by definition of an independent nation status. Unless you mean something else.

Nice thread by the way.
bubbatheclown
Posts: 1,258
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/27/2014 2:01:52 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/26/2014 9:57:20 PM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 1/26/2014 8:27:31 PM, bubbatheclown wrote:
This forum is not about whether the Founding Fathers intended for America to be a Christian nation. In fact, it is not necessarily about America, though it probably is.
The million dollar question is: should there be a Christian Nation, somewhere in the world?

I will define this Christian Nation. Non-Christians are not prohibited from being in this country. Any religion is allowed. Nobody is required by law to attend church. However, Christian values would be followed in this country. For instance, if the Bible said it was a sin to eat donuts and the leaders of this country felt strongly about this, then donuts would be banned. But then again, other religions would still be tolerated. The Ten Commandments would be displayed in the courthouses of this country, because it would be an openly Christian nation.

By this point you're probably wondering why. I'll put it this way: there are Muslim countries. In these Muslim countries Islam is the rule. Other religions are barely tolerated, if they're tolerated at all. Discrimination against other religions is commonplace in these countries, and Islam is the rule of law. Yet nobody seems to complain about this.
There are colleges in the United States (a country that stands for freedom and equality) where the teachers pretty much force the students to believe in God. If they don't they're heavily ridiculed by their professors, or even failed from the classes. No one complains about this.

So somewhere in the world, shouldn't there be a place where Christian principles are applied, in the same way there are places in the world where Muslim principles are applied, yet on a way more tolerant scale? And believe me, since this state would tolerate non-Christians and treat them as people, with equal rights as the Christian population, it'd be quite tolerant compared to Saudi Arabia or Iran.

P.S. No, don't say the Vatican. The world's Christians are not moving in there, and it's not a real state anyway.

P.S.S. For some of you (the more radical Atheists) I know your atheist instincts are probably kicking in about now, but try to refrain from posting an anti-Christian rant or talking about atrocities that the Christians stopped committing over 100 years ago. And do not troll against me either. If Richard Dawkins is somehow on this site, then I'm asking him to stay far, far away from this forum. All he'd be able to do is rant anyway and call me an "intolerant bigot."

So, your only reason for this is,"The Muslims do it,and Christians can do it SO much better!"? Is that right? I would argue this is absurd, and not a very good reason. Also, somehow, I managed to curtail my atheistic instincts, although I think my head may explode now. There are more significant reasons, IMO, but I am doing my best to hold the EVIL back!!

I was not saying that all or most atheists were this way. I was talking to the radical atheists, who think that the UN should outlaw religion, or at least Christianity. And I never called anyone evil. Not on this forum, anyone.

And actually, any group that recognizes the basic rights of other groups could do better than the Middle East today. If this Christian nation had even the slightest degree of tolerance it'd be equal to some really bad Muslim nations. If it had a decent amount of tolerance it'd be better than some Muslim nations. If it recognized that people of other religions were not inferior, then they'd be a lot better than some Muslim nations.

As for this nation, it could probably be located in a heavily Conservative Christian place. Perhaps Texas. It would allow immigration from Texas to the United States and from the United States to Texas.
That way, in the event of the extremely unlikely scenario where the church reverts back to Medieval barbarism and starts burning heretics, the Texans can flee to the United States. Likewise, if this state fares a lot better than the United States, then USA citizens can flee to Texas, provided they follow the rules set down.
PotBelliedGeek
Posts: 4,298
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/27/2014 3:13:21 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
I have a number of points.

1. You base the argument on the fact that the Muslims run their countries so. This raises two subpoints.

A. Should the Muslims do this in the first place?
B. Why do the Muslims do it? Does the same reasoning apply to Christianity?

2. It is not possible to be tolerant and fair to all religions while the government clearly endorses one particular religion over all others. Equality is not possible, and will be disregarded in such state.

3. In order to avoid inevitable religious oppression, though it may not be intentional, the non-Christian inhabitants of said state must be able to leave whenever they wish. Please note that this not only means no restriction by the government, but they must also have a feasible destination to which they might go, where they can set up a new life.
Religion Forum Ambassador

HUFFLEPUFF FOR LIFE!!!!!!!!!!!!
PotBelliedGeek
Posts: 4,298
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/27/2014 3:16:28 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/27/2014 2:01:52 PM, bubbatheclown wrote:
At 1/26/2014 9:57:20 PM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 1/26/2014 8:27:31 PM, bubbatheclown wrote:
This forum is not about whether the Founding Fathers intended for America to be a Christian nation. In fact, it is not necessarily about America, though it probably is.
The million dollar question is: should there be a Christian Nation, somewhere in the world?

I will define this Christian Nation. Non-Christians are not prohibited from being in this country. Any religion is allowed. Nobody is required by law to attend church. However, Christian values would be followed in this country. For instance, if the Bible said it was a sin to eat donuts and the leaders of this country felt strongly about this, then donuts would be banned. But then again, other religions would still be tolerated. The Ten Commandments would be displayed in the courthouses of this country, because it would be an openly Christian nation.

By this point you're probably wondering why. I'll put it this way: there are Muslim countries. In these Muslim countries Islam is the rule. Other religions are barely tolerated, if they're tolerated at all. Discrimination against other religions is commonplace in these countries, and Islam is the rule of law. Yet nobody seems to complain about this.
There are colleges in the United States (a country that stands for freedom and equality) where the teachers pretty much force the students to believe in God. If they don't they're heavily ridiculed by their professors, or even failed from the classes. No one complains about this.

So somewhere in the world, shouldn't there be a place where Christian principles are applied, in the same way there are places in the world where Muslim principles are applied, yet on a way more tolerant scale? And believe me, since this state would tolerate non-Christians and treat them as people, with equal rights as the Christian population, it'd be quite tolerant compared to Saudi Arabia or Iran.

P.S. No, don't say the Vatican. The world's Christians are not moving in there, and it's not a real state anyway.

P.S.S. For some of you (the more radical Atheists) I know your atheist instincts are probably kicking in about now, but try to refrain from posting an anti-Christian rant or talking about atrocities that the Christians stopped committing over 100 years ago. And do not troll against me either. If Richard Dawkins is somehow on this site, then I'm asking him to stay far, far away from this forum. All he'd be able to do is rant anyway and call me an "intolerant bigot."

So, your only reason for this is,"The Muslims do it,and Christians can do it SO much better!"? Is that right? I would argue this is absurd, and not a very good reason. Also, somehow, I managed to curtail my atheistic instincts, although I think my head may explode now. There are more significant reasons, IMO, but I am doing my best to hold the EVIL back!!

I was not saying that all or most atheists were this way. I was talking to the radical atheists, who think that the UN should outlaw religion, or at least Christianity. And I never called anyone evil. Not on this forum, anyone.

And actually, any group that recognizes the basic rights of other groups could do better than the Middle East today.

It would be better to qualify this statement. I have been to many middle eastern countries, and in reality only two of them are as intolerant as some would think, and even then their level of intolerance is greatly over exaggerated.

If this Christian nation had even the slightest degree of tolerance it'd be equal to some really bad Muslim nations. If it had a decent amount of tolerance it'd be better than some Muslim nations. If it recognized that people of other religions were not inferior, then they'd be a lot better than some Muslim nations.

As for this nation, it could probably be located in a heavily Conservative Christian place. Perhaps Texas. It would allow immigration from Texas to the United States and from the United States to Texas.
That way, in the event of the extremely unlikely scenario where the church reverts back to Medieval barbarism and starts burning heretics, the Texans can flee to the United States. Likewise, if this state fares a lot better than the United States, then USA citizens can flee to Texas, provided they follow the rules set down.
Religion Forum Ambassador

HUFFLEPUFF FOR LIFE!!!!!!!!!!!!
bubbatheclown
Posts: 1,258
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/27/2014 3:23:30 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/27/2014 3:16:28 PM, PotBelliedGeek wrote:
At 1/27/2014 2:01:52 PM, bubbatheclown wrote:
At 1/26/2014 9:57:20 PM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 1/26/2014 8:27:31 PM, bubbatheclown wrote:
This forum is not about whether the Founding Fathers intended for America to be a Christian nation. In fact, it is not necessarily about America, though it probably is.
The million dollar question is: should there be a Christian Nation, somewhere in the world?

I will define this Christian Nation. Non-Christians are not prohibited from being in this country. Any religion is allowed. Nobody is required by law to attend church. However, Christian values would be followed in this country. For instance, if the Bible said it was a sin to eat donuts and the leaders of this country felt strongly about this, then donuts would be banned. But then again, other religions would still be tolerated. The Ten Commandments would be displayed in the courthouses of this country, because it would be an openly Christian nation.

By this point you're probably wondering why. I'll put it this way: there are Muslim countries. In these Muslim countries Islam is the rule. Other religions are barely tolerated, if they're tolerated at all. Discrimination against other religions is commonplace in these countries, and Islam is the rule of law. Yet nobody seems to complain about this.
There are colleges in the United States (a country that stands for freedom and equality) where the teachers pretty much force the students to believe in God. If they don't they're heavily ridiculed by their professors, or even failed from the classes. No one complains about this.

So somewhere in the world, shouldn't there be a place where Christian principles are applied, in the same way there are places in the world where Muslim principles are applied, yet on a way more tolerant scale? And believe me, since this state would tolerate non-Christians and treat them as people, with equal rights as the Christian population, it'd be quite tolerant compared to Saudi Arabia or Iran.

P.S. No, don't say the Vatican. The world's Christians are not moving in there, and it's not a real state anyway.

P.S.S. For some of you (the more radical Atheists) I know your atheist instincts are probably kicking in about now, but try to refrain from posting an anti-Christian rant or talking about atrocities that the Christians stopped committing over 100 years ago. And do not troll against me either. If Richard Dawkins is somehow on this site, then I'm asking him to stay far, far away from this forum. All he'd be able to do is rant anyway and call me an "intolerant bigot."

So, your only reason for this is,"The Muslims do it,and Christians can do it SO much better!"? Is that right? I would argue this is absurd, and not a very good reason. Also, somehow, I managed to curtail my atheistic instincts, although I think my head may explode now. There are more significant reasons, IMO, but I am doing my best to hold the EVIL back!!

I was not saying that all or most atheists were this way. I was talking to the radical atheists, who think that the UN should outlaw religion, or at least Christianity. And I never called anyone evil. Not on this forum, anyone.

And actually, any group that recognizes the basic rights of other groups could do better than the Middle East today.

It would be better to qualify this statement. I have been to many middle eastern countries, and in reality only two of them are as intolerant as some would think, and even then their level of intolerance is greatly over exaggerated.

If this Christian nation had even the slightest degree of tolerance it'd be equal to some really bad Muslim nations. If it had a decent amount of tolerance it'd be better than some Muslim nations. If it recognized that people of other religions were not inferior, then they'd be a lot better than some Muslim nations.

As for this nation, it could probably be located in a heavily Conservative Christian place. Perhaps Texas. It would allow immigration from Texas to the United States and from the United States to Texas.
That way, in the event of the extremely unlikely scenario where the church reverts back to Medieval barbarism and starts burning heretics, the Texans can flee to the United States. Likewise, if this state fares a lot better than the United States, then USA citizens can flee to Texas, provided they follow the rules set down.

Okay then, perhaps not. But still, if there is such thing as a Muslim nation or a Sikh nation (Bangladesh, I think) then why not a Christian nation? Yes, I know that Christianity did some horrible things in the Middle Ages. But are today's Christians the perpetrators or those atrocities? Would Christians today perpetrate those atrocities if given the chance?
The answer to both of these questions are no. Therefore, I argue there should be a Christian nation.
PotBelliedGeek
Posts: 4,298
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/27/2014 3:26:24 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/27/2014 3:23:30 PM, bubbatheclown wrote:
At 1/27/2014 3:16:28 PM, PotBelliedGeek wrote:
At 1/27/2014 2:01:52 PM, bubbatheclown wrote:
At 1/26/2014 9:57:20 PM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 1/26/2014 8:27:31 PM, bubbatheclown wrote:
This forum is not about whether the Founding Fathers intended for America to be a Christian nation. In fact, it is not necessarily about America, though it probably is.
The million dollar question is: should there be a Christian Nation, somewhere in the world?

I will define this Christian Nation. Non-Christians are not prohibited from being in this country. Any religion is allowed. Nobody is required by law to attend church. However, Christian values would be followed in this country. For instance, if the Bible said it was a sin to eat donuts and the leaders of this country felt strongly about this, then donuts would be banned. But then again, other religions would still be tolerated. The Ten Commandments would be displayed in the courthouses of this country, because it would be an openly Christian nation.

By this point you're probably wondering why. I'll put it this way: there are Muslim countries. In these Muslim countries Islam is the rule. Other religions are barely tolerated, if they're tolerated at all. Discrimination against other religions is commonplace in these countries, and Islam is the rule of law. Yet nobody seems to complain about this.
There are colleges in the United States (a country that stands for freedom and equality) where the teachers pretty much force the students to believe in God. If they don't they're heavily ridiculed by their professors, or even failed from the classes. No one complains about this.

So somewhere in the world, shouldn't there be a place where Christian principles are applied, in the same way there are places in the world where Muslim principles are applied, yet on a way more tolerant scale? And believe me, since this state would tolerate non-Christians and treat them as people, with equal rights as the Christian population, it'd be quite tolerant compared to Saudi Arabia or Iran.

P.S. No, don't say the Vatican. The world's Christians are not moving in there, and it's not a real state anyway.

P.S.S. For some of you (the more radical Atheists) I know your atheist instincts are probably kicking in about now, but try to refrain from posting an anti-Christian rant or talking about atrocities that the Christians stopped committing over 100 years ago. And do not troll against me either. If Richard Dawkins is somehow on this site, then I'm asking him to stay far, far away from this forum. All he'd be able to do is rant anyway and call me an "intolerant bigot."

So, your only reason for this is,"The Muslims do it,and Christians can do it SO much better!"? Is that right? I would argue this is absurd, and not a very good reason. Also, somehow, I managed to curtail my atheistic instincts, although I think my head may explode now. There are more significant reasons, IMO, but I am doing my best to hold the EVIL back!!

I was not saying that all or most atheists were this way. I was talking to the radical atheists, who think that the UN should outlaw religion, or at least Christianity. And I never called anyone evil. Not on this forum, anyone.

And actually, any group that recognizes the basic rights of other groups could do better than the Middle East today.

It would be better to qualify this statement. I have been to many middle eastern countries, and in reality only two of them are as intolerant as some would think, and even then their level of intolerance is greatly over exaggerated.

If this Christian nation had even the slightest degree of tolerance it'd be equal to some really bad Muslim nations. If it had a decent amount of tolerance it'd be better than some Muslim nations. If it recognized that people of other religions were not inferior, then they'd be a lot better than some Muslim nations.

As for this nation, it could probably be located in a heavily Conservative Christian place. Perhaps Texas. It would allow immigration from Texas to the United States and from the United States to Texas.
That way, in the event of the extremely unlikely scenario where the church reverts back to Medieval barbarism and starts burning heretics, the Texans can flee to the United States. Likewise, if this state fares a lot better than the United States, then USA citizens can flee to Texas, provided they follow the rules set down.

Okay then, perhaps not. But still, if there is such thing as a Muslim nation or a Sikh nation (Bangladesh, I think) then why not a Christian nation? Yes, I know that Christianity did some horrible things in the Middle Ages. But are today's Christians the perpetrators or those atrocities? Would Christians today perpetrate those atrocities if given the chance?
The answer to both of these questions are no. Therefore, I argue there should be a Christian nation.

Please see my earlier points. If you wish to invoke the existence of Muslim nations as justification, you must first illustrate that Muslim nations should exist as well.
Religion Forum Ambassador

HUFFLEPUFF FOR LIFE!!!!!!!!!!!!
Skepticalone
Posts: 6,093
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/27/2014 3:56:54 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/27/2014 2:01:52 PM, bubbatheclown wrote:
At 1/26/2014 9:57:20 PM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 1/26/2014 8:27:31 PM, bubbatheclown wrote:
This forum is not about whether the Founding Fathers intended for America to be a Christian nation. In fact, it is not necessarily about America, though it probably is.
The million dollar question is: should there be a Christian Nation, somewhere in the world?

I will define this Christian Nation. Non-Christians are not prohibited from being in this country. Any religion is allowed. Nobody is required by law to attend church. However, Christian values would be followed in this country. For instance, if the Bible said it was a sin to eat donuts and the leaders of this country felt strongly about this, then donuts would be banned. But then again, other religions would still be tolerated. The Ten Commandments would be displayed in the courthouses of this country, because it would be an openly Christian nation.

By this point you're probably wondering why. I'll put it this way: there are Muslim countries. In these Muslim countries Islam is the rule. Other religions are barely tolerated, if they're tolerated at all. Discrimination against other religions is commonplace in these countries, and Islam is the rule of law. Yet nobody seems to complain about this.
There are colleges in the United States (a country that stands for freedom and equality) where the teachers pretty much force the students to believe in God. If they don't they're heavily ridiculed by their professors, or even failed from the classes. No one complains about this.

So somewhere in the world, shouldn't there be a place where Christian principles are applied, in the same way there are places in the world where Muslim principles are applied, yet on a way more tolerant scale? And believe me, since this state would tolerate non-Christians and treat them as people, with equal rights as the Christian population, it'd be quite tolerant compared to Saudi Arabia or Iran.

P.S. No, don't say the Vatican. The world's Christians are not moving in there, and it's not a real state anyway.

P.S.S. For some of you (the more radical Atheists) I know your atheist instincts are probably kicking in about now, but try to refrain from posting an anti-Christian rant or talking about atrocities that the Christians stopped committing over 100 years ago. And do not troll against me either. If Richard Dawkins is somehow on this site, then I'm asking him to stay far, far away from this forum. All he'd be able to do is rant anyway and call me an "intolerant bigot."

So, your only reason for this is,"The Muslims do it,and Christians can do it SO much better!"? Is that right? I would argue this is absurd, and not a very good reason. Also, somehow, I managed to curtail my atheistic instincts, although I think my head may explode now. There are more significant reasons, IMO, but I am doing my best to hold the EVIL back!!

I was not saying that all or most atheists were this way. I was talking to the radical atheists, who think that the UN should outlaw religion, or at least Christianity. And I never called anyone evil. Not on this forum, anyone.

I know, I was just playing, but I do think you are confusing atheists with anti-theist.

And actually, any group that recognizes the basic rights of other groups could do better than the Middle East today. If this Christian nation had even the slightest degree of tolerance it'd be equal to some really bad Muslim nations. If it had a decent amount of tolerance it'd be better than some Muslim nations. If it recognized that people of other religions were not inferior, then they'd be a lot better than some Muslim nations.

If the government endorses one religion over all others how is this not discriminatory? Can this type of government make laws in regards to religion? I'm not sold on how this would be a good thing.

As for this nation, it could probably be located in a heavily Conservative Christian place. Perhaps Texas. It would allow immigration from Texas to the United States and from the United States to Texas.
That way, in the event of the extremely unlikely scenario where the church reverts back to Medieval barbarism and starts burning heretics, the Texans can flee to the United States. Likewise, if this state fares a lot better than the United States, then USA citizens can flee to Texas, provided they follow the rules set down.

Lol, Hell no! Not Texas! I have no desire to become a crispy Skepticalone! Lol, this may not be a very strong argument to you, but it is VERY compelling for me!
This thread is like eavesdropping on a conversation in a mental asylum. - Bulproof

You can call your invisible friends whatever you like. - Desmac

What the hell kind of coked up sideshow has this thread turned into. - Casten
PotBelliedGeek
Posts: 4,298
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/27/2014 4:22:08 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/27/2014 3:56:54 PM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 1/27/2014 2:01:52 PM, bubbatheclown wrote:
At 1/26/2014 9:57:20 PM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 1/26/2014 8:27:31 PM, bubbatheclown wrote:
This forum is not about whether the Founding Fathers intended for America to be a Christian nation. In fact, it is not necessarily about America, though it probably is.
The million dollar question is: should there be a Christian Nation, somewhere in the world?

I will define this Christian Nation. Non-Christians are not prohibited from being in this country. Any religion is allowed. Nobody is required by law to attend church. However, Christian values would be followed in this country. For instance, if the Bible said it was a sin to eat donuts and the leaders of this country felt strongly about this, then donuts would be banned. But then again, other religions would still be tolerated. The Ten Commandments would be displayed in the courthouses of this country, because it would be an openly Christian nation.

By this point you're probably wondering why. I'll put it this way: there are Muslim countries. In these Muslim countries Islam is the rule. Other religions are barely tolerated, if they're tolerated at all. Discrimination against other religions is commonplace in these countries, and Islam is the rule of law. Yet nobody seems to complain about this.
There are colleges in the United States (a country that stands for freedom and equality) where the teachers pretty much force the students to believe in God. If they don't they're heavily ridiculed by their professors, or even failed from the classes. No one complains about this.

So somewhere in the world, shouldn't there be a place where Christian principles are applied, in the same way there are places in the world where Muslim principles are applied, yet on a way more tolerant scale? And believe me, since this state would tolerate non-Christians and treat them as people, with equal rights as the Christian population, it'd be quite tolerant compared to Saudi Arabia or Iran.

P.S. No, don't say the Vatican. The world's Christians are not moving in there, and it's not a real state anyway.

P.S.S. For some of you (the more radical Atheists) I know your atheist instincts are probably kicking in about now, but try to refrain from posting an anti-Christian rant or talking about atrocities that the Christians stopped committing over 100 years ago. And do not troll against me either. If Richard Dawkins is somehow on this site, then I'm asking him to stay far, far away from this forum. All he'd be able to do is rant anyway and call me an "intolerant bigot."

So, your only reason for this is,"The Muslims do it,and Christians can do it SO much better!"? Is that right? I would argue this is absurd, and not a very good reason. Also, somehow, I managed to curtail my atheistic instincts, although I think my head may explode now. There are more significant reasons, IMO, but I am doing my best to hold the EVIL back!!

I was not saying that all or most atheists were this way. I was talking to the radical atheists, who think that the UN should outlaw religion, or at least Christianity. And I never called anyone evil. Not on this forum, anyone.

I know, I was just playing, but I do think you are confusing atheists with anti-theist.

And actually, any group that recognizes the basic rights of other groups could do better than the Middle East today. If this Christian nation had even the slightest degree of tolerance it'd be equal to some really bad Muslim nations. If it had a decent amount of tolerance it'd be better than some Muslim nations. If it recognized that people of other religions were not inferior, then they'd be a lot better than some Muslim nations.

If the government endorses one religion over all others how is this not discriminatory? Can this type of government make laws in regards to religion? I'm not sold on how this would be a good thing.

As for this nation, it could probably be located in a heavily Conservative Christian place. Perhaps Texas. It would allow immigration from Texas to the United States and from the United States to Texas.
That way, in the event of the extremely unlikely scenario where the church reverts back to Medieval barbarism and starts burning heretics, the Texans can flee to the United States. Likewise, if this state fares a lot better than the United States, then USA citizens can flee to Texas, provided they follow the rules set down.

Lol, Hell no! Not Texas! I have no desire to become a crispy Skepticalone! Lol, this may not be a very strong argument to you, but it is VERY compelling for me!

I'm guessing someone on this thread lives in Texas......
Religion Forum Ambassador

HUFFLEPUFF FOR LIFE!!!!!!!!!!!!
Romanii
Posts: 4,851
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/27/2014 4:39:24 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/26/2014 8:27:31 PM, bubbatheclown wrote:

P.S.S. For some of you (the more radical Atheists) I know your atheist instincts are probably kicking in about now, but try to refrain from posting an anti-Christian rant or talking about atrocities that the Christians stopped committing over 100 years ago. And do not troll against me either. If Richard Dawkins is somehow on this site, then I'm asking him to stay far, far away from this forum. All he'd be able to do is rant anyway and call me an "intolerant bigot."

Lol, I've always wondered if Dawkins is secretly is on this site. I have a few radical atheists in mind who would fit right in with his attitude towards religion...

Dawkins is an "intolerant bigot".

I've been thinking of creating a forum where I post a rebuttal to each of his major arguments against the existence of God...
slo1
Posts: 4,314
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/27/2014 7:07:43 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/27/2014 3:13:21 PM, PotBelliedGeek wrote:
I have a number of points.

1. You base the argument on the fact that the Muslims run their countries so. This raises two subpoints.

A. Should the Muslims do this in the first place?
B. Why do the Muslims do it? Does the same reasoning apply to Christianity?

2. It is not possible to be tolerant and fair to all religions while the government clearly endorses one particular religion over all others. Equality is not possible, and will be disregarded in such state.

3. In order to avoid inevitable religious oppression, though it may not be intentional, the non-Christian inhabitants of said state must be able to leave whenever they wish. Please note that this not only means no restriction by the government, but they must also have a feasible destination to which they might go, where they can set up a new life.

To expand on your #2 & #3, which are dead on.

In order for a Christian nation to remain Christian it either has to maintain a majority to maintain a facade of democracy either by limiting non-christian immigration or even regulating conversions to other religions or it has to be authoritarian to allow the Christian minority to rule over a non-Christian majority.

Add in the fact that the Christian sects are extremely varied in belief. Take evolution as an example. A majority of Christians believe it was put into play by the creator as the method to create life on earth. Fundamentalists obviously don't believe that. Does a Christian nation teach evolution at school? Either way it is one Christian sect forcing its will over another Christian sect.

Any person who wants the freedom to practice his own beliefs will answer with a resounding "No" to the original question.

Those who want to force others to their will and don't understand that their support for freedom is what allows them to practice their personal belief will answer "Yes".