Total Posts:9|Showing Posts:1-9
Jump to topic:

Question to Athiests

POPOO5560
Posts: 2,487
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/25/2015 3:24:05 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
which Law you prefer to live under as an athiest (the law of the country..) - Islamic, Jewish or Christian (restricted one they must follow the Bible...). and which one is the worst lol
Never fart near dog
Vox_Veritas
Posts: 7,074
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/25/2015 4:53:05 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
Religious texts obviously do not cover stuff like traffic code and dealing drugs, so other laws are needed. However, in a nation which was founded upon a certain religion, it's laws would need to be based on that religion's principles and moral code.
Call me Vox, the Resident Contrarian of debate.org.

The DDO Blog:
https://debatedotorg.wordpress.com...

#drinkthecoffeenotthekoolaid
intellectuallyprimitive
Posts: 1,000
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/25/2015 4:54:13 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/25/2015 4:53:05 PM, Vox_Veritas wrote:
Religious texts obviously do not cover stuff like traffic code and dealing drugs, so other laws are needed. However, in a nation which was founded upon a certain religion, it's laws would need to be based on that religion's principles and moral code.

Why would laws 'need' to be a derivative of a religions principals or values?
Vox_Veritas
Posts: 7,074
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/25/2015 5:04:40 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/25/2015 4:54:13 PM, intellectuallyprimitive wrote:
At 3/25/2015 4:53:05 PM, Vox_Veritas wrote:
Religious texts obviously do not cover stuff like traffic code and dealing drugs, so other laws are needed. However, in a nation which was founded upon a certain religion, it's laws would need to be based on that religion's principles and moral code.

Why would laws 'need' to be a derivative of a religions principals or values?

Not in the United States, but in a theocracy built upon a certain religion.

You see, a nation is for its people. If a large enough group of people who share a religion get together and decide that they want to live in a place where their religion is THE religion, then they should be able to have such a place available somewhere on Earth. Of course, this does come with some problems. MaInly the fact that few large areas are completely unpopulated in the modern age, meaning that unless you go to Ellesmere Island or something, there will be people already living in said area who have a different religion and don't want to live according to said religion. Also, even among the religious population some dissenters would emerge. I believe that these problems can be overcome.
Call me Vox, the Resident Contrarian of debate.org.

The DDO Blog:
https://debatedotorg.wordpress.com...

#drinkthecoffeenotthekoolaid
intellectuallyprimitive
Posts: 1,000
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/25/2015 5:35:31 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/25/2015 5:04:40 PM, Vox_Veritas wrote:
At 3/25/2015 4:54:13 PM, intellectuallyprimitive wrote:
At 3/25/2015 4:53:05 PM, Vox_Veritas wrote:
Religious texts obviously do not cover stuff like traffic code and dealing drugs, so other laws are needed. However, in a nation which was founded upon a certain religion, it's laws would need to be based on that religion's principles and moral code.

Why would laws 'need' to be a derivative of a religions principals or values?

Not in the United States, but in a theocracy built upon a certain religion.

You see, a nation is for its people. If a large enough group of people who share a religion get together and decide that they want to live in a place where their religion is THE religion, then they should be able to have such a place available somewhere on Earth. Of course, this does come with some problems. MaInly the fact that few large areas are completely unpopulated in the modern age, meaning that unless you go to Ellesmere Island or something, there will be people already living in said area who have a different religion and don't want to live according to said religion. Also, even among the religious population some dissenters would emerge. I believe that these problems can be overcome.

I suppose that if thats what the general consensus is, then establishing laws in a theocracy from religious morals is suitable.
RuvDraba
Posts: 6,033
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/25/2015 5:38:27 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/25/2015 3:24:05 PM, POPOO5560 wrote:
which Law you prefer to live under as an athiest (the law of the country..) - Islamic, Jewish or Christian (restricted one they must follow the Bible...). and which one is the worst lol

Each doctrine enshrines evil.

To condone evil law is an evil act, so I cannot approve of any.
Vox_Veritas
Posts: 7,074
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/25/2015 5:38:41 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/25/2015 5:35:31 PM, intellectuallyprimitive wrote:
At 3/25/2015 5:04:40 PM, Vox_Veritas wrote:
At 3/25/2015 4:54:13 PM, intellectuallyprimitive wrote:
At 3/25/2015 4:53:05 PM, Vox_Veritas wrote:
Religious texts obviously do not cover stuff like traffic code and dealing drugs, so other laws are needed. However, in a nation which was founded upon a certain religion, it's laws would need to be based on that religion's principles and moral code.

Why would laws 'need' to be a derivative of a religions principals or values?

Not in the United States, but in a theocracy built upon a certain religion.

You see, a nation is for its people. If a large enough group of people who share a religion get together and decide that they want to live in a place where their religion is THE religion, then they should be able to have such a place available somewhere on Earth. Of course, this does come with some problems. MaInly the fact that few large areas are completely unpopulated in the modern age, meaning that unless you go to Ellesmere Island or something, there will be people already living in said area who have a different religion and don't want to live according to said religion. Also, even among the religious population some dissenters would emerge. I believe that these problems can be overcome.

I suppose that if thats what the general consensus is, then establishing laws in a theocracy from religious morals is suitable.

Despite this, people act as though we should do all we can to change Saudi Arabia. So they have Sharia Law. So what?
Of course, as a provision towards that minority, they should be given the chance to accept a government-provided immigration trip to the country of their choosing.
Call me Vox, the Resident Contrarian of debate.org.

The DDO Blog:
https://debatedotorg.wordpress.com...

#drinkthecoffeenotthekoolaid