"There was a time" is the operative part of your statement.
Now it is the common view.
There was also a time when believing that the earth was round and it revolved around the sun was considered extremely dangerous. Just like there was a time when Witches were burned at the stake here in America, and the right to own another human as a piece of property was considered commonplace. There was a time when allowing women to vote was considered socially dangerous as well.
For better or for worse, society continues to move beyond beliefs and ideas that it once held, and accept those new "dangerous" ideas.
Now I'm not exactly sure what you are referring to by "social world-view", but I am assuming you mean my position that as society relaxes its social restrictions, people must come to accept it, rather than to fight against what has already happened. I am assuming you are not accusing me of being a socialist.
I'm probably wrong...and generally don't jump to conclusions but at times you come across and appear to be antagonistic towards those who outwardly show their Christian convictions.
I support anyone in their own privately held religious beliefs, whatever they may be.
But I think religion is between you, your family, and your place of worship. Period.
I do get antagonistic when people try to shove it in my face, act holier-than-thou, assume that their beliefs of blind faith are somehow more valid than someone else's beliefs of blind faith (especially those who choose not to believe blindly at all), or want to legislate based on arbitrary religious mores.
"There was a time" is the operative part of your statement."
"Now it is the common view." ]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]
Common or not..doesn't make it correct. And I think the argument could be made that certain "views" aren't as "common" as some would like us to think. There is evidence that suggests....that when all the smoke clears..this countries population is quite a bit more socially conservative...than your take on the subject.
There was also a time when believing that the earth was round and it revolved around the sun was considered extremely dangerous. Just like there was a time when Witches were burned at the stake here in America, and the right to own another human as a piece of property was considered commonplace. There was a time when allowing women to vote was considered socially dangerous as well.
{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{
And you find something wrong with those practices? Just kidding....(g). Yes, humans have a wealth?? of negative examples to pull from. On the flip side.....good moral people eventually stood up..fought,...and died, to end those and other like practices.
For better or for worse, society continues to move beyond beliefs and ideas that it once held, and accept those new "dangerous" ideas. {{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{
I "feel" you mocking me...hehehe. No problem....if you are. My mistake if you aren't. What I deem to be "dangerous"...I'm fairly sure, ( based upon what you've previously wrote...) you wouldn't. It might be just the proverbial "slippery slope" of incrementalism...that I fear. You know once you've crossed the Rubicon...it's real hard to go back.
Now I'm not exactly sure what you are referring to by "social world-view", but I am assuming you mean my position that as society relaxes its social restrictions, people must come to accept it, rather than to fight against what has already happened. I am assuming you are not accusing me of being a socialist.
{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{
Of course I don't "know" you well enough to label you a socialist yet. :O) But from a purely anecdotal perspective..it wouldn't be intellectually honest of me...to say that you didn't certainly have some characteristics of one. Nothing personal...just a incomplete observation...at this point.
As far as demanding that we just accept certain behavior, just accept irresponsibility....I will never do that. I think your position is wrong, and ultimately very dangerous.
I support anyone in their own privately held religious beliefs, whatever they may be. But I think religion is between you, your family, and your place of worship. Period. I do get antagonistic when people try to shove it in my face, act holier-than-thou, assume that their beliefs of blind faith are somehow more valid than someone else's beliefs of blind faith (especially those who choose not to believe blindly at all), or want to legislate based on arbitrary religious mores.
{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{
I suspected as much.....And I've sympathy for your tone..and stance. I had much the same attitude at one time........It is my contention that religious folks have turned more people away from God..than towards Him. It is a travesty..and for that I am ashamed. While I believe one's faith to be a personal relationship...I also understand that sharing that relationship with others is part of the Great Commission..It is how one undertakes that Commission that makes all the difference. It would be my pleasure to expound on the subject with you in private...if you are willing. If not...I certainly understand. I've no problem with that..as I've been there...in a manner of speaking.
You must realize...that much of your rebuttal and original arguments have a distinct Democrat flavor to them. And thusly I can understand your debating stance/style better. and your attraction to Arnold...As I think you've mentioned...he's appealing to many Democrats. You know..many Dems in both Houses "call" themselves "Progressives"...and "Moderates"...and "Conservatives" too. When in "fact", and in "action" they are anything but.......And it most certainly happens on the "Grey" side of the aisle too.
Fwiw-