Posted on 08/29/2006 6:51:14 AM PDT by headsonpikes
We all know the basic alternatives that form the familiar "spectrum" of American politics and culture.
If a young person is turned off by religion or attracted by the achievements of science, and he wants to embrace a secular outlook, he is told--by both sides of the debate--that his place is with the collectivists and social subjectivists of the left. On the other hand, if he admires the free market and wants America to have a bold, independent national defense, then he is told--again, by both sides--that his natural home is with the religious right.
But what if all of this is terribly wrong? What if it's possible to hold some of the key convictions associated with the right, being pro-free-market and supporting the war, and even to do so more strongly and consistently than most on the right--but still to be secular? What if it's possible to reject the socialism subjectivism of the left and believe in the importance of morality, but without believing in God? ....
(Excerpt) Read more at realclearpolitics.com ...
Hey, you posted something NEW!! Congrats. How sick I get of the same ole spam...
Nobody wants a wimpy god.
There are people who happen to live moral lives who do not believe in God. Which is not to say that there actually is such a thing as morality in the absence of God.
Neither of which addresses the point of the article however, so it's just a comment on one line of the excerpt.
Regardless, it should be remembered that it is the believers in God that get things done whether it's a William Jennings Bryant or Martin Luther King Jr. on the left, or a Ronald Reagan or Billy Graham on the right.
In the fight against communism, the atheists were generally cheering on the Reds or sneering from the sidelines.
Another comment on a line there; One can believe in God and be spiritual in the absence of "religion". God is not religious.
You `tub-thumpers' are out of the closet all right.
http://www.watchman.net/articles/pray.html
So, Jimmy Swaggart, Oral Roberts and that really weird looking guy (RWLG) in that `Crystal Cathedral' whose-name-escapes-me, they were all meeting to `chew the fat', but specifically, to talk about a sensitive subject: `tithing'.
The RWLG said, "I figure half goes to our operating expenses, including my salary, of course. The residue goes to God."
Oral said, "The Lord will call me home if I don't use 3/4 for His purposes--overhead, `walking around money', rentals, etc.--you've gotta `feed the bulldog' you know! And He gets the rest: orphans, the RNC ... things like that, you know."
And Jimmy chimed in: "We just put all the offerings in a big peach basket, then toss it all in the air. Whatever the Lord catches, He can keep!"
MacDonald's article showed about as much courage and insight as a drunken dorm room bull session. We should be talking about the rest of the TAC symposium of which it was a part. However, the author of this article is one of the least insipid Rand admirers I've yet read.
Right-wing atheists are still freeloading off the accumulated spiritual and moral capital of Christendom. Though they often aren't actively subverting it like the secular left, neither are they contributing to its strength. Reason itself is a divine capacity, requiring a certain amount of credulous trust even among those who reason only in service of skepticism.
Both Buddhism and Taoism are non "thiestic" religious philosophies (religions), and each contain mechanisms for distinguishing right from wrong.
Who defines what is right and what is wrong in a world with no God?
The right needs to have a long, open, honest debate about the role of religion. We need it now more than ever because we are in the middle of a war with an enemy that is defined by his religious fervor and by his attempt to make his religion dominate the "public square," to borrow a catchphrase from the religious right. If we don't understand the real nature and value of Western, Enlightenment secularism, then we can't fully understand what is at stake in this clash of civilizations, and in the long run, we won't know how to win it.
Unfortunately, many people just don't get it, and have allowed Islamic terrorists to convince them that we are engaged in a "holy war". These people couldn't have been played better - this is exactly what our enemy wants.
Rational self-interest. It's obvious the believers in God have a hard time with "right" and "wrong." Is killing heretics "right" or "wrong?" You'll get different answers from different religious types and at different times.
The Religious Right, as you call it, has owned the table of politics for all but the last couple of centuries.
We'll have no whining from the sky-pilots, thanks.
You left out "political conservativsm" - the old school constitutionalists who won't simply take a social agenda into the political arena and let the end justify the means.
genesis:
18:20 And the LORD said, Because the cry of Sodom and Gomorrah is great, and because their sin is very grievous;
18:21 I will go down now, and see whether they have done altogether according to the cry of it, which is come unto me; and if not, I will know.
18:22 And the men turned their faces from thence, and went toward Sodom: but Abraham stood yet before the LORD.
18:23 And Abraham drew near, and said, Wilt thou also destroy the righteous with the wicked?
18:24 Peradventure there be fifty righteous within the city: wilt thou also destroy and not spare the place for the fifty righteous that are therein?
18:25 That be far from thee to do after this manner, to slay the righteous with the wicked: and that the righteous should be as the wicked, that be far from thee: Shall not the Judge of all the earth do right?
18:26 And the LORD said, If I find in Sodom fifty righteous within the city, then I will spare all the place for their sakes.exodus
32:8 They have turned aside quickly out of the way which I commanded them: they have made them a molten calf, and have worshipped it, and have sacrificed thereunto, and said, These be thy gods, O Israel, which have brought thee up out of the land of Egypt.
32:9 And the LORD said unto Moses, I have seen this people, and, behold, it is a stiffnecked people:
32:10 Now therefore let me alone, that my wrath may wax hot against them, and that I may consume them: and I will make of thee a great nation.
32:11 And Moses besought the LORD his God, and said, LORD, why doth thy wrath wax hot against thy people, which thou hast brought forth out of the land of Egypt with great power, and with a mighty hand?
32:12 Wherefore should the Egyptians speak, and say, For mischief did he bring them out, to slay them in the mountains, and to consume them from the face of the earth? Turn from thy fierce wrath, and repent of this evil against thy people.
32:13 Remember Abraham, Isaac, and Israel, thy servants, to whom thou swarest by thine own self, and saidst unto them, I will multiply your seed as the stars of heaven, and all this land that I have spoken of will I give unto your seed, and they shall inherit it for ever.
32:14 And the LORD repented of the evil which he thought to do unto his people.
Right-wing believers are still freeloading off the accumulated political and scientific capital of the English Enlightenment.
BUMP
Pascal's Wager Payoff Matrix |
||
| . | Believer | Atheist |
| God Exists | +infinity | -infinity |
| God Doesn't Exist | -1 | +1 |
| Total: | infinity-1 = Infinite Gain |
1-infinity = Infinite Loss |
|
A payoff matrix for the Pascal's Wager game makes it clear to the Atheist that his infinitely best choice is to accept the existence of God. Atheist and Believer represent different strategies the single participant can choose. Positive values represent gains, and negative ones losses. The value of |
Not to nit-pick, but I know what our laws are based on. You didn't read my profile page.
As our Framers said, our Constitution was written for Godly (self-controlled) people only --- it is inadequate for the governance of any others. (They have to be externally controlled by more and more laws if we're to have an orderly society).
Love does no harm to a neighbor, therefore love is the fulfillment of the law" (Romans 13:10)
http://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/Rom/Rom013.html
More excerpts:
Rom 13:1 ¶ Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God.
Rom 13:3 For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same:
Rom 13:4 For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to [execute] wrath upon him that doeth evil.
Rom 13:9 For this, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not kill, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness, Thou shalt not covet; and if [there be] any other commandment, it is briefly comprehended in this saying, namely, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.
Rom 13:10 Love worketh no ill to his neighbour: therefore love [is] the fulfilling of the law.
Interesting take. I gather you are a liberal Catholic.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.