Kerry has conceded

[jimbo]

"And let us with caution indulge the supposition, that morality can be maintained without religion. Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure -- reason and experience both forbid us to expect that National morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle."

This is very interesting. My in-laws, born again Christians, are forever paraphrasing this quote saying that "George Washington (or the founding fathers) intended this nation to be a christian and thought that if religion and state were separated the state would fail."

Now that you pointed this out and I carefully read it I can see what he really means and it's not quite how it is often paraphrased at all.

Perhaps if George Washington were with us today he would take a firm stance against the meddling of religion that is going on in America's politics today.

Very interesting.

[BaM*BaM]

What city would Jesus bomb next?


And please, no crap about, " this question can't be applied to the USA,... and to your sophisticated 'christian' 'ideas' of Jesus.

Or that Jesus represents only a 'spiritual' model,... but not really a model for YOUR OWN political actions.

And that USA casualties are more spiritually significant than the Iraqis that we are killing.

[tiggergreen]

Did someone try to read between the lines of what I've been saying? I know well and good that George Washington was a Deist... I never tried to state that. However, the quote was not understood:

*************************
"And let us with caution indulge the supposition, that morality can be maintained without religion. Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure -- reason and experience both forbid us to expect that National morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle."

Note that part about "influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure" -- basically he just said that enlightened people don't need religion to have morals, but for the average bloke its simpler if somebody else sets out the rules of morality and they just follow along.
*************************

Let me put this quote in layman's terms:

"And let us be careful saying that morality can be maintained without religion. No matter how high an education a person has gained -- reason and experience have taught us that National morality cannot exist without religious principle."

His quote says that we cannot have morality without religion - which is what I was saying in the first place. This nation was founded by people who believed in GOD - I didn't say which one and I didn't say that it mattered. What I am saying is that I do believe that we all need to believe in a higher power whether Muslim, Catholic, Mormon, Protestant, Hindu, Buddhist or whatever - because that is the driving force that helps us to be a better person, better families, better nation.

Jesus would not bomb anyone - I'm sorry - if you read the New Testament - he taught us to love our enemies. Last time I checked around - it isn't showing love when you drop a huge bomb on someone's neighborhood. In fact, I would go so far as to say that we should only defend our country if someone was to attack us. Some would say that we were attacked on 9/11 - however, the group that attacked us was not a nation - but a group of outlaws attempting to overthrow our "infidel" nation. I don't know what would have been the best route - but if I had been in charge - I would have just boosted our nation's defenses including an overhaul of the airport security system and a tighter scrutiny of persons wishing to obtain a pilot's license...

I don't have all the answers, however, and I would hate to be in the position to have to make such crucial decisions. I do believe that the only way to win peace in this world, is through the power of love... If you live by the sword, you will die by the sword. We have so far to go before we are even ready to show love for our enemies abroad. We have so much hate domestically and we really need to address that. Fathers pass their hate on to their progeny and it is a hard cycle to defeat...

Did I mention that I love my VX?

Cheers...

Brent
;Dp; ;Dr;

[Heraclid]

I respect his conviction and I agree with tiggergreen's interpretation of the Washington quotation, but where we do differ is that I'm more of an Old Testament kinda guy. :-) Evil has to be confronted and defeated, and the nations harboring it must understand that there are consequences. We must mean what we say and do it.

I got into a bit of an argument with my brother over the separation of church and state recently. He has become quite the liberal and apparently has a real problem with President Bush's being openly religious, so he is for separation of church and state. I told him that while that all sounds fine and dandy, in reality there comes a point where the two are inextricably linked and things get tricky. Such as when you have a presidential candidate who claims to be a devout Catholic but also supports abortion. If you are a Catholic and you oppose abortion, how do you overlook that and vote for that candidate anyway? There will always be times in the debate over church and state in which one simply cannot ignore the other.

My brother is actually fairly religious. It is interesting that now many on the left are so even more outspoken against the religious community since this last election. Perhaps it will open his eyes. I have hope even in the midst of doubt.

[WyrreJ]

Brent, your interpretation of the Washington quotation completely ignores the key phrase that I commented on. If Washington really believed what you say he believed, then what do you think he meant when he said, "Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure..." ?

Furthermore, look at the first sentence of the paragraph from which that quotation is taken, Washington begins it with, "Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports."

If he believe that morality uniquely and solely derives from religion, as you appear to be claiming why does he break morality out and give it equal standing? If morality flows only from religion and is not in any way self-evident, why did he not just say so, or at least write as if he believed it?

Also, I really would appreciate you addressing my question about animals, homosexual behaviour and free will.

Heraclid - I really don't see how a candidate's claim to being a devout follower of a particular religion and then holding forth in words or actions in contradiction to that religion's tenents is an issue of seperation between church and state. Seems to me it is simply a matter of person saying one thing and doing another.

The hypocrisy of claiming to be a devout catholic and then supporting the murder of babies is just as hypocritical as claiming to be a devout born-again christain and then bombing cities which are populated with innocent civilians. Hypocrisy is not some trait unique to claims of religious belief, it is simply a characteristic that some people have, regardless of their religion or lack there of.

[SlowPro48]

Originally posted by kpaske
....Someone mentioned something about it being hypocritical for someone to say closed-minded people should have closed mouths. I think the point is that it's not interesting or a valuable use of your time to listen to close minded people because they will rarely have any truth or valuable insight to share with you.

Just wondering - how do you make the determination that a person is closed-minded and not worthy of conversing with you if you don't listen to them. Can you tell just by the bumper stickers on their car? Or the political signs in their yard maybe...?

Originally posted by kpaske
If they are too close minded to consider your opinion, then how could they possibly be enlightened about anything?

Yeah - what could they possibly know? It's a total waste of time for an open-minded person such as yourself to talk to closed-minded individuals.

I guess I'm just really stupid because I learn something from practically everybody I talk to. Even the ones who are not receptive to my views.

Anyway.. Thanks for the comments!!! I think you did a fantastic job of illustrating my point.

[SlowPro48]

Dang I figured this thread would die over the weekend but you guys are still going at it! What's the record for the longest thread on this site?

Originally posted by WyrreJ
Washington was well known as a deist, as were most of the founding fathers. You will find that there are no records of George Washington ever referring to Jesus - not a single mention of Christ in all of Washington's writings.

In his speech on May 12, 1779, he claimed that what children needed to learn "above all" was the "religion of Jesus Christ"; on May 2, 1778, he charged his soldiers at Valley Forge that "To the distinguished character of patriot, it should be our highest glory to add the more distinguished character of Christian"

Originally posted by WyrreJ
Beyond the abstract characteristics of generic monotheism, the God of the deists shares very little in common with the God of christianity. For the most part, deists are just one step away from being agnostics.

Now you've got me confused. The God of Christianity is the God of the Jewish people right? - the God of Abraham and Isaac and Jacob? So which God did George Washington and the other Deists believe in if not that one? Thor the God of Thunder? (Don't laugh - I just buy his riding gear but there are still plenty of people who worship Thor)

[kpaske]

Originally posted by SlowPro48
Just wondering - how do you make the determination that a person is closed-minded and not worthy of conversing with you if you don't listen to them. Can you tell just by the bumper stickers on their car? Or the political signs in their yard maybe...?

See? You just aren't listening. If you read my response it didn't say that I don't listen, just that I realize it's often a waste of my time.

Yeah - what could they possibly know? It's a total waste of time for an open-minded person such as yourself to talk to closed-minded individuals.

I guess I'm just really stupid because I learn something from practically everybody I talk to. Even the ones who are not receptive to my views.

I've wasted countless hours talking to closed-minded people who never seriously considered anything I had to say. It comes to a point where what little you may learn isn't worth the effort.

[tiggergreen]

Animals and homosexuality - I don't care. I would never compare ourselves to animals. Animals have no morals and do not belong in a comparison to human behavior. In fact, I would say that some people go so far down the tube as to become animal-like and that is not a good thing.

"Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure" - this is saying to me that no matter how educated someone gets and says that he is so much more enlightened - this does not mean that morality will prevail. In fact, there are some very evil people who are very well educated. Education in and of itself is not an indicator of morality. George Washington knew this. Please tell me how morality can exist without religion? If you do not believe in a higher power, why be moral? Where is the reward for being moral? I would say that if I did not believe in God, then I would be a far different person - if someone got in my way, I would remove them - if lying would get me closer to the top of the pack, then I would do so. My religion helps me to be a better citizen.

Look at France and the French revolution for what happens when a mass of people lose sight of God...

Brent

[dutchie]

Such as when you have a presidential candidate who claims to be a devout Catholic but also supports abortion. If you are a Catholic and you oppose abortion, how do you overlook that and vote for that candidate anyway?

True religious devotion is devoting religion to life, not life to religion..
A true minister, will advise and lead its herd, but will never judge them, the final judgement is up to god.
So who are all these people who judge people in the name of god? People who go against everything Jesus tried to teach us....
Followers of the old Herbrew scripts, should convert to that other religion, which applies a tooth for a tooth...judaism.

Christians are to recognize the Old Testament as the inspired word of God and use it for learning, for admonition, and for comfort, but they must not, however, use it for their law (study Romans 15:4, I Cor. 10:11). The law we are to follow today consists of Jesus' commandments, the Apostles' directions, and the examples of the early Christians as they lived under the direct tutorship of the inspired apostles.

Your Dutch minister

[jimbo]

Animals have no morals and do not belong in a comparison to human behavior

Please tell me how morality can exist without religion? If you do not believe in a higher power, why be moral?

This sort of thinking goes to the heart of this thread and why the current american administration is narrow-minded and dangerous.

Humans are not "better", just different. America is not better either. We see being these things as being better because it is hard to get outside of our own belief systems and value judgements. Even if you feel you can argue that the above suppositions are absolutely true (I realize that humans and americans are different in significant ways) it is no way to think. We do not have to attach value judgements to our own differentness.

This is the beginning of intolerance.

When you start believing that humans are so special, americans are so great, my religion is the one "true" religion, then you set up a dangerous situation that often leads to violence and oppresion of other nations, religions, and the earth's ecosystem itself.

You become so sure you are right that you justify your aggresive actions by your own narrow-minded belief system.

Is this how we justify the torture going on at Guantanomo? Is this a good way for the leader of the free world to behave?

Back to the topic at hand, animals and morals :

Many animals exhibit altruistic behavior. One example is whale pods who will often surround a sick member who is in shallow water (beached) and in danger of drowning by flipping over and submerging the blowhole.

Whales will often stay with the sick individual until that individual recovers or dies, even if they end up getting stranded and dying themselves. I don't think this behavior can be justified by saying that the animals are simply reacting out of instinctual needs to protect the gene pool (like a mother bear protecting her own cubs). Something deeper is going on here.

Altruism -The quality of unselfish concern for the welfare of others. Often used as a synonym for morals.

So whales might have morals. In fact the whole animal kingdom is full of examples that we might call "moral" behavior.

Do animals have religion? I think not. But they might have morals.

The same instinctual moral behaviors apply to humans. After the toddler stage human animals exhibit moral behavior on their own, regardless of their culture and upbringing (religion or not). As a matter of fact humans (barring psychological problems like sociopaths) have to learn immoral behavior, in other words rationalize harming others. People who do wrong often know it is wrong instinctually, but rationalize it to themselves. Example: It is ok to steal from my boss because he didn't give me the raise I deserved. Studies seem to show that moral behavior is instinctual in humans and can be totally unreliant on religious beliefs.

Actually, some sociologists who study religion believe the opposite is true.

Religious beliefs seem true to people because they reenforce instinctual moral systems that exist within the brain already. This is why some belief systems just "seem" right. The more the religion conforms to these instinctual systems, the more it will seem true, and the more popular and widespread the memes of that religious system are likely to be.

[Maverick]

In my junior year of High school ( a long , long time ago, public school system) i had a great literary arts teacher..he was a protestant minister (or the equivelant of a preist for that religion, excuse my ignorance of the title, and my memory lapse) ...extremely intelligent, and a great teacher...he, ofcourse was a very religious man, however he never attempted to force his views on his students. instead, he varied his lesson plans, including great works from many different faiths. I once asked him if it was frustrating for him to teach so many different view points (including athiest perceptions) considering his position in his church..he responded to me with something to effect of "I am an educator, and a student of the worlds great works, of which many are religiously based texts. God gave us the gift of choice, and no choice can be made in honest with out exposure to different viewpoints.the moral fiber, or lack of it, in the texts are far more important than the beliefs behind them. It is up you to make your decisions on faith, its up to me to make sure you have the tools to make your decision, and have a wide exposure to the history of right and wrong. I enjoy that challenge very much, even it it means you might choose to believe there is no god at all. "

those words have stuck with me my entire life. I signed up for all the elective classes i could with him after that, because i knew id learn something and enjoy them, not be subjugated by his religious ferver. to this day i feel very fortunate to have had him for a teacher. He taught that accepting religion wasnt necessary to be "moral" but it was a great tool to teach morality with.
the point? many seem to feel that the subject of religion in the US is a tangible, win or loose situation, i submit that it is not, it has never been, and will never be so, it has been and always will be a gray area, and should be addressed with tolarance, respect and equality..might i also remind those people that this country was formed by people fleeing religious persecution and intolarance. Our base structure was formed to prevent such a thing from happening here, yet today, we face intolarance as never before.. my teacher wasnt teaching religion, he was teaching history, diversity, morals, choice and even consequence...that message will be lost forever if we let the far right, or far left for that matter, elliminate opposing view points, and we will cease to be the country our founders envisioned..and our greatest strength will be lost....if it already hasnt...

[Dallas4u]

VERY nicely put, Maverick. (For some reason, when I say your screen name, I feel like I'm Goose in Top Gun).

[SlowPro48]

Originally posted by kpaske
See? You just aren't listening. If you read my response it didn't say that I don't listen, just that I realize it's often a waste of my time.

Sorry - guess I'm not much for parsing casual conversation and was paying more attention to what I perceived to be the spirit of your message than the semantics.

Originally posted by kpaske
I've wasted countless hours talking to closed-minded people who never seriously considered anything I had to say. It comes to a point where what little you may learn isn't worth the effort.

I know what you mean. I spend a lot of time listening to my neighbor ramble on. Most people walk the other way when they see him coming because they think he's crazy. He's a WW2 vet, a Marine infantryman. On this very day 61 years ago he was fighting for his life, and our freedom on Bougainville Island in the South Pacific. I guess it's stressful having 75mm of exploding ordnance lobbed at you all day and he came back from that place a little wacky.

Actually in his case I think what bothered him more than people trying to kill him was the people he saw die as he looked through his sights and pulled the trigger. He said he stopped counting at 100. That was the first, and worst day of the invasion. He's not a "natural-born killer" or an "army of one" or any of that crap. Far from it. He's a very humble, passive, softspoken man - not someone you would think has ever killed another human. He wonders how he made it out of that place alive. He says God has blessed him his entire life.

He gets on my nerves sometimes with all his God talk and the tracts he leaves on my windshield and telling me I shouldn't be shacking up (as he calls it) but you know what? Every once in a while that man says something I need to hear.

But yeah - I know what you mean about wasting time. I always make sure I've got a paintbrush or wrench or something in my hand when I seem him walking my way. That way I can at least do something constructive while I wait for that gold nugget to drop out of his mouth...

[SlowPro48]

Originally posted by jimbo
This sort of thinking goes to the heart of this thread and why the current american administration is narrow-minded and dangerous.

A Kerry administration would have been as narrow-minded and dangerous. The Democratic [Socialist] Party is no better than the GOP - they just want to ignore different parts of the Constitution, trample different individual rights and freedoms and would have us worship the earth and "humanity".

Originally posted by jimbo
People who do wrong often know it is wrong instinctually, but rationalize it to themselves.

Where do you think this instinctual morality come from?