It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by marg6043
What is worst to strip people in politics from using their bias to influence their version and interpretation of religious views or to allow this self righteous appointees to dictate what by law should be the way to worship religion.
To tell the truth this a very dangerous precedent and either way somebody or groups in the population are going to be oppressed.
Originally posted by spines
Should people who quote the bible as a basis for political argument, be taken seriously?
The short answer is no, but for the sake of argument:
When I refer to quoting, it is in regards to: x is evil because bible passage z says so.
The ‘moral issues’, which were so touted as being a cornerstone for the republican party’s absolute majority of government until recently, are not political issues. They are social issues which are only issues because religion says they are (i.e.: gay’s right to marriage).
(I feel it is important to clarify that the current republican mainstream of neo-con talking heads is a relatively recent phenomenon. The same could be said for the Democratic Party as well, albeit with different players)
Using the word ‘moral’, doesn’t allow you to push religious views as policy. In example:
insisting that the definition of marriage is y; y states that gays can not marry; and therefore, gays can not marry, is a pitiful attempt to front a non-religious facet to the argument. This is an insulting attempt to camouflage the true [religious] nature of the argument: “The bible says so”.
If this was a legitimate argument, then the very women pushing it (neo-cons such as Anne Coulter) are going to have to give up that right to vote on it…
…oh wait, it’s not a legitimate argument after all. Of course we change the definitions as we go; it’s called growing up. Or are blacks still not counted as a whole people?
Bigotry bread by religion is bigotry just the same. Why do we allow it to be argued as a matter religious fact and take it seriously? The fact that is was written in an old religious text gives it no bearing on political debate...
The second it becomes clear –although it is often not hidden at all—that a religious text is the basis for a political policys argument, the offending individual(s) should be shuffled out the door and put back on the pulpit.
You want to openly support and encourage bigotry? Fine. But don’t bring your religion into the political realm.
The separation of church and state has recently been walked all over, from the local level to the president himself.