It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by adjensen
Originally posted by arpgme
reply to post by pajoly
Even more than "Evangelical" Christianity, is Christianity per se. Many Christians claim that Christianity is not a religion, and then they always talk about "Freedom of Religion", that is a contradiction.
Who are these "many" who claim that Christianity is not a religion? Provide some sources, please, because they are most likely confusing "religion" with "sect/denomination".
To the OP: congratulations on one of the most poorly thought out hypothesis that I've seen in a long time. Fortunately, the law under the Constitution doesn't hinge on dictionary definitions and the claims of some subset of people in a large group.
I don't know what the point of posting the Jefferson quotes was, but he was a Deist, and hung the whole premise of the Declaration of Independence on the existence of God.
Originally posted by harryhaller
Curious topic.
Op, keep it simple. Define the difference between faith, belief, knowledge and fact in the human mind and ascribe human rights values and external objective validity to each.
Starting with law is the back end.
peace
Originally posted by pajoly
1. I offer half my family as evidence of how evangelicals deny they are "religious" or even a member of a religion. They directly tell me they don't believe in religion, but rather "the word of God."
2. Your Deist comment about Jefferson reflects a major error on your part. You assume his definition of "God" equates to the modern Christian definition.
My real issue with Evangelicals is #2. Evangelicals are aggressive in proposing bills and promoting candidates that will codify evangelical beliefs into law, from DOMA to women's rights. That activity seems to me an express violation of the 2nd part of the clause.
I care what they say because they are gaining in power. Who cared in 1929 about what Hitler thought.
e was still fairly obscure and the majority thought him no real threat to the power structure. He went unchecked and then it was too late. I am not saying evangelicals are equal to Hitler, but I do think they are happily theocrats and perfectly willing to smile at you while taking away your rights.
Almost daily it seems appears another article on some new law they propose that reflects this.
Originally posted by NoRegretsEver
reply to post by pajoly
I am assuming that I was the only one that flagged this thread, and I am ok with that. I knew where you were coming from in the beginning and applaud you keeping up with it, many would have left it by now.
Originally posted by pajoly
reply to post by adjensen
"The separation of church and state regards the impact of the state on the church, it doesn't say that religious people or organizations are to be deprived of their political rights. Do you honestly believe that evangelicals should be stripped of religious status because they have political opinions? Seriously?"
You misread me entirely and you are incorrect. The Separation of church and state is not only about the impact of the state on the church. It is also about the converse -- the impact of the church on the state, which is the larger of the risk.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
What I say most clearly is that they have no rights (made clear in the Constitution) to force their brand of beliefs on me by force of legislation -- to convert THEIR opinions into LAW the compels others.
So religion is a belief system in God or the supernatural held together by FAITH. That's the key here: FAITH. Religion does not exist in the absence of faith. Faith is the central element to all religion.
So why then is evangelical Christianity NOT a religion? ....(et al)
Why, because FAITH, by definition, is a belief based on lack of proof.
Not only are evangelicals vociferous that they hold the only truth, they claim with great passion that their knowledge is based on fact, not faith.
Because of this, evangelicals grow to feel entitled as the lone keepers of the "Truth". This attitude fosters their sense of moral superiority and is central to their compulsion to legislate their beliefs upon everyone else. After all, they alone are keepers of the truth and is not the truth the only just basis of the Law?
The percentage. of people who call themselves in some way Christian has dropped more than 11% in a generation.
I admit ignorance to the distinction. How exactly do their beliefs differ (seriously)? I've them in the same bucket labeled "ultra right Christian extremists" with the only difference being the evangelical smiles broadly while the fundamentalist scowls.
I am perfectly open to correction, especially about why evangelicals are "harmless" even as they seek to deny other's rights, reject science at every turn which screws up sound policy and want women to be forcibly raped by the government with a vaginal wand if they want an abortion (even though doctors say it is not medically necessary).
Originally posted by pajoly
If you are asking me to place them on a scale of sorts, belief and faith in a religious construct have no place alongside knowledge and fact, which are scientific, testable constructs.
Does that answer your question?
Originally posted by pajoly
reply to post by WickettheRabbit
"To them, it's still truth based on faith."
I disagree. To them, it is truth based on facts. Let's see if we can find any evangelical here who will say his or her belief system is NOT based on fact, but rather unprovable faith.