Christianity and our Nation.

I disagree.

The Constitution was written 248 years ago. It was written in a way that allowed for things we would never allow for today. You call it an "unraveling". I call it more progress.

 

No other POTENTIAL
It's a POTENTIAL human being, but it isn't one at six weeks, or even 18 weeks.

 

I fully expected you would, and for centuries many Christians have agreed that it's best to let the secular and religious preside over its own sphere influence, free from each other's interference. The historical record is pretty clear that governments and churches are happiest with this arrangement and that the attempts on the part of one to impose its will and rule on the other have ultimately been self-destructive.

 

I think you misunderstood, and likewise I don't understand what you mean by "It was written in a way that allowed for things we would never allow for today". I can understand that it was written to allow for things that weren't allowed 248 years ago, but not today. That makes no sense.

While you're sorting that out, I'll point out that the Constitution was never written in a way to allow for the evisceration of the rule of written law in this country. That makes no sense either, and I'll explain why:

As Alexander Hamilton pointed out in the Federalist, the Constitution was written for a reason - to abolish the rule of arbitrary fiat that once tyrannized this land by establishing the rule of written law in its place. Hamilton explicitly stated that if the Founders and Framers wanted to hand the federal government a general, unlimited grant of authority they wouldn't have bothered to write the Constitution in the first place.

Now, contemplate the implications of the language in our laws/statutes no longer having any meaning anymore.

What would be the ludicrous point in writing laws that contain language that doesn't mean what it contains?

What would be the even more ludicrous point in even bothering to interpret and adjudicate laws that contain language that can mean anything...or nothing?

How is the Chief Executive supposed to enforce laws that contain contents that can mean anything or nothing?

There is no point, thus there is no point in paying for the dubious "privilege" of being treated to an elaborate charade masquerading as "the rule of law".

This not progress, it is regress, and as I pointed out earlier, it takes us back to the dark ages of Ancient Greece where there was no written rule of law.

 

It was written as to allow slavery
It was written as to allow second class citizenship of the marginal members of our society.

 

Thank you for clarifying - we were talking about two different things.

 

It was written to eventually resolve the issue of slavery at a time when the Colonies didn't need division at a very uncertain time.

 

Not even Christians can agree on what the Christian god tells you concerning human society.

We are a democracy - a democratic republic. Your opinion counts in the way that the opinion of all others counts.

What doesn't work is for GOVERNMENT to have a religion. Or, for you to claim that your view is right simply on the grounds that your god told you so.

I don't believe we have adequate answers here. I'd point out that a percentage of babies are born with anatomy that is difficult to interpret. In the past, doctors actually used their scalpel to "assign" a sex. Thank god we're past that. But, the idea that there is a strict divide between the sexes just isn't true. There are stil cases of both physical and psychological existence that don't just match the common cookie cutter in various ways.

This is a gross misinterpretation of what it means to be a religion. A religion is more than just a philosophy.

Yes. What we think the constitution means when it says "cruel and unusual punishment" has changed even just during our short existence as a state. How we view women has changed in major ways. We continue to improve on our acceptance of humans with darker skin than was prevalent in England. We recognize that sexual orientation is not a valid grounds for exclusion and discrimination. And, all of these are a work in progress, not a completion.

Yes, we still see too many ignoring all the cases where the outcome is not going to be a healthy baby and a healthy mother - no mater what action is taken or not taken.

I don't believe your idea is good enough, as there are women who would chose in favor of the survival of the fetus over their own life. These decisions aren't reasonable to legislate. There is far to much variety in the medical circumstances and personal/religious beliefs can't be adjudicated in court.

Also, no matter WHAT the law is, there will always be those who demand that abortion be disallowed in various circumstances. In my view, we must accept the woman's decision. Period. It is her body. Canada has this law and they have fewer abortions per 1000 pregnancies.

We can still find the reasons women choose abortion and attempt to reduce those reasons.

 

I don't accept your assessment of motivation for the law just signed here.

First, there weren't religious arguments against that law. No church stood up to demand that wages should not be raised due to something Jesus said (or any other argument). The popular opposition came from business owners and their interests in profit.

Income/wealth disparity is one of our most serious problems in America. Low wages eliminates people from our economy. It reduces the chances for children to find a way out of poverty. It increases the taxes that go to support those making pathetic wages. It encourages abortion. It reduces ability to be part of our political decision making - that is so singularly oriented to those with wealth. Etc. Etc.

 

Bidenomics does a lot of that through inflation it has caused. The wealthy win and working people lose.
https://nypost.com/2024/02/28/busin...om-california-wage-law-after-newsom-donation/

 

Oh....Religion is more than a philosophy? The only difference I see is the spiritual aspect. You don't believe in that anyway, so how is there a difference?

No matter what the law says, there will always be murder!

 

The issue isn't that I don't believe it - it's that you DO believe it.

Our laws on murder do not come from the Bible.

 

Economists agree that the inflation spike didn't come from actions promoted by the president.

They came from factors such as the oil price spike and the supply chain problems.

 

Ahhh, better to allow slaves than to allow "division"

Got it

 

I didn't make myself. I didn't make my Parents or Grandparents or any of my forbears. And they didn't actually make me more than being cocreators in the miracle of life. I didn't make the earth or anything on it that goes to my sustenance. I didn't make the air, sky, sun, moon, planets, stars or solar system. I didn't make the light of conscience within me to know right from wrong. And I didn't give myself the priesthood like power of choice to choose one thing or another. I have made nothing. It is all a glorious privilege, a miracle in which I am a participant. So what does one make of it or of ones self but either friend or foe to God who is the holy author of it all. It is either that or esteem the miracle itself, which would be rather superstitious, like loving the gift more than the giver. To esteem ourselves or one another is self congratulatory, overlooking the greater hand in the matter, without which nothing could be. Life then is a precursor of experience on the path to eternal godhood. The enormity of Gods patience is mind boggling as I ply him prematurely for the cause of justice. So it is to me to wait and believe, rather than to complain and forget. That is my sanctuary and peace, my depths and my eternity.

 

Apparently you don't like how things turned out.......ever consider leaving?

 

Yes, those are two additional factors that Biden policies drove to the hilt!

 

Treating other as we treat ourselves DOES come from the Bible. I don't know any secular teachings that study and contemplate such things.

 

I'm very happy how things have turned out. It took too long to get here.

It's the Republicans/Conservatives who are not happy.

 

Just wanted to add that the Bible, like all things that are good and true, comes from God in my opinion. What sets the Bible apart from standard human conscience and goodness is that it testifies of a living God and promotes a higher standard across the spectrum of human conduct. As such, it encourages us to accountability and hope in a perfect Father rather than in ourselves alone. But that concept is a matter of choice as to whether to go it alone or be inclined to him in spite of his absence. Many see no profit in sacrifice, and love their lives more. And that, imo, is Gods testing point and the purpose of life. But even in that, he has suspended judgment and provided a way for us thru his Son Jesus Christ because we all fall short from our youth onward. I mean, who here is perfect and holy?

Isaiah said, " All we, like sheep, have gone astray, and have turned everyone to his own way. And the Lord hath laid on him the iniquity of us all." Some say this is a reference to Israel rather than to a savior. But that's because their unbelief guides their judgment and blinds them to the obvious.

 

Sounds to me like you don't like what the Founders and what they did.

 

Shouldn't you be at Columbia University protesting America?

 

Agreed. This is evolution. We do make choices that have an effect. We choose who to procreate with. We choose what our food should be - through the human induced evolution of life forms that has been used by agriculturalists since early times.

One doesn't have to be a foe of God to study how nature works. Nor does it make sense for humans to decide exactly what it was that some god actually did.

How could it be a sign of being a foe of god to suggest that god kicked of this universe in such a way that humans arrived by resulting natural processes? Why would we say that God couldn't have done it that way, rather than making each individual part as a separate task?

I would suggest that to esteem ourselves as being on the path to eternals godhood can be somewhat problematic.

 

This is clearly false, as they both refer to causes coming from outside the USA.

You need to think about what policies would isolate us from world economic events, especially given that our entire economy is so closely woven with that of much of the rest of the world.

If you want change, you need to point to specific changes that you believe would be improvements.

 

There aren't any philosophies that DON'T include that.

It may not always be easy to see without study, but if that principle is not followed, it's hard to imagine how hypocrisy is avoided.

Look at the discrimination we see in the world today. We don't even believe the millions of Palestinian people have a right to life.