Theology

[Cal427eb]

I just wanna have my own country. 

[Sabby]

They'll be calling Islam immoral and offensive. Pot, meet kettle.

[KirklandSignature]

As long as people have egos, a secular nation will never exist. In fact, I think an argument could be made that if a secular nation were truly in existence and people weren't constantly under the influence of religious individuals, then it wouldn't challenge the rest of us to think about these rules and they're deemed to be important. I think religion has no place in our political system but without religion having some bearing on our lives, no one would be able to understand why it can be harmful.

I'm just scared that America is going to become some Mormon theocracy one day and atheists will be hunted down like witches.

What world are you living in where this is even a remote possibility?

The 2010's sir. A world where a presidential candidate must have a fervent religious devotion in order to be on the ballot. Believe it or not, the USA is still a country where religionists dicates who we can have for a leader.

[DoomRulz]

I don't believe it because 'religionist' isn't even a word. Evangelicalism is popular the southern U.S. and I'm pretty sure it's only a small part of that region. 

[KirklandSignature]

I don't believe it because 'religionist' isn't even a word. Evangelicalism is popular the southern U.S. and I'm pretty sure it's only a small part of that region.

Hun,

It's a real word in a real world.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/religionist

[ChrisPachi]

I realize many Christians are very casual in their belief, but there are also many others who would like to see children pray in school and learn that carbon dating doesn't work and the world could be 6 thousand years old.

There is indeed, but I think you are being a bit gloom and doom about it all - these kinds of ideas are in decline and are held by an increasing minority of people. All U.S presidents have been religious people and Atheists aren't getting hung up in the streets... yet. Public opinion would never stand for the politicising of such ideas, no matter how dogmatic a president is.

In Australia we just got ourselves a devout Catholic prime minister (really devout - they call him the Mad Monk), but if he tried to push rubbish ideas into policy he would be shot down, mostly from people in his own cabinet. Maybe it will have a subtle effect, and if I had my way religious people would be banned from running for public office (I can be dogmatic too) but you and I don't live in a political dictatorship.

It's apocalyptic thinking. Mormon theocracy. Gimme a break.

[SM]

The don't call him the Mad Monk so much anymore - though who knows what the future holds.

Mind you, kinda worrying we have an Abbott and a Bishop in charge.  Well she gets the coffee at least.

[Sabby]

In Australia we just got ourselves a devout Catholic prime minister (really devout - they call him the Mad Monk), but if he tried to push rubbish ideas into policy he would be shot down, mostly from people in his own cabinet.

Correct, and I'm thankful for that xD I hate Abbott with a passion. But I just don't see the situations as comparable. I see the US as being far more volatile then that, with more politicians that would support things that go against separation of church and state, as long as it swings in Christianity's favor. Abbott can't do a whole lot here (though he will certainly try) but if he were the President of the USA, I think he could do far more damage in his 4 years then he could here in 3.

Call me a pessimist or ignorant of exactly how the US system is. I'm likely a pinch of both at times. I'm not trying to make it sound like we could see street justice against the Godless in 5 years, just I feel the whole situation with the states is a bit unstable.

[maledoro]

I have a feeling that in 10 years, likely less, the Christians in the U.S. will stop worrying about abortion and other such squabbles and will turn their attention to Islam. It's the fastest growing religion in the world and with Europe 'going to war' with Muslims over the past few years, they'll start crying about terrorists living on home soil.

Been there, done that, bought the soundtrack.

[ChrisPachi]

Call me a pessimist or ignorant of exactly how the US system is.

I didn't call you those things

I am certainly not fully across the U.S. system, however I get the distinct impression that we aren't that different from a sociopolitical standpoint. I just think there is more religious rhetoric in the U.S. and extreme voices are always louder - from outside and through a media window we just see the differences far more than we see the similarities. But as I say, I am probably not entirely au fait with American cultural norms.

[SM]

Australians simply don't get passionate about religion or politics the same way Seppos do.  That passion is generally reserved for sport.

In Australia political parties like Rise Up Australia, Christian Democratic Party, Citizens Electoral Council, One Nation are generally regarded as a bit of a joke by most people (those that even know they exist), and ignored.

In the US Bachman, Santorum et al. run for President...

Mind you the Secular Party of Australia got way less votes than the aforementioned far right religious nutbags.

[whiterabbit]

http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2013/10/07/scalia-says-satan-is-a-real-person/?hpt=hp_c4

And I'll just leave this here. Scalia is a fun guy, that likes to actually share his personal opinions but man he sure is coo-coo for coco-puffs.

[Terx2]

I realize many Christians are very casual in their belief, but there are also many others who would like to see children pray in school and learn that carbon dating doesn't work and the world could be 6 thousand years old.

There is indeed, but I think you are being a bit gloom and doom about it all - these kinds of ideas are in decline and are held by an increasing minority of people. All U.S presidents have been religious people and Atheists aren't getting hung up in the streets... yet. Public opinion would never stand for the politicising of such ideas, no matter how dogmatic a president is.

In Australia we just got ourselves a devout Catholic prime minister (really devout - they call him the Mad Monk), but if he tried to push rubbish ideas into policy he would be shot down, mostly from people in his own cabinet. Maybe it will have a subtle effect, and if I had my way religious people would be banned from running for public office (I can be dogmatic too) but you and I don't live in a political dictatorship.

It's apocalyptic thinking. Mormon theocracy. Gimme a break.

Gillard was PM and she wasn't religious (granted she didn't actually get voted in either) and she was the first femae PM. As for Abott he has a very narrow mindset. Things like gay marrige (which his sister I believe is gay supports gay marrige) which a large majority of people think we should have (everyone has the right be married and happy) but Abott opposes instead wanting to stop the boats and have no carbon tax. But this isn't the political thread so I won't keep talking

[SM]

The Labor party under Gillard won the 2010 election.

[Terx2]

The Labor party under Gillard won the 2010 election.

Forgive me but wasn't that against Abott than she went against a Kevin Rudd comeback. Than another one and she lost that I don't pay that much attention to politics the last three years fell like a long annoying blurr