I don't know. I once had a myna bird that lied something fierce. Probably a conservative.
Hungary PM: No Compromise on Migration, Protecting Christian Culture
- Thread starter Scataphagos
- Start date
Hate it when my dog lies to me
Hamarrabi codified much of the basis for law before Moses issued the Ten Commandments, which is the basis of law today. Interestingly, the vedas were equally significant but rarely get talked about.
Saying we need religion or people will do whatever they want is not a true statement. Oftentimes, religion is used as the basis for some very harmful deeds.
Anyway, a rabbi once said that the hardest commandment to follow is to honor your mother and father because it permeates throughout all of your actions. All things you do is a reflection of your parents. And a mitzvot is considered an honor to your parents. I always thought that was interesting.
While that comment has merit and wide agreement, where it becomes insidiously complicated is that Secularism is also a religious belief system and it has arguably become the state religion.
The Constitution prohibits congress from establishing a state religion and/or actions that would have that effect. Fine.
However, just as other religions have their fundamentalists the Secularists also have a pantload of them and they are well represented among the lefties and government in general.
The constitution prohibits the establishment of a state religion but it does not create an affirmative obligation on the part of government to identify and hunt down and eradicate any vestiges of religion in the workplace, school etc on the part of attendees or in the public square. Nor does it require or is it inappropriate for an elected official to state that they are informed by the religious beliefs of a certain religion as long as it does not result in discrimination. If it is repulsive don't vote for them. Ditto for the Secularist fundamentalists, when they use their religion (Secularism) to hunt down and eradicate the views and practices of other religions.
Take home message: We have a state religion now. Don't shiite yourself. It is Secularism which is vastly different than just not holding traditional religion views or from just being committed to being neutral although often masquerades as such.
Last edited:
When I was working in Saudi Arabia in the mid '90s, I had a similar discussion with an Egyptian co-worker, who was Muslim. I wonder if carrer realizes that he's the opposite side of that same coin.
I think this is a bit oversimplified. We don't have a government religion, even though some of the original states did have individual state-sanctioned religions. The Constitution does bar religious tests for public office. At the same time the Founders' writings are full of statements about how essential Christian values would be and how the new nation would not survive without them. I am quite sure they would be shocked and appalled to see courts treat islam as somehow equivalent to Christianity and hear arguments that we cannot favor one over the other in public policy.
There is a conflict inherent in the right to freely practice religion and the fact that some religions, eg islam, are clearly not compatible with our form of government. The solution is not to pretend that the conflict does not exist, but to limit the immigration of people who practice it. We followed a similar policy during the Cold War with communists. Why would any sane society want to import people whose goal is to destroy it?
I see no problem in a country deciding that it likes its culture and religious traditions and does not want to see either undermined by mass immigration of people with conflicting views. This is the explicit policy of not only Israel and Hungary but China, Japan, Singapore, Russia, Saudi Arabia and indeed most of eastern europe. Perhaps they are all just dead wrong and the way forward is that being pioneered by western Europe but all of human history suggests the opposite.
Some people get all their values and beliefs from reading the material in their Media Matters package every morning.
Getting all your values off the internet. What could go wrong there?
He may be a zealot, but I doubt it. He is probably some guy looking to get the upper hand in an argument.
I’d like to say, I do not dismiss religion as a basis for law, morality or ethics. My argument is religion should not be the end of the law. There have been some very well thought out arguments made in legal areas by many theologians throughout history. Thomas Aquinas comes to mind in his arguments against unjust laws or Martin Luther King in arguments against segregation.
Regardless of the contributions made to civility by religious scholars, I still think religion is not a necessary component of morality. Without empathy you have nothing, and religion then just becomes lipstick on a pig. Religion is meaningless without true empathy but empathy does not require religion.
What about "God-damn America" thought out by that great and influential theologian - Rev. Wright- whose church gave a lifetime achievement award to Louis Farrakan, the premier jew hater on the earth?
just ticklin your butt White Boy.