Tolerance
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 1 Votes - 5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
08-07-2014, 01:08 PM
RE: Tolerance
I would also like to add that I think that the separation of Faith and State to be impossible. The way you perceive the world is going to affect how you think it should be run.

I'm homophobic in the same way that I'm arachnophobic. I'm not scared of gay people but I'm going to scream if I find one in my bath.

I'm. Also homophobic in the same way I'm arachnophobic. I'm scared of spiders but I'd still fuck'em.
- my friend Marc
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-07-2014, 01:12 PM
RE: Tolerance
(08-07-2014 01:08 PM)TarzanSmith Wrote:  I would also like to add that I think that the separation of Faith and State to be impossible. The way you perceive the world is going to affect how you think it should be run.

The enlightenment would disagree with you.

(31-07-2014 04:37 PM)Luminon Wrote:  America is full of guns, but they're useless, because nobody has the courage to shoot an IRS agent in self-defense
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Revenant77x's post
08-07-2014, 01:24 PM
RE: Tolerance
(08-07-2014 01:12 PM)Revenant77x Wrote:  
(08-07-2014 01:08 PM)TarzanSmith Wrote:  I would also like to add that I think that the separation of Faith and State to be impossible. The way you perceive the world is going to affect how you think it should be run.

The enlightenment would disagree with you.

And I would disagree with the Enlightenment.

To expand upon my statement, I don't necessarily mean separation of religion and state but more philosophy and state. For example if one is a positivist, a social Darwinist, a Calvinist, A material reductionist, a Nietzschean, A Thomist, a Kantian, A Lockean, A Secular Humanist. Or what have you. These must affect how one believes society should be and as such will affect their politics.

(Also while the forum is on the topic of fallacies, wouldn't that be argument from authority Big Grin)

I'm homophobic in the same way that I'm arachnophobic. I'm not scared of gay people but I'm going to scream if I find one in my bath.

I'm. Also homophobic in the same way I'm arachnophobic. I'm scared of spiders but I'd still fuck'em.
- my friend Marc
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-07-2014, 01:27 PM
RE: Tolerance
(08-07-2014 01:24 PM)TarzanSmith Wrote:  
(08-07-2014 01:12 PM)Revenant77x Wrote:  The enlightenment would disagree with you.

And I would disagree with the Enlightenment.

To expand upon my statement, I don't necessarily mean separation of religion and state but more philosophy and state. For example if one is a positivist, a social Darwinist, a Calvinist, A material reductionist, a Nietzschean, A Thomist, a Kantian, A Lockean, A Secular Humanist. Or what have you. These must affect how one believes society should be and as such will affect their politics.

(Also while the forum is on the topic of fallacies, wouldn't that be argument from authority Big Grin)

Of course peoples world views affect how they vote. Mine certainly do anyway. I think the point here is politics arent supposed to be making policies pushing one religion over another, or forcing others to participate in a particular religion.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-07-2014, 01:33 PM
RE: Tolerance
(08-07-2014 01:12 PM)Revenant77x Wrote:  
(08-07-2014 01:08 PM)TarzanSmith Wrote:  I would also like to add that I think that the separation of Faith and State to be impossible. The way you perceive the world is going to affect how you think it should be run.

The enlightenment would disagree with you.

But that isn't what the phrase means. It refers to relationships between states and religious establishments.

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-07-2014, 01:36 PM
RE: Tolerance
(08-07-2014 01:33 PM)cjlr Wrote:  
(08-07-2014 01:12 PM)Revenant77x Wrote:  The enlightenment would disagree with you.

But that isn't what the phrase means. It refers to relationships between states and religious establishments.

Sorry I was trying to differentiate between the two by saying Faith and State instead of Church and state. My Bad.

I do think the Separation of the establishments is perfectly possible and most likely a healthy thing to do.

I'm homophobic in the same way that I'm arachnophobic. I'm not scared of gay people but I'm going to scream if I find one in my bath.

I'm. Also homophobic in the same way I'm arachnophobic. I'm scared of spiders but I'd still fuck'em.
- my friend Marc
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-07-2014, 01:42 PM
RE: Tolerance
(08-07-2014 01:36 PM)TarzanSmith Wrote:  
(08-07-2014 01:33 PM)cjlr Wrote:  But that isn't what the phrase means. It refers to relationships between states and religious establishments.

Sorry I was trying to differentiate between the two by saying Faith and State instead of Church and state. My Bad.

I do think the Separation of the establishments is perfectly possible and most likely a healthy thing to do.

Well if you are trying to say personal belief and state is inseparable I would agree for the most part. I dont think thats always true though.

Ive known a few christians who are against banning gay marriage (example) but then again they probably dont believe the bible is correct in its opinion so thats not their faith...hmmm I must think on this.


Ignore my ramblings.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-07-2014, 01:42 PM
RE: Tolerance
(08-07-2014 01:36 PM)TarzanSmith Wrote:  
(08-07-2014 01:33 PM)cjlr Wrote:  But that isn't what the phrase means. It refers to relationships between states and religious establishments.

Sorry I was trying to differentiate between the two by saying Faith and State instead of Church and state. My Bad.

I do think the Separation of the establishments is perfectly possible and most likely a healthy thing to do.

Well; you capitalised 'Faith', which would gramatically indicate a proper noun and thus semantically organised bodies...

The point of representative democracy is that representatives have opinions, and personal religious beliefs may well be a significant component of that. That's fine so far as it goes.
(the bug in that feature is that representatives' opinions become divorced from the will of the general populace, but that's another story)

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-07-2014, 07:46 AM
RE: Tolerance
(08-07-2014 01:24 PM)TarzanSmith Wrote:  
(08-07-2014 01:12 PM)Revenant77x Wrote:  The enlightenment would disagree with you.

And I would disagree with the Enlightenment.

To expand upon my statement, I don't necessarily mean separation of religion and state but more philosophy and state. For example if one is a positivist, a social Darwinist, a Calvinist, A material reductionist, a Nietzschean, A Thomist, a Kantian, A Lockean, A Secular Humanist. Or what have you. These must affect how one believes society should be and as such will affect their politics.

(Also while the forum is on the topic of fallacies, wouldn't that be argument from authority Big Grin)

The actual point is that it is separation of church and state - not one's individual beliefs, but the hierarchy.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Chas's post
09-07-2014, 08:17 PM
RE: Tolerance
(09-07-2014 07:46 AM)Chas Wrote:  
(08-07-2014 01:24 PM)TarzanSmith Wrote:  And I would disagree with the Enlightenment.

To expand upon my statement, I don't necessarily mean separation of religion and state but more philosophy and state. For example if one is a positivist, a social Darwinist, a Calvinist, A material reductionist, a Nietzschean, A Thomist, a Kantian, A Lockean, A Secular Humanist. Or what have you. These must affect how one believes society should be and as such will affect their politics.

(Also while the forum is on the topic of fallacies, wouldn't that be argument from authority Big Grin)

The actual point is that it is separation of church and state - not one's individual beliefs, but the hierarchy.

Yes but we are discussing Anti-theism here and why should one hate religion. My argument is that even if a separation of the Hierarchy and State is possible, the separation of ones personal views and politics is not. As such one should not be apathetic towards the beliefs of others because they can have a very real effect upon you.

I would like to point out that ones beliefs can affect other areas of another's life, I just think politics to be the most clear and efficacious example.

I'm homophobic in the same way that I'm arachnophobic. I'm not scared of gay people but I'm going to scream if I find one in my bath.

I'm. Also homophobic in the same way I'm arachnophobic. I'm scared of spiders but I'd still fuck'em.
- my friend Marc
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: