c5dcad No.582217
Agnostic here.
What exactly gives Christians (or any religious people) the right to try and impose their values and beliefs on society as a whole via politics, especially people who do not neccessarily share their beliefs? I have no problem with private Christians who practice their beliefs at a personal level (charity etc), but whenever a "Christian" comes out to denounce homosexuality or whatever he doesn't like I feel complete disgust towards Christianity. As long as people obey the law they should be able to do whatever they like.
Do Christians not understand the concept "mind your own business"?
fc90ac No.582221
>As long as people obey the law they should be able to do whatever they like.
Therein lies the problem. The law was either an explicitly Christian law or a secular law thoroughly based on Christian principles for thousands of years. Only in the last few decades have Western societies begun to diverge significantly from it, and Christians are right to be upset by this because we are concerned with everyone's souls, not just our own.
c5dcad No.582222
>>582221
Seeing as you cannot even scientifically prove the existence of "souls", you shouldn't be concerned about the fate of something that may not even exist.
fa2e8a No.582223
>>582217
>so·ci·e·ty
>səˈsīədē/
>noun
>noun: society
> 1.
> the aggregate of people living together in a more or less ordered community.
Okay, so a society is made up of people. People hold religious beliefs. If enough people hold the same religious beliefs, they will order society based on those beliefs. Sorry faggot
c5dcad No.582225
>>582223
And what about the many secular republics in the world whose population is mostly religious yet the State itself is not?
9e3089 No.582226
>>582217
Because Christians believe (unlike Atheists and Agnostics) that there is a thing called "Objective Morality"
For example: Murder is wrong, since the Lord told us "thou shalt not murder" and homsex, adultery, fornication of all other kinds should be outlawed by law since those too are against the law of god.
Anyway nice bait thread
a4ad20 No.582227
9e3089 No.582228
>>582226
sorry meant to write "Objective Truth"
fc90ac No.582229
>>582222
>scientifically prove
There are those words again. If religion was about 'proving' things under a microscope, then we could all pack up and go home, but its not. Your scientism betrays your ignorance about what religious belief actually is. Please do some reading as the topic is far too large to be adequately broached on an imageboard. May I suggest starting with The Rage Against God by Peter Hitchens, which is short and easy to read but will provide you with a good introduction to the societal element of Christianity.
d8ae71 No.582230
>>582217
>What exactly gives Christians (or any religious people) the right to try and impose their values and beliefs on society as a whole via politics, especially people who do not neccessarily share their beliefs?
533945 No.582232
Nihilist here.
What exactly gives people who believe in things (or any non-nihilists) the right to try and impose their values and beliefs on society as a whole via politics, especially people who do not neccessarily share their beliefs? I have no problem with private people who believe in things who practice their beliefs at a personal level (charity etc), but whenever a "person who believes in something" comes out to denounce a belief or whatever he doesn't like I feel complete disgust towards people who believe in things. As long as people obey the law they should be able to do whatever they like.
Do people who believe in things not understand the concept "mind your own business"?
f97f06 No.582238
>>582217
Do fedoras not understand they're retarded and should go back to the shit hole site known as Reddit?
58199b No.582241
>>582232
Well christians are explicitly told to preach the word of God to all creatures in mark 16:15. But christians of today would be wise to follow Jesus' example in matthew 7:6,26 and to rather matthew 10:6. see 2 samuel 9:8, 2 samuel 16:5,9, and 1 kings 22:38 for what matthew 7:6, 10:6, and proverbs 25:11 refer to. All KJV
fa2e8a No.582244
>>582241
You should Job 13:5
533945 No.582246
>>582241
My post was satire of OP's post, I was hoping that would be obvious.
58199b No.582248
>>582244
I don't care for my own wisdom as hebrews 4:12 applies. I seek to do as 1 corinthians 1:23 says as the wisdom of the world or my own wisdom is as foolishness to God.
cb034b No.582252
>>582217
…is this a serious question or just bait?
From our point of view you agnostics/atheists have taken over the government and made your beliefs the law of the land.
Heck I'm forced to support abortions since I have to pay taxes and whatever your stance on abortion it IS murder of a baby.
If you really were for the whole 'mind your own business' mindset you support a dual-law state like in some muslim countries where ethical questions are governed by that person's religious law and state matters by the state itself.
Oh wait you guys made everything a matter of the state including marriage which you turned into a travesty by allowing gays to 'marry' and everybody can quit it whenever they feel like it.
>>582225
>And what about the many secular republics in the world whose population is mostly religious yet the State itself is not?
The morals of those states are based upon the religion their population has/had.
Even here in the West this is the case for a lot of things.
You think Iraqi and Syrian law function like a Western country?
625193 No.582254
>>582225
Religious tolerance is adopted by societies open to being converted. I assume once the transition period is over they'll go back to being intolerant of religious dissent.
6ce988 No.582256
>>582222
The scientific process is one of descriptions of happenings. Things that have no physical process can't be used to define so there's no point in acknowledging it. Physical descriptions > metaphysical explanations.
c5dcad No.582268
>>582252
>The morals of those states are based upon the religion their population has/had.
Do you really think Christianity invented prohibitions on murder, theft and perjury? These morals existed in societies years before Judaism or Christianity even existed.
0c7e81 No.582273
half assed arguments made by a half assed person
>these values should be upheld as long as they're there for non-religious reasons
??? sounds like you need to mind your own business op
47c3a4 No.582276
Fellow agnostic here
What gives them the right is the results, places with an enforced moral code always have better social cohesion, and typically the best form of an enforced moral code is a religion, Not Judiasm or Islam beacuse those are basically religions founded on two different forms of empire building rather than social cohesion
47c3a4 No.582279
>>582268
Talmudic Judiasm came after Christianity
c5dcad No.582280
>>582276
Explain to me why a social moral code cannot be entirely secular and justified by humanism rather than religion.
47c3a4 No.582281
>>582280
I could theoretically go on a long spheal that there is no way that it could work in a secular democracy but really all the argument I need is the current state of the work
Also Humanitarianism is a religion, a spin off of Talmudic Judaism
f72d1e No.582282
>>582280
Because humans suck
0c7e81 No.582283
>>582280
What exactly gives Humanists(or any secular people) the right to try and impose their values and beliefs on society as a whole via politics, especially people who do not neccessarily share their beliefs? I have no problem with private Humanists who practice their beliefs at a personal level…
47c3a4 No.582284
c5dcad No.582285
>>582282
Notice how Christianity always comes back to how they despise human beings.
f72d1e No.582286
c5dcad No.582287
>>582283
Probably because human beings actually exist and we are them. There's no proof God or anything metaphysical or spiritual exist. Better to devote yourself in reality than in something that might not even be real.
ff7f82 No.582289
Look bro, what gives Christians the right to impose their beliefs is natural law. Strictly speaking natural law is a set of moral truths that everyone can know, even filthy atheists.
Christians don't have the right to require conversion to Christianity or say Sunday mass attendance. But only matters of basic morals like sodomy, things that everyone instinctually knows are wrong and have to be brainwashed into thinking are okay, yeah we have a right to make that illegal. And not because God said so in our book, but because nature itself tells you so and you already know it's true.
47c3a4 No.582291
>>582285
>he thinks Arabians are people
heh
c5dcad No.582292
>>582289
Natural law is BS though. The reason murder, theft etc are prohibited in almost all societies is simply because it's conducive to a stable society. And if you think that the only way to make people behave is by threatening them with eternal torture if they misbehave, then you probably have a very low and morbid view on humans to begin with.
>But only matters of basic morals like sodomy, things that everyone instinctually knows are wrong
They don't lol, most people in civilized countries don't care. Why do you care about whether someone puts their peepee in their partners bum? How does it personally affect you?
cb034b No.582293
>>582268
Murder is a concept.
before christianity it was only murder if the thing you slay is seen as either sacred (as with some animals in ancient Egypt) or seen as an actual person (killing a slave wasn't murder but more akin to vandalism and was fined as that).
When christianity spread murder was the killing of a human being without any good reason, whatever that person's caste or status.
Besides, we as christians believe in something called 'natural law' which can be seen as universal moral and ethical values upheld by most societies and cultures.
These are semi-subjective because what is a moral system without a base?
Then again you know if something isn't natural law if it either goes against nature or one needs to explicitly promote said law with lots of effort and instate it with force.
A good example is same-sex marriage and abortion.
Every culture ever know has seen the slaying of a baby inside a woman as murder, and besides some Polynesian fringe groups getting penetrated as a man was always seen as disgraceful and the concept of 2 men or women marrying wasn't even thinkable.
>>582292
>Natural law is BS though. The reason murder, theft etc are prohibited in almost all societies is simply because it's conducive to a stable society.
Murder like you know it now isn't the same as in other cultures (see my post above).
Theft comes in many forms and can be practiced almost freely on lower-caste people.
That said ancient and classical kingdoms were pretty stable.
ff7f82 No.582294
The imposing of beliefs on others sounds so horrible on paper in your teenage rebellion anarchist phase. Then you grow up and realize that shared beliefs are the foundation of all civilization and that some beliefs must by the nature of the case be imposed on others unless we are all to fall back into barbarism.
Your belief that only the scientific is the provable/knowable is just a belief. I don't share it, I think there are other means of knowledge. Now either the state recognizes my view or yours, that is, either it says that only scientific ideas will be allowed as premises of legislation, or it allows that some non scientific ideas can be allowed. There is no middle ground. So the state cannot be unbiased, and your proposed solution is already biased in your favor. A civilization must be built on shared beliefs and that means excluding some beliefs at the foundational level. On a practical level is not a question of who has the "right" to impose their beliefs, it is really a question of which beliefs are compatible with a long surviving stable state. And allowing sodomy as we see from the statistics on gay promiscuity is simply not compatible with a stable state. Since the unsustainable will not be sustained, sodomy is suicidal for a nation. That is the most empirical basis on which we can know that sodomy is against the natural moral law.
That is one example but in general anything that tends to destabilize a state is justifiably outlawed by that state, and this is true whether or not it happens to coincide with certain religious dogma.
9eb379 No.582296
>>582217
They believe they possess a universal truth, the spread and adherence to which is beneficial beyond conception.
Considering you're an agnostic, why are you judging Christians by concepts like 'rights' and things people 'should' do? From where do you draw your answers to these questions? You see, the Christians actually think they have a real answer, which is why they use their uh powers of democracy and free speech which they are considered entitled to under the system you both exist in to try and spread it. You on the other hand are trying to also preach a method of living onto someone else, which is the idea of 'minding your own business' - you want the Christians to change their way of life, in a sense. We are all our own ugly prophets. The sooner you recognise it in yourself the better.
ff7f82 No.582298
>>582292
Get rid of your strawmen and talk to us like we're human beings, please. I didn't say anything about eternal torture. And being "conducive to a stable society" just IS part of what it means to be part of natural law.
>Why do you care about whether someone puts their peepee in their partners bum? How does it personally affect you?
I don't want to care. It doesn't personally affect me. But here's why that is a bad argument: it doesn't need to personally affect me to be destructive for society as a whole.
The heterosexual, biological family is the molecule of civilization. Anything that weakens the family even a tiny amount strikes at the heart of civilization. Legalized sodomy weakens the biological family.
Is it the worst culprit? No. Is it the disease? No, it's the symptom of an already diseased nation. Gay marriage could not have happened without feminism and sexual liberation, which couldn't have happened without the birth control pill, etc. So gay marriage is just a late stage symptom of a dying civilization. But the fact that you can't even contemplate the idea, the fact that your mind is SO COMPLETELY CLOSED to the notion that there might be something wrong with homosexuality, to the point where I sound like a raving lunatic for simply reiterating what has been common sense for all human history–doesn't that worry you just a little? Isn't it just slightly possible that you're a totally brainwashed modern zombie? Think about it.
9aa67f No.582300
>>582217
What exactly gives atheists (or any non religious people) the right to try and impose their values and beliefs on society as a whole via politics, especially people who do not neccessarily share their beliefs? I have no problem with private atheists who practice their beliefs at a personal level (gay sex parties etc), but whenever a "atheist" comes out to denounce objective morality or whatever he doesn't like I feel complete disgust towards atheism. As long as people obey the moral law they should be able to do whatever they like.
Do atheists not understand the concept "mind your own business"?
96efba No.582305
I don't think this is a bait thread, but it might as well be considering OP's prejudice and lack of intellectual rigour which >>582221, >>582223, >>582226, >>582229, >>582252, >>582293, >>582294, >>582296 and >>582298 have thoroughly examined and corrected.
I think the question remains for OP: Why are you here? What do you really want?
b0d190 No.582306
>>582217
>As long as people obey the law they should be able to do whatever they like.
As long as the law has a sound moral basis, like what the Bible teaches, I'd be fine with that.
You are free to go your own way. The USA is God's country, it was founded and built by devout Christians. Almost all revolutionaries carried a Bible with them and read it when they had downtime.
If you do not like the USA, a CHRISTIAN country, which has allowed you to exist and thrive as an ignorant, self-absorbed cuck, you are more than welcome to leave and go to the middle east, other african countries, or perhaps somewhere like venezuela…where you can do what you want as long as you don't break the law, and so can everyone else…and they will do what they want…and the law usually doesn't give much of a shit.
And nobody is forcing you to be a christian, but in the USA and most countries that are not shitholes, biblical morality rules. What, exactly, do you believe you are gaining in life by being "agnostic" and in denial about something extremely obvious - that God exists?
8229c1 No.582309
>>582217
What exactly gives Faggots (or any liberal ideology people) the right to try and impose their values and beliefs on society as a whole via politics, especially people who do not neccessarily share their beliefs? Why try to normalize gay marriage and legalize it? I don't get it. I have no problem with private Faggots who practice their sins in the closet, at a personal level (bug chasing, self-cutting, drug abuse, anal fissures, going to hell on purpose), but whenever a "Homosexual" comes out of the closet and denounces Christian values or whatever he doesn't like I feel complete disgust towards "Homosexuals". As long as people obey the law they should be able to do whatever they like in their closets, including sending themselves to hell and chasing aids.
60a150 No.582310
>>582217
Can a mod delete that disgusting, faggoty image?
ee2d95 No.582443
YouTube embed. Click thumbnail to play.
>>582217
Pastor Anderson speaks about this in relation to abortion
It's probably the most insightful thing I've seen from him, and even if you do not like him you will still likely be edified by it.
a7f47f No.582553
>>582268
>Do you really think Christianity invented prohibitions on murder, theft and perjury?
Why do you think Christians believe this? Especially considering these things show up in the Old Testament long before there was such a thing as Christianity.
fe3bb2 No.582562
>>582285
>thinks abortion is OK
>thinks sodomy is OK
>knows people can force others to do things that are against their own personal beliefs
>gets mad when Christians point out that people are actually quite awful
lel
>>582280
>Explain to me why a social moral code cannot be entirely secular and justified by humanism rather than religion.
Picture related. This is the end result of your super duper 100% rational humanist secular "moral code".
625193 No.582564
>>582292
Most people in civilized countries view homosexuality as anti-social and selfish. Just because you're a eurocentric mouthbreather doesn't mean the rest of us are.
fe3bb2 No.582566
>>582292
>They don't lol, most people in civilized countries don't care.
<being OK with sodomy is a sign of advanced civilisation
So civilisation didn't exist until the 1960s, did it?
20d571 No.582665
>>582292
>by threatening them with eternal torture if they misbehave
Can someone please explain this to me? I've only heard about Hell in bits and pieces, and I've never gotten the same answer twice.
From what I recall, after judgement, the damned receive the Second Death, but I thought that was described as annihilation of the soul and not eternal torment. It's just death in the same manner an atheist already expects it: oblivion?
fe3bb2 No.582667
>>582665
Some Christians believe what you write, which is simply called annihilationism, whereby God just ends up utterly destroying wicked souls.
Mostly we believe in the that the "Second Death" is the Final Judgment of souls, when they will be finally cast into Outer Darkness.
To be honest, I don't know that it profits one to meditate much on what Hellish suffering consists of exactly, other than to believe we shouldn't want to find out.
This isn't to say I don't believe we shouldn't meditate on Death and the Last Things (which we should) but trying to get into the fine details is beside the point.
>It's just death in the same manner an atheist already expects it: oblivion?
In a way you are right, but part of the problem is that they have in between their death and Judgement they have the "particular judgment" which is a temporary stage, where you will receive a foretaste of the bliss or punishment to come.
b97d35 No.582678
261eb2 No.582684
>>582217
That's why I'm an anarchist. (Or an 'anarchist' as some would say)
ed2a7d No.582691
>>582684
That is literally the exact same word
0c7e81 No.582843
>>582292
>threatening them with eternal torture if they misbehave
I hate when people say this. It's not a "threat" to tell someone that sticking their hand into a pot of boiling water is going to burn them.
8ff724 No.585000
>>582443
>killing a bunch of sodomites doesn't count as shedding innocent blood
What did he mean by this? Does (((Anderson))) think that being guilty of sexual intemperance would automatically absolve your killer of the sin of murder?
4ae049 No.585111
>>585000
He's a heretic but too useful to discard. The fact that he non ironically zealously follows KJV makes him not heretic enough to warrant shaming.
He has some weird extra-biblical beliefs, that being one of them
6759ad No.585146
>>582292
>Why do you care if sexual perversion is constantly thrust in you and your families faces?
4ae049 No.585148
>>582292
Did civilization appear in 1960?