i wonder how long till this thread is now locked?
i wonder how long till this thread is now locked?
LetsAllMakeBelieve said:
having read his posts, he said religion can lead to terrorism and that terrorist are religous and that religous fundies use the same justification as terrorists, thats not the same as calling them terrorists. |
Take it up with Naz if thats how you see his post. Remember that free discussion about religion is in this or any discussion threads I make, not anywhere else on this site. As for his thread's purpose lets discuss what happened here.
Lets go with:
Should religion play a role in political decisions?
Go.
imho it is inevitable. The world is ran on religion. Even if we do not want it we can't stop it. It is wrong that someone that is supposed to have judicial power be swayed by religion but sadly most are.
Since nobody is equating those who follow religion to terrorists, I think you are jumping to conclusions.
LetsAllMakeBelieve said: i wonder how long till this thread is now locked? |
I control this thread so as long as this thread doesnt turn to crap and goes against the rules I set then it wont be.
So do you mean in creating laws or electing presidents or what?
Be a tad more specific please.
Kimi wa ne tashika ni ano toki watashi no soba ni ita
Itsudatte itsudatte itsudatte
Sugu yoko de waratteita
Nakushitemo torimodosu kimi wo
I will never leave you
dtewi said: So do you mean in creating laws or electing presidents or what? Be a tad more specific please. |
poitical decisioons meaning go to war, make laws, etc.
@ ssj12 - i sent naznatips a message, also this thread is the same as PS360s it deals with peoples veiws on religion.
"Should religion play a role in political decisions?"
As you said, its hard to pull them apart, as religion (or lack thereof for our athiest friends) often leads people to make judgements that favor them but negatively affect others.
So my answer is, no it shouldn't. It shouldn't be a factor either way.
A person shouldn't be told that their president is "doing God's will" (aka George Bush Jr) and thus it affecting them and their families (Iraq War)
Conversely, a person who is anti-religion should not feel the need to change slogans that were created at the founding of a nation (such as getting rid of In God We Trust on money).
A tolerance is needed. I can discuss beliefs and have a polite chat with my athiest friends, and they can respect my faith, and we never have a problem. It is the extremists that ruin it for everyone - the uber bible thumpers and the athiest who laughs in people's face when they state their beliefs.
I do not think it should be allowed to interfere.
Laws should be based on what is harmful and what isn't. Not what is morally acceptable by the religion's standard and what is not.
Kimi wa ne tashika ni ano toki watashi no soba ni ita
Itsudatte itsudatte itsudatte
Sugu yoko de waratteita
Nakushitemo torimodosu kimi wo
I will never leave you
dtewi said: I do not think it should be allowed to interfere. Laws should be based on what is harmful and what isn't. Not what is morally acceptable by the religion's standard and what is not. |
i agree 100%