Should religious issues be pushed on to the general population?

[brycelaliberte]

Is it just me or has anybody else noted that incredible amount of ‘false dichotomies’ that are used as arguments by those who (wittingly or unwittingly) have fallen victim to the ‘moral relativism’ crowd?

Verily so, yes I have noticed. It boils down to “If society says that’s what morality is, that’s what morality is.” Nevertheless that societies change, they can never say one ethical system is better without being socially arrogant.

On topic, more or less, is there a single argument for being moral that doesn’t eventually boil down to God?

For instance, one may say we should be moral to better society, but why should society be better? Or to better the individual, but why should the individual be better? Why does it matter if something is better or worse, if there is no God? Why can something be good or bad if there is no God?

Moral relativism will answer that it just wants to live for itself and nothing else.

 

[vern_humphrey]

It’s post-modernism. Since we can’t really know anything, then we can’t make judgements.

 

[elt1956]

A blade of grass?

Of course, all saints walk on air as I do. Peace.

 

[kristie_m]

Of course, all saints walk on air as I do. Peace.

Good one!

 

[Newbie2]

Let’s not silly this down. Peace.

I’m not. You stated that “ANY living thing has rights”. There are people who would endow the same rights on a blade of grass as an unborn human being.

I don’t think it’s silly to ask you to clarify your position. My apologies if I didn’t spell that out.

 

[elt1956]

I’m not. You stated that “ANY living thing has rights”. There are people who would endow the same rights on a blade of grass as an unborn human being.

I don’t think it’s silly to ask you to clarify your position. My apologies if I didn’t spell that out.

Well, I can’t speak for others who can’t prioritize as to what, or who should come first. Perhaps I can say that all living things should be protected, but those who are created with only human attributes come first. I would say soul instead of attributes, but some would say the soul can’t be proven. It is a no win situation to anyone not having the same value system. Peace.

 

[KathleenElsie]

Medical science says that pregnancy begins at implantation. I believe this Wikipedia article addresses that issue:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pregnancy

I’ll take the teachings of Holy Mother Church over Wikipedia any day.

 

[Daniel_Marsh]

It depends,

“thou shalt not murder”

do you want someone who murdered you to go to jail?

“thou shalt not steal”

As a store owner, do you want the person who stole a million dollars from your to pay you back? and possiblity go to jail?

If you or a love one is raped, do you want the rappist locked up and treated? or do you want them to go free to rape someone else’s mother, child, sister, wife?

These and many more are all “religious issues” that have been pushed on society.

 

[vern_humphrey]

It depends,

“thou shalt not murder”

do you want someone who murdered you to go to jail?

“thou shalt not steal”

As a store owner, do you want the person who stole a million dollars from your to pay you back? and possiblity go to jail?

If you or a love one is raped, do you want the rappist locked up and treated? or do you want them to go free to rape someone else’s mother, child, sister, wife?

These and many more are all “religious issues” that have been pushed on society.

Isn’t it funny how many laws we have based on the commandments – like those against murder, theft, fraud, perjury, and so on – but only laws restricting abortion are singled out as “pushing your religion on other people?”

 

[GregoryPalamas]

Alright, we’ve played aroung the edges of the question and Holly has changed her sig line so my earlier comment is not applicable. To answer her question. “Of course I believe that the Catholic Church’s position on all things should be the governements position. I would not be Catholic if I did not think so. Moreover, a secular government produces all sorts of wars and enslavement. I’d much rather have a Catholic Monarchy. Since that is unlikely we just keep plugging away and working and praying as our Lord did 'Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done, on earth as it is in heaven.”

CDL

 

[catharina]

When people of faith are unwelcome in the political arena, it’s only a matter of time that people of faith are also limited in their very existence.

I see no great leap in China’s move from limiting family size to more availability of abortions to imposition of abortions. If the state can rule, independent of informed conscience (religion), there are no limits to the choices made and enforced by the state (nation).

 

[vern_humphrey]

When people of faith are unwelcome in the political arena, it’s only a matter of time that people of faith are also limited in their very existence.

I see no great leap in China’s move from limiting family size to more availability of abortions to imposition of abortions. If the state can rule, independent of informed conscience (religion), there are no limits to the choices made and enforced by the state (nation).

That’s assuming the government has the power to do that.

Unfortunately, increasing socialism means increasing government power.

 

[Gamera]

Hi everyone. Should religious issues such as abortion be pushed on to the general population?

Abortion is not a religious issue. Like any sin, it has religious implications, but that doesn’t make it a religious issue.

Religious people were at the forefront of the 1960’s civil rights movement. Did that make racial equality a religious issue? Should those civil rights activists have stopped trying to force their anti-segretation religious principles on society? No, of course not. The fact that the segretation was sinful didn’t make it a “religious issue.” Like segregation, abortion is a human rights issue.

 

[vern_humphrey]

Abortion is not a religious issue. Like any sin, it has religious implications, but that doesn’t make it a religious issue.

Religious people were at the forefront of the 1960’s civil rights movement. Did that make racial equality a religious issue? Should those civil rights activists have stopped trying to force their anti-segretation religious principles on society? No, of course not. The fact that the segretation was sinful didn’t make it a “religious issue.” Like segregation, abortion is a human rights issue.

Amen.

From the 14th Amendment to the Constitution:

Amendment XIV

Section 1.
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; **nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. **

(My emphasis)

 

[catharina]

That’s assuming the government has the power to do that.

Unfortunately, increasing socialism means increasing government power.

As someone in my 60s, I’d never have imagined in my younger years that the government would decide it had the power to legalize abortion. Yet, abortion has been legalized. Hmmm … .

 

[vern_humphrey]

As someone in my 60s, I’d never have imagined in my younger years that the government would decide it had the power to legalize abortion. Yet, abortion has been legalized. Hmmm … .

Another decade or two should see the government legalizing euthanasia – especially if we have socialized medicine. The government will “save money” by witholding treatment of those who are too old, too sick, or too physically or mentally impaired to make it worthwhile to treat them.

 

[markomalley]

Hi everyone. Should religious issues such as abortion be pushed on to the general population? We all know that abortion is largely a religious issue because many people believe it is murder but this is based upon their religious beliefs. Their religious beliefs teach them that from the moment of conception, it is a human being or a person with legal rights. But that is a religious opinion and not a factual opinion. Should religious opinions really be pushed on to other people? I’m sorry but I don’t think they should be.

*1. Should matters of faith (or religious issues) be pushed onto the general population? *

No. I should not be able to force a passer-by to recite the Nicene Creed.

I should not be able to force a woman to wear a burkha. On the other hand, I should not have to endure utter immodesty (i.e., there should be some middle ground)

I should not be allowed to teach the Catechism within a public school. Nor should a Catholic child be forced to be taught the Koran. Nor should a student of any variety of faith be told their faith (unless it is a faith in no God) is full of ****.

No. I should not be able to force total abstinence from alcohol, for religious beliefs, in of itself (now get me acting the fool in public or get me driving after having too much to drink, well, that’s another issue altogether)

1. We all know that abortion is largely a religious issue because many people believe it is murder but this is based upon their religious beliefs.

I don’t know that abortion is a religious issue. I know many atheists who are pro-life. I know the vast majority of muslims who are pro life. I know many hindus who are pro life.

As for me, my belief as a pro lifer has nothing to do with religious faith. It is strictly based upon science. The baby has a unique identity, determined by his/her DNA…which is distinctly different than that of the host organism (i.e., the mother). Therefore, the baby is not part of the mother when in utero. I know that the baby is alive because, given natural processes with no direct intervention to stop those natural processes, once the baby has matured sufficiently, the baby will no longer require support from the mother (After about 14-16 years).

I am pro-life as a result of the natural law. That is not a matter of religion…it does not require faith. It simply requires an honest, objective look at the world around us. (i.e., facts, ill-informed people like you notwithstanding)

Try again.

 

[GregoryPalamas]

Abortion is not a religious issue. Like any sin, it has religious implications, but that doesn’t make it a religious issue.

Religious people were at the forefront of the 1960’s civil rights movement. Did that make racial equality a religious issue? Should those civil rights activists have stopped trying to force their anti-segretation religious principles on society? No, of course not. The fact that the segretation was sinful didn’t make it a “religious issue.” Like segregation, abortion is a human rights issue.

They are all religious issues. Why do you separate some religious issues from other religious issues?

CDL

 

[elt1956]

Isn’t it funny how many laws we have based on the commandments – like those against murder, theft, fraud, perjury, and so on – but only laws restricting abortion are singled out as “pushing your religion on other people?”

Never thought of that before Vern. Veeeeeeeery Interesting! Have to think of this for a bit, but could it be because the rest of the Thou Shalt Nots are refering to one’s “personal” safety? We are a selfish race, aren’t we? Peace.

 

[Swan]

Isn’t it funny how many laws we have based on the commandments – like those against murder, theft, fraud, perjury, and so on – but only laws restricting abortion are singled out as “pushing your religion on other people?”

I don’t think “thou shalt not rape” is one of the commandments. But the bigger issue is that a lot of governments, including atheistic dictaroships, have these same laws. It has nothing to do with the Bible. Murder and stealing were illegal in Soviet Russia, Red China, Cuba - not to mention scores of others around the world and throughout history that are run by folks other than Christians. So to give the entire credit for murder being illegal to the OT is a bit of a stretch.