Is there a place for religion in modern politics?

Super Caley

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 31, 2014
Messages
876
All leadership of main political parties in Ireland have been staunch church goers, In the UK similar. In fact the only political leader to claim no belief in a God was Nick Clegg.
And look what happened to him! :)
 


Lumpy Talbot

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 30, 2015
Messages
26,976
Twitter
No
I see the usual social reactionaries who have served the church so well are evident on this thread.

The interesting thing to do would be to remind them that the question is whether there is a place for religion in modern politics and to enquire whether this means they would be happy to share the place in politics the previous dominant religion once had with the Muslim faith.

Would they be happy I wonder with madrassas, TDs attending Islamic ceremonies, a round-robin in council and Oireachtas chambers with imprecations to the xtian god on Monday, a muezzin to lead the call to prayer in the chambers on Tuesdays, the rabbi on Wednesdays, straight to business on a Thursdays with a nod to the secular, et cetera et cetera.

Of course it is likely they would fight any of these suggestions to the death. Mainly because underneath the lie of the term 'religion' is the notion that there is only one.
 

Lumpy Talbot

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 30, 2015
Messages
26,976
Twitter
No
You only have to look at the regions of the earth where politics IS religion to see how civilised it all could be:)
 

rainmaker

Administrator
Joined
Mar 26, 2012
Messages
22,633
Try answering my question first!
You did not ask me a question. What you are doing is what you usually do and finding any escape route you can from answering the difficult questions.

Show me any moral act performed by a person of faith that cannot just as easily be performed by a person of no faith.
 

ruserious

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 3, 2011
Messages
29,091
You did not ask me a question. What you are doing is what you usually do and finding any escape route you can from answering the difficult questions.

Show me any moral act performed by a person of faith that cannot just as easily be performed by a person of no faith.
The sacrificial killing of people with late onset disease and horrific pain? :p
 

Lumpy Talbot

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 30, 2015
Messages
26,976
Twitter
No
There is a certain obvious bipolarity observable in the fundamentally religious. On the one hand they ascribe all negative acts in society as 'evil' and usually describe it in terms customary to their particular cult.

On the other hand they cannot encompass any socially positive act or event without ascribing it to the effect of their religion.

That is why the simple mistake the religious make in assuming civilisation cannot exist without their particular cult occurs.

It is also why they assume that civilisation didn't really exist before their cult came along.

It is the bipolarity of the psychology that cannot understand the world outside the terms their religion ascribe to it.

TFM was determinedly asserting on the thread concerning the dreadful events in Cavan recently as it being undoubtedly the work of satanic evil in the world. All it does is display that TFM cannot process the world other than in terms of his worldview which is deeply affected by religious terminology.
 

The Field Marshal

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 27, 2009
Messages
43,645
No. Religion does not hold a monopoly on morality. The state ought to owe its authority from its citizens and its citizens alone.
But a majority of the citizens are catholic in Ireland and want some reflection of their religion in their constitution and their laws which govern them.

Your answer that the state derives its authority from the citizens must then incorporate into its acts and structures the wishes and religious beliefs of a majority of those citizens otherwise it is not reflecting their authority.

The majority of Irish people want God and the Christian ethos reflected in their state and in their constitution.

You seek to deny that right and to subvert the authority of the people.
 

rainmaker

Administrator
Joined
Mar 26, 2012
Messages
22,633
But a majority of the citizens are catholic in Ireland and want some reflection of their religion in their constitution and their laws which govern them.

Your answer that the state derives its authority from the citizens must then incorporate into its acts and structures the wishes and religious beliefs of a majority of those citizens otherwise it is not reflecting their authority.

The majority of Irish people want God and the Christian ethos reflected in their state and in their constitution.

You seek to deny that right and to subvert the authority of the people.
I love how religious people assume they speak for the majority based on no evidence whatsoever, and falling church attendances.
 

Super Caley

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 31, 2014
Messages
876
I see the usual social reactionaries who have served the church so well are evident on this thread.

The interesting thing to do would be to remind them that the question is whether there is a place for religion in modern politics and to enquire whether this means they would be happy to share the place in politics the previous dominant religion once had with the Muslim faith.

Would they be happy I wonder with madrassas, TDs attending Islamic ceremonies, a round-robin in council and Oireachtas chambers with imprecations to the xtian god on Monday, a muezzin to lead the call to prayer in the chambers on Tuesdays, the rabbi on Wednesdays, straight to business on a Thursdays with a nod to the secular, et cetera et cetera.

Of course it is likely they would fight any of these suggestions to the death. Mainly because underneath the lie of the term 'religion' is the notion that there is only one.
The problem with a thread like this is that it seems to be based on an assumption that there is this thing call "religion" which some people are guided by while other people who are labelled "nonreligious" are guided by something else, i.e. some political philosophy. I think this is a false dichotomy.

Many systems which are usually considered political philosophys, communism, nationalism, environmentalism, devotion to FF etc etc, from the outside seem to have many of the characteristics of a religion...indeed many of what I would see as the more dubious characteristics of religion (blind faith in leader, unquestioning acceptance of ideology, tendency to tribalistic thinking etc).

Furthermore, many of the systems usually characterised as "religions", don't seem to have that much in common with each other. Quakers and Buddhists seem to have little in common with ISIS for instance.

Hence you have to question if the concept of "religion" Vs "secularism" is a valid concept at all. As far as I can see the distinction is used mostly be people who strongly identify with one (conceptually invalid) group so that they can disparage their rivals in the other group.


It would be far more meaningful IMO if we spoke of a person's value system, rather than labeling them on the basis of their religious affiliations, or lack of.

The question in the OP would then read "Is there a place for value systems in modern politics"?
 

ruserious

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 3, 2011
Messages
29,091
But a majority of the citizens are catholic in Ireland and want some reflection of their religion in their constitution and their laws which govern them.

Your answer that the state derives its authority from the citizens must then incorporate into its acts and structures the wishes and religious beliefs of a majority of those citizens otherwise it is not reflecting their authority.

The majority of Irish people want God and the Christian ethos reflected in their state and in their constitution.

You seek to deny that right and to subvert the authority of the people.
A majority of people may believe sex every night is a good thing. Should that be reflected in the constitution?
 

Lumpy Talbot

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 30, 2015
Messages
26,976
Twitter
No
We had a remarkable exhibition of why exactly religion affecting politics is not such a good thing in Ireland.

When the financial crisis was at its worst in Ireland one Minister attempted to say we should take our human hands off the wheel of the car altogether- Eamonn O'Cuiv actually announced in public that our response to the financial emergency could be addressed with prayer.

To my mind that man should have stood down immediately as someone not fit for public office.

He's well entitled to his view as a private citizen but that sort of hapless nonsense being announced by a Minister which suggests he thinks that in reality Mr god is in charge of the response to the financial crisis displayed in an instant why he should never have been in ministerial office.

He showed in an instant that he was not mature enough to be in a cabinet post. His response was that of a child of communion age at best.
 

Super Caley

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 31, 2014
Messages
876
But a majority of the citizens are catholic in Ireland and want some reflection of their religion in their constitution and their laws which govern them.

Your answer that the state derives its authority from the citizens must then incorporate into its acts and structures the wishes and religious beliefs of a majority of those citizens otherwise it is not reflecting their authority.

The majority of Irish people want God and the Christian ethos reflected in their state and in their constitution.

You seek to deny that right and to subvert the authority of the people.


You seem to be suggesting that the Irish state should reflect CHristian values, not because those values are intrinsically good, but because it is the will of the majority. But that seems to suggest that the moral good is what ever the majority deem it to be. If the majority wanted to reintroduce human sacrifice, would you be happy to have put into the constitution?

Or do you believe that Christian values transcend cultural context?
 

The Field Marshal

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 27, 2009
Messages
43,645
There is a certain obvious bipolarity observable in the fundamentally religious. On the one hand they ascribe all negative acts in society as 'evil' and usually describe it in terms customary to their particular cult.

On the other hand they cannot encompass any socially positive act or event without ascribing it to the effect of their religion.

That is why the simple mistake the religious make in assuming civilisation cannot exist without their particular cult occurs.

It is also why they assume that civilisation didn't really exist before their cult came along.

It is the bipolarity of the psychology that cannot understand the world outside the terms their religion ascribe to it.

TFM was determinedly asserting on the thread concerning the dreadful events in Cavan recently as it being undoubtedly the work of satanic evil in the world. All it does is display that TFM cannot process the world other than in terms of his worldview which is deeply affected by religious terminology.
Lumpy Talbot cannot process the world other than in terms of his worldview which is deeply affected by anti- religious terminology.

And thats ok.

The essential issue in Ireland is that democratically , historically and socially the country is catholic and Christian.

This religious fact must be reflected in its constitution and its culture laws irrespective of what any one individual such as your self might think.

In pagan non catholic non Christian societies and atheist where religion is a dominent factor[atheism can be a state religion] these reflections are also seen.

It is also clear that many of these states are mostly culturally/socially barbaric backward eg North Korea, Iran, Saudi Arabia, The Gulf States , China, much of the far east ,where individual freedoms and rights do not exist etc.

So be thankful to the Christian ethic which alone promotes the value of the individual versus the state..

Remove Xtianity from the state results in Godless laws which end up destroying the individual and eventually the state itself as everybody saw with the fall of communism.

You see Lumpy, both God and the devil are actual realities which influence the way the world operates and its about time you recognized these fundamental realities.

All discourse that fails to observe these fundamental truths on subjects like this will remain defective.
 

Lumpy Talbot

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 30, 2015
Messages
26,976
Twitter
No
Lumpy Talbot cannot process the world other than in terms of his worldview which is deeply affected by anti- religious terminology.

And thats ok.

The essential issue in Ireland is that democratically , historically and socially the country is catholic and Christian.

This religious fact must be reflected in its constitution and its culture laws irrespective of what any one individual such as your self might think.

In pagan non catholic non Christian societies and atheist where religion is a dominent factor[atheism can be a state religion] these reflections are also seen.

It is also clear that many of these states are mostly culturally/socially barbaric backward eg North Korea, Iran, Saudi Arabia, The Gulf States , China, much of the far east ,where individual freedoms and rights do not exist etc.

So be thankful to the Christian ethic which alone promotes the value of the individual versus the state..

Remove Xtianity from the state results in Godless laws which end up destroying the individual and eventually the state itself as everybody saw with the fall of communism.

You see Lumpy, both God and the devil are actual realities which influence the way the world operates and its about time you recognized these fundamental realities.

All discourse that fails to observe these fundamental truths on subjects like this will remain defective.

'Mr god' and 'Mr satan' are two of the best examples of a taught bipolarity in human social history. Your notion that any discourse outside these two opposites is 'defective' only serves as an example of how it can be inculcated in the human mind.
 

Super Caley

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 31, 2014
Messages
876
There is a certain obvious bipolarity observable in the fundamentally religious. On the one hand they ascribe all negative acts in society as 'evil' and usually describe it in terms customary to their particular cult.

On the other hand they cannot encompass any socially positive act or event without ascribing it to the effect of their religion.

That is why the simple mistake the religious make in assuming civilisation cannot exist without their particular cult occurs.

It is also why they assume that civilisation didn't really exist before their cult came along.

It is the bipolarity of the psychology that cannot understand the world outside the terms their religion ascribe to it.

TFM was determinedly asserting on the thread concerning the dreadful events in Cavan recently as it being undoubtedly the work of satanic evil in the world. All it does is display that TFM cannot process the world other than in terms of his worldview which is deeply affected by religious terminology.
Much, if not all of the above could also be said of Nationalism.
 

The Field Marshal

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 27, 2009
Messages
43,645
You seem to be suggesting that the Irish state should reflect CHristian values, not because those values are intrinsically good, but because it is the will of the majority.
Speaking with my democratic hat yes.
[It sits beneath my religious hat.]

But that seems to suggest that the moral good is what ever the majority deem it to be.
Wearing my religious hat I reject that because the objective truths taught by catholocism are not dependent on who or how many believe in them.

They stand alone as signposts to God.

If the majority wanted to reintroduce human sacrifice, would you be happy to have put into the constitution?
They already have in some countries with liberal abortion laws.

I oppose this and deem it barbaric.

I did not say democracy is perfect.
It is probably the best system we have in an imperfect world and it is importent that democracy continue be informed by Christian values for its own long term success.

Or do you believe that Christian values transcend cultural context?
I believe they do and especially Roman Catholic values which are the superior form.

Our culture is now somewhat conflicted because some reject these values due to ignorence.
 

Lumpy Talbot

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 30, 2015
Messages
26,976
Twitter
No
Much, if not all of the above could also be said of Nationalism.
Only if you assume nationalism is the same as as a religion. That mistake has been made in human history on quite a number of occasions.
 

Lumpy Talbot

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 30, 2015
Messages
26,976
Twitter
No
Speaking with my democratic hat yes.
[It sits beneath my religious hat.]



Wearing my religious hat I reject that because the objective truths taught by catholocism are not dependent on who or how many believe in them.

They stand alone as signposts to God.



They already have in some countries with liberal abortion laws.

I oppose this and deem it barbaric.

I did not say democracy is perfect.
It is probably the best system we have in an imperfect world and it is importent that democracy continue be informed by Christian values for its own long term success.



I believe they do and especially Roman Catholic values which are the superior form.

Our culture is now somewhat conflicted because some reject these values due to ignorence.
You have an amazing hat size if you can keep the hat of democracy underneath a hat which is informed by Europe's last absolute dictator.

There is no democracy in the vatican.
 


New Threads

Popular Threads

Most Replies

Top