Religion in politics, a question...

[timhsvwalkinsha]

Is there any good reason why economic conservatism and christianity should necessarily go hand in hand in politics?

Seems to me that redistributive policies better suit a christian ethic.

[Ruhanv]

I agree but somewhere along the line abortion became all and end all of moral sin for Christians.

[Cramerica]

Originally Posted by timhsvwalkinsha

Seems to me that redistributive policies better suit a christian ethic.

In the end redistribution isn't as effective, though.

[HoosierBoy]

Originally Posted by Ruhanv

I agree but somewhere along the line abortion became all and end all of moral sin for Christians.

Not a Christian, but why wouldn't it be a big deal for Christians?

[KLMARB]

Charity, which is voluntary, goes with christianity. Not big government redistribution and the inevitable creation of dependancy for political purposes.....

[timhsvwalkinsha]

Originally Posted by Cramerica

In the end redistribution isn't as effective, though.

Can you elaborate?

[booopooo]

absolutely not. Many Ron Paul supporters will tell you this marriage has resulted in the downgrade of our society, one in which we cannot recover

[timhsvwalkinsha]

Originally Posted by booopooo

absolutely not. Many Ron Paul supporters will tell you this marriage has resulted in the downgrade of our society, one in which we cannot recover

Well that's kinda what I'm getting at. If you want to screw people (esp lower classes) right up the ass...then go laissez faire - or as close to it before you got yourself a peoples revolution

[Barry Bonds]

and the reason Christians jump on abortion is the same reason they do genocide. Protection of those who can't protect themselves.

The vast majority of abortions are for birth control. Why should an unborn child pay the price because you can't use a condom or control yourself any more than an animal?

Then there's that self preservation thing. Everyone harps about the rampant sexual deviancy when Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed. But they leave out the part about the way they sacrificed their children.

As is often quoted, If the United States isn't punished for abortion, then God owes Sodom and Gomorrah an apology.

[Callaar21]

Originally Posted by timhsvwalkinsha

Is there any good reason why economic conservatism and christianity should necessarily go hand in hand in politics?

Seems to me that redistributive policies better suit a christian ethic.

Yes that is a good question and one of the major reasons that i can not support the republican party as much as I would like.

Originally Posted by timhsvwalkinsha

Well that's kinda what I'm getting at. If you want to screw people (esp lower classes) right up the ass...then go laissez faire - or as close to it before you got yourself a peoples revolution

Right on! Let it be is the best philosophy for economics imo. No government control.


There is a contradiction within the liberal logic as well.. They want to not force anything upon another person (abortion is a good example) yet they force buig government and all the taxes associated with it on me. Ya real liberal to say that you should choose what you do with your body yet try and control 4-6 months of my income....lolz

[Ruhanv]

Originally Posted by HoosierBoy

Not a Christian, but why wouldn't it be a big deal for Christians?

I am not saying it wouldn't be but somehow it became more important than anything else. They would rather support a guy who will bomb other countries and put real adult sons and daughters in harms way for ridiculous reasons as long as he protects the chances of an embyo surviving.

[timhsvwalkinsha]

Originally Posted by Callaar21

There is a contradiction within the liberal logic as well.. They want to not force anything upon another person (abortion is a good example) yet they force buig government and all the taxes associated with it on me. Ya real liberal to say that you should choose what you do with your body yet try and control 4-6 months of my income....lolz

Rawls would suggest your ability to accumulate primary social goods (like money) is a matter of chance (you never chose you character, intelligence, family you were born into etc. not to mention sheer luck experienced in life) and as such is 'morally arbitrary' - that is, you DESERVE none of it. Redistributive principles tend to shift the bias of the 'morally arbitrary' contingencies in the direction of equality.


At this point I see a possible answer to my original question. Christians believe their abilities and life situation is 'God given' or at least 'God's will' therefore each is entitled to exactly what they earn and none may be taken off them - economic conservatism.

The only problem is see here is that it leads people to believe the more rich and prosperous are more righteous, whilst the poor and sick have been deal those cards by 'God' - so be it?

[SDMuscleBuddy]

Originally Posted by Callaar21

Yes that is a good question and one of the major reasons that i can not support the republican party as much as I would like.





Right on! Let it be is the best philosophy for economics imo. No government control.


There is a contradiction within the liberal logic as well.. They want to not force anything upon another person (abortion is a good example) yet they force buig government and all the taxes associated with it on me. Ya real liberal to say that you should choose what you do with your body yet try and control 4-6 months of my income....lolz

I disagree about liberals and big government. The federal government expands under Republican control, for one thing, and these days there is little difference between big government and big business. Both are suspect among liberals, and conservatives seem to prefer giving control to the latter.

In regards to laissez faire economics, when combined with corporate capitalism we've stifled competition and individual achievement. Entrepreneurship is a thing of the past.

[Callaar21]

Originally Posted by timhsvwalkinsha

Rawls would suggest your ability to accumulate primary social goods (like money) is a matter of chance (you never chose you character, intelligence, family you were born into etc. not to mention sheer luck experienced in life) and as such is 'morally arbitrary' - that is, you DESERVE none of it. Redistributive principles tend to shift the bias of the 'morally arbitrary' contingencies in the direction of equality.


At this point I see a possible answer to my original question. Christians believe their abilities and life situation is 'God given' or at least 'God's will' therefore each is entitled to exactly what they earn and none may be taken off them - economic conservatism.

The only problem is see here is that it leads people to believe the more rich and prosperous are more righteous, whilst the poor and sick have been deal those cards by 'God' - so be it?

Ok so let's say I was born into a decent family that raised me to the best of thier ability and for that I am blessed. Yes that's right I did not control that this happened to me, it was by chance. What I did control is to take advantage of what was put in front of me. When it comes down to it I did have the free will to shun my upbringing and go be a crackhead that lives off society, but I did not choose this. So this guy you mention would say I did not choose to be on time for work and make it everyday, I do not choose to go to school and get good grades, it's just sheer luck? I can't and won't give in to the belief that I don't deserve what I have and will work for. You can switch this around with someone who didn't get such a good start but I beleive they choose to perpetuate thier mediocrity, sure I am open for error here.

Personally I would leave out the God and the government, let me decide which charities I give to not someone else forcing it upon me. Although you are right in that those who fit the typical republican would think the way you have mentioned.

Originally Posted by SDMuscleBuddy

I disagree about liberals and big government. The federal government expands under Republican control, for one thing, and these days there is little difference between big government and big business. Both are suspect among liberals, and conservatives seem to prefer giving control to the latter.

In regards to laissez faire economics, when combined with corporate capitalism we've stifled competition and individual achievement. Entrepreneurship is a thing of the past.

Lesser of the two evils I suppose.

I don't like to see personal achievement stifled but i'm afraid that the other choices would do the same thing in the name of collectivism.

[timhsvwalkinsha]

Originally Posted by Callaar21

Ok so let's say I was born into a decent family that raised me to the best of thier ability and for that I am blessed. Yes that's right I did not control that this happened to me, it was by chance. What I did control is to take advantage of what was put in front of me. When it comes down to it I did have the free will to shun my upbringing and go be a crackhead that lives off society, but I did not choose this. So this guy you mention would say I did not choose to be on time for work and make it everyday, I do not choose to go to school and get good grades, it's just sheer luck? I can't and won't give in to the belief that I don't deserve what I have and will work for. You can switch this around with someone who didn't get such a good start but I beleive they choose to perpetuate thier mediocrity, sure I am open for error here. .

Again Rawls would claim that your character, which led you to put in lots of effort and take advantage of every resource available to you etc., was indeed not chosen and a matter of sheer chance. Thus, desert does not come into it.

As for free will, anyone who believes in it must admit the minute role it could play IF indeed it even does exist. Any rewards gained from free will are too hard to be distinguished from those gained by chance.

[FIVE OAKES]

Originally Posted by Barry Bonds

and the reason Christians jump on abortion is the same reason they do genocide. Protection of those who can't protect themselves.

Victims of genocide are usually full-grown adults who have the same opportunities as those who are targeting them.

And what are Christians' reasons or oppressing homosexuals?

If they're doing it to protect the innocent, then they aren't doing it because of religion. If they're doing it out of fear of God's retribution, then they are doing it because of religion. If they are doing it just because they don't like it, then they are doing it out of hate and are passing judgement, which is against their religion as far as I know.

The vast majority of abortions are for birth control. Why should an unborn child pay the price because you can't use a condom or control yourself any more than an animal?

All abortions are for birth control - but I know what you were trying to say. What about rape victims?

Then there's that self preservation thing. Everyone harps about the rampant sexual deviancy when Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed. But they leave out the part about the way they sacrificed their children.

What a great arguement against abortion. The human race is definitely in dire need of a population boom.

As is often quoted, If the United States isn't punished for abortion, then God owes Sodom and Gomorrah an apology.

If God's that concerned about it, then why is he waiting so long to smite us? The US is just as bad as Sodom and Gomorrah, so why are we being spared?

[Callaar21]

Originally Posted by timhsvwalkinsha

Again Rawls would claim that your character, which led you to put in lots of effort and take advantage of every resource available to you etc., was indeed not chosen and a matter of sheer chance. Thus, desert does not come into it.

As for free will, anyone who believes in it must admit the minute role it could play IF indeed it even does exist. Any rewards gained from free will are too hard to be distinguished from those gained by chance.

Well if you want to hold Rowls in such high esteem I guess that's your choice. I won't argue that fortune plays a huge role in life in general although I do think that personal choices (free will) plays its role as well. What you do when fortune comes your way is up to you. Could be bad fortune, good fortune, it doesn't matter.

I can see some validity in this theory but I think it would make us feel helpless, which we aren't, at least in my opinion.

[timhsvwalkinsha]

Originally Posted by Callaar21

Well if you want to hold Rowls in such high esteem I guess that's your choice. I won't argue that fortune plays a huge role in life in general although I do think that personal choices (free will) plays its role as well. What you do when fortune comes your way is up to you. Could be bad fortune, good fortune, it doesn't matter.

I can see some validity in this theory but I think it would make us feel helpless, which we aren't, at least in my opinion.

I'm only suggesting what his line of argument would be (to the best of my ability).

I haven't personally fully developed my political orientation - simply haven't considered all arguments yet.