NationStates Jolt Archive

In britain blair said we dont do god, the reason is that if an administration is christian it could be biased, and christian biased policies my not be the policies that the people want, or that christian ideals arent quite fair ones or whatever my point is do you think that leaders shouldnt do god? or that they have the right to convert their people.

Ideally, politicians should do what they say they're gonna do. Doesn't always happen, of course, but if someone runs on a platform that includes some stance on religious issues, and is elected fairly by the people, then that's the will of the people, by definition. If your leader doesn't "do" God, and you elect him, then he shouldn't.

Blair sort of makes Christianity one of the bases for his semi-socialist outlook on things, from what I've heard.

It not a matter of christian politicians wanting to convert you, or that a christian politician may be biased, its that most of them want to make laws that are in accordancewith and that support thier own religion.
Take abortion for instance.
Most of them believe that abortion is wrong.
They think this becuase thier religion tells them so.
Therefore, regardless of whose body is involved, they want to make it so no one can have them...becuase apparently God doesnt like it.

They also would be perfectly happy allowing prayer in public school.

This is because religion blinds judgement.

Im sure a couple of people will disagree with me, but its true.
Following a religion, especially christianity, makes you unable to truly appreciate anyone elses beliefs, and customs, to the point where the christians judgement is clouded, and permeated with his own beliefs.
They cant be objective with regards to policy, becuase thier own religion dictates that policy for them.

Blair sort of makes Christianity one of the bases for his semi-socialist outlook on things, from what I've heard.

Well he is regarded as the most devout PM in a while, so it's not surprising.

I feel than governments should remain as secular as possible. That way they don't discriminate against a certain faith, even invouluntarily.

Well he is regarded as the most devout PM in a while, so it's not surprising.

I feel than governments should remain as secular as possible. That way they don't discriminate against a certain faith, even invouluntarily. Governments are secular - however, the leaders aren't necessarily. Of course their beliefs will shape their policies, religious beliefs or otherwise.
It not a matter of christian politicians wanting to convert you, or that a christian politician may be biased, its that most of them want to make laws that are in accordancewith and that support thier own religion.
Take abortion for instance.
Most of them believe that abortion is wrong.
They think this becuase thier religion tells them so.
Therefore, regardless of whose body is involved, they want to make it so no one can have them...becuase apparently God doesnt like it.

They also would be perfectly happy allowing prayer in public school.

This is because religion blinds judgement.

Im sure a couple of people will disagree with me, but its true.
Following a religion, especially christianity, makes you unable to truly appreciate anyone elses beliefs, and customs, to the point where the christians judgement is clouded, and permeated with his own beliefs.
They cant be objective with regards to policy, becuase thier own religion dictates that policy for them. Yeah, I disagree. I don't think abortion is wrong because of my religion; I've always thought it was wrong.

No, I would allow prayer in public school because I see no reason why students should not be allowed to pray. Freedom of assembly.

And yes, religion probably does blind judgement, because it's a belief. So does any kind of ideology. I would like you to find me one unbiased person on this planet. One's own beliefs dictate a policy, whether they're religious or not.

Why not? As long as they're not doing anything stupid like forcing people to adhere to a particular religion, I don't have a problem with politicians being motivated by it. Political beliefs are influenced by a number of factors- upbringing, social class, why can't religion be another acceptable way of defining what sort of country you want to live in?

Blair sort of makes Christianity one of the bases for his semi-socialist outlook on things, from what I've heard.

Blair hasn't come close to even semi socialist since he was a student!

I don't think in a country such as ours that we should have a religious man as a leader. He kept it queit before he was elected and has since allowed creationist theory to be taught in our schools! It's particularly bad as he doesn't know what religion he is, he goes to both CofE and Catholic churches, that like me turning up to both Everton and Liverpool football games as I am a football fan.

Yeah, I disagree. I don't think abortion is wrong because of my religion; I've always thought it was wrong.

So, what your saying is, even if it clearly stated that abortion was allowed, or even favored, in the bible, you would be against it?
I cant help but doubt that.

No, I would allow prayer in public school because I see no reason why students should not be allowed to pray. Freedom of assembly.

How about becuase not everyone prays to the same diety, or even prays at all?
Mind you, if a student was praying quietly in class, who would even know, or likely care?
Its when students are asked to pray, by teachers, or staff, or against thier will, or any other time when it might inconvieniece anyone else, that problems arise.

And yes, religion probably does blind judgement, because it's a belief. So does any kind of ideology. I would like you to find me one unbiased person on this planet. One's own beliefs dictate a policy, whether they're religious or not.

So now that we are agreed that religion blinds judgement, now keep in mind that when one is making a law, its wise to ensure that such a law, must apply equally to all people, regardless of race, creed, or religion.
Too often such leaders favor laws that are unfair, or invasive to freedoms set forth by its government.

In britain blair said we dont do god, the reason is that if an administration is christian it could be biased, and christian biased policies my not be the policies that the people want, or that christian ideals arent quite fair ones or whatever my point is do you think that leaders shouldnt do god? or that they have the right to convert their people.
No, they shouldn't do God. Nobody's ever voted for the swine in an election, so he should keep his nose out of politics.

So, what your saying is, even if it clearly stated that abortion was allowed, or even favored, in the bible, you would be against it?
I cant help but doubt that. No, I was saying that it's quite possible to disagree with abortion from a totally secular stance.



How about becuase not everyone prays to the same diety, or even prays at all?
Mind you, if a student was praying quietly in class, who would even know, or likely care?
Its when students are asked to pray, by teachers, or staff, or against thier will, or any other time when it might inconvieniece anyone else, that problems arise. We find this rather odd in Britain, the *ahem* Yanks complaining about this. Britain is one of the most heathen countries in Europe, and yet no one complains about prayer in assemblies. But I was referring to private prayer, which I see nothing wrong with, as it infringes on nobody's liberties.

So now that we are agreed that religion blinds judgement, now keep in mind that when one is making a law, its wise to ensure that such a law, must apply equally to all people, regardless of race, creed, or religion.
Too often such leaders favor laws that are unfair, or invasive to freedoms set forth by its government. What you're basically saying is that laws should be fair.
I don't think in a country such as ours that we should have a religious man as a leader. He kept it queit before he was elected and has since allowed creationist theory to be taught in our schools! It's particularly bad as he doesn't know what religion he is, he goes to both CofE and Catholic churches, that like me turning up to both Everton and Liverpool football games as I am a football fan. What planet are you on? Blair is the legitimate leader (well, even though the system is deeply flawed) - why should someone be disallowed from leadership because of their religion?
Blair has not kept his religion quiet, and I have never been taught creationism in schools. I don't know what you're on about.
And of course he's confused about religion. That's the CoE for you. :p

Blair hasn't come close to even semi socialist since he was a student!

I don't think in a country such as ours that we should have a religious man as a leader. He kept it queit before he was elected and has since allowed creationist theory to be taught in our schools! It's particularly bad as he doesn't know what religion he is, he goes to both CofE and Catholic churches, that like me turning up to both Everton and Liverpool football games as I am a football fan.

I agreed on the first point but since when has Creationism been taught in school? I've certainly never encountered it (except for a brief mention in biologists of 'fundamentalists' who don't accept evolution.

I don't see why we shouldn't have a religous man as leader as long as he respects everyone elses beliefs ( which he usually does). I'm fairly sure he did attack Atheism once but that's all I can remember.