NationStates Jolt Archive

Well I have been thinking lately, and this kinda relates to this other topic I made a while ago. But I am quite disappointed that religion was seeminlgy been hijacked by the political right, and that individual non-issues as I call them, such as abortion and same sex marriage are somehow more important than issues of social justice and a collective aim.

It seems like the religious right in politics has become nothing but a gang of homophobic, pro-business, individualist, 'traditional family values' conservatives. My question is, how has the gospels been hijacked for such perverse ideals, and the whole social aspect of 'feeding the poor, clothing the naked' been lost, and all that matters are personal matters, when certainly Jesus was trying to affect a larger societal goal.

I infact would really like to see a return of Leftist Christian Socialism to the political arena, and see a debate on a more world scale as to proper political interpretation of the gospels. I would also like to quote an interview with an Australian Politician, Kevin Rudd, to add to my statement. Most Australians will know Kevin Rudd recently became leader of the Opposition Labour Party.

http://www.abc.net.au/compass/s1362997.htm

My question is, how has the gospels been hijacked for such perverse ideals, and the whole social aspect of 'feeding the poor, clothing the naked' been lost, and all that matters are personal matters, when certainly Jesus was trying to affect a larger societal goal. When Constantine became a christian, and turned his empire into a christian empire, anyone that wanted to get up in the world had to become a christian. And thus it became a political tool.
Befor ethat only people that really believed became christian, occasionally they'd be prosecuted for it and get killed. Afterwards, well, any tom, dick and harry became christian, it gave opportunities. And later still people were simply forced into it. The ideals pretty much went out with that.

Well I have been thinking lately, and this kinda relates to this other topic I made a while ago. But I am quite disappointed that religion was seeminlgy been hijacked by the political right, and that individual non-issues as I call them, such as abortion and same sex marriage are somehow more important than issues of social justice and a collective aim.

It seems like the religious right in politics has become nothing but a gang of homophobic, pro-business, individualist, 'traditional family values' conservatives. My question is, how has the gospels been hijacked for such perverse ideals, and the whole social aspect of 'feeding the poor, clothing the naked' been lost, and all that matters are personal matters, when certainly Jesus was trying to affect a larger societal goal.

I infact would really like to see a return of Leftist Christian Socialism to the political arena, and see a debate on a more world scale as to proper political interpretation of the gospels. I would also like to quote an interview with an Australian Politician, Kevin Rudd, to add to my statement. Most Australians will know Kevin Rudd recently became leader of the Opposition Labour Party.

http://www.abc.net.au/compass/s1362997.htm



I got a better Idea! Become an athesist or agnostic and stop complaining. Hijacked..BAH! If anything conservatives were the ones who supported it and kept it alive if you know your past. Christians were against gays for centuries, or atleast as long as they knew they were alive. If anything the Left hijacked religion and changed century old beliefs to fit their train of thought. If you don't like it, don't be religious. Works for me.

Well I have been thinking lately, and this kinda relates to this other topic I made a while ago. But I am quite disappointed that religion was seeminlgy been hijacked by the political right, and that individual non-issues as I call them, such as abortion and same sex marriage are somehow more important than issues of social justice and a collective aim.

It seems like the religious right in politics has become nothing but a gang of homophobic, pro-business, individualist, 'traditional family values' conservatives. My question is, how has the gospels been hijacked for such perverse ideals, and the whole social aspect of 'feeding the poor, clothing the naked' been lost, and all that matters are personal matters, when certainly Jesus was trying to affect a larger societal goal.

I infact would really like to see a return of Leftist Christian Socialism to the political arena, and see a debate on a more world scale as to proper political interpretation of the gospels. I would also like to quote an interview with an Australian Politician, Kevin Rudd, to add to my statement. Most Australians will know Kevin Rudd recently became leader of the Opposition Labour Party.

http://www.abc.net.au/compass/s1362997.htm

I'm just wondering, but how many people can you honestly cite that use Christianity as their driving goal? And aside from this Kevin Rudd guy or, for some reason, Bush...

Because I think people generalize the political right as the people at the head of the party. Sure, there are certainly God-fearing gay-flamers near the head of the right-winged side of politics, but there is a mass of other, less radical thinkers massed into the large part of the party that largely is ignored.

Andaras Primeabortion and same sex marriage

individualist, 'traditional family values'

These ARE serious issues within Christianity. They have just as much to do with the moral message as food and justice.

I infact would really like to see a return of Leftist Christian Socialism to the political arena, and see a debate on a more world scale as to proper political interpretation of the gospels.

Ummm....no. If "hijacking" didn't work/wasn't proper for the Right, the same goes for the Left.

The risk that the ALP runs is that there are probably many people, and who knows what proportion of the electorate that are just going to roll their eyes and say oh not more religion, why do we have to have religion brought in from any side.

DING DING DING! Winner!

Well as i see it, religion is poison for people, even dough religions goal is to create a kinda peace and virtue, it always lead to conflict, oppression, persecution and death, and the reason for this is, religion takes away peoples responsibility to think for them selves. It is always "i am right because its written down in a book, that has been written down along time ago, so no matter what you say and what scientific evidence you show, I AM RIGHT".

In my book it don't even matter if some of religions has gotten it right, religion will still lead to the same bad things.. if we humans as a race, should have a splinter of hope for survival in the long run, religion would have to one of the first things we have to eliminate, and in its stead we would have a chance to implement both a responsibility to other humans no matter who they are (which would be possible when religions are gone), and to the nature its self (since we no longer would excuse our actions to some religious "chosen race"). We would be more self aware as a global community, if the walls called religion would be torn down...

ps. i know a lot of people are gonna disagree with this (since 96% of the world are none atheists), but this is how i see things and i am aware of this would not be how most people would see it, so try to keep the discussion civil

Religions are, and always has been, designed to be a tool of social control.

Religions are, and always has been, designed to be a tool of social control.I would say emerged, rather than designed. It's rarely controlled by anyone; in fact even if it starts out that way, they generally lose control of it pretty fast.

I would say emerged, rather than designed. It's rarely controlled by anyone; in fact even if it starts out that way, they generally lose control of it pretty fast.

Yes you are right about that.

Yuck, no. Whatever happened to separation of church and state?

The main problem with the religious left in politics is that the religious left is marked by ideological diversity...

... and hence will never develop the same sort of unified "voice" the religious right has.

It seems like the religious right in politics has become nothing but a gang of homophobic, pro-business, individualist, 'traditional family values' conservatives. My question is, how has the gospels been hijacked for such perverse ideals, and the whole social aspect of 'feeding the poor, clothing the naked' been lost, and all that matters are personal matters, when certainly Jesus was trying to affect a larger societal goal.

I infact would really like to see a return of Leftist Christian Socialism to the political arena, and see a debate on a more world scale as to proper political interpretation of the gospels.
I agree. Most Christians in the world are not right-wing, but it is unsurprisingly the right-wingers who howl the loudest... as the Bible demonstrated.

The US Christian Right in any case is very selective about its Christian morality.


Befor ethat only people that really believed became christian, occasionally they'd be prosecuted for it and get killed. Afterwards, well, any tom, dick and harry became christian, it gave opportunities.
I agree, too many people are just "Christian" by default without thinking about it.

The main problem with the religious left in politics is that the religious left is marked by ideological diversity...

... and hence will never develop the same sort of unified "voice" the religious right has.
I'm still trying to figure out what the "religious left" is. If it's the part of religion that espouses ideas like "love thy neighbor", "turn the other cheek", and so on, it's still alive and kicking. It's just that a lot of the social work that is done by the churches is being hijacked by the government.

But the truth is that the government sucks at administering anything. That's why a lot of states have been promoting the idea of assisting church groups with money, but allowing them to control it. That's something the political left just can't stand.

Superstition is a hindrance to serious discussion on important topics. It is a distraction and a red herring. If we want to actually make progress toward meaningful goals, it is a waste of time to divert our energy onto rambling about the important of story books and magical fairies.

If individuals who happen to hold particular superstitions wish to participate in meaningful discourse, then more power to them! There is no reason why one's personal superstitions must make one a conservative or a reactionary. There is no reason why superstitious people can't be liberal or progressive. A lot of superstitious people have a great deal to contribute to the public arena. However, their personal superstitions are not a useful contribution. They should keep their personal beliefs in their personal life, and not allow those beliefs to derail efforts toward actual achievement and progress.

I got a better Idea! Become an athesist or agnostic and stop complaining.
That would be living a lie for me. This is a political problem, not a religious one.

Certain factions are trying to steal our religion.

These ARE serious issues within Christianity. They have just as much to do with the moral message as food and justice.

Abortion, I agree with as being a very important matter, but the others are mainly distractions.

However, their personal superstitions are not a useful contribution. They should keep their personal beliefs in their personal life, and not allow those beliefs to derail efforts toward actual achievement and progress.
That's a sweeping generalisation. Are beliefs which aid progress also unacceptable?

That's a sweeping generalisation. Are beliefs which aid progress also unacceptable?
An individual's personal superstitions are a distraction from the actual issues. If a person genuinely cares about those issues, they will accept that it is inappropriate and selfish of them to try to sidetrack discussions about those issues onto theological tangents.

Their personal theology can be discussed in the appropriate context, if they wish, just as their personal preference for strawberry ice cream over vanilla can be discussed in the appropriate context. However, when it comes to discussing social or political problems requiring concrete solutions, their superstitions are as irrelevant as their preference in ice cream flavors.

Well I have been thinking lately, and this kinda relates to this other topic I made a while ago. But I am quite disappointed that religion was seeminlgy been hijacked by the political right, and that individual non-issues as I call them, such as abortion and same sex marriage are somehow more important than issues of social justice and a collective aim.

It seems like the religious right in politics has become nothing but a gang of homophobic, pro-business, individualist, 'traditional family values' conservatives. My question is, how has the gospels been hijacked for such perverse ideals, and the whole social aspect of 'feeding the poor, clothing the naked' been lost, and all that matters are personal matters, when certainly Jesus was trying to affect a larger societal goal.

I infact would really like to see a return of Leftist Christian Socialism to the political arena, and see a debate on a more world scale as to proper political interpretation of the gospels. I would also like to quote an interview with an Australian Politician, Kevin Rudd, to add to my statement. Most Australians will know Kevin Rudd recently became leader of the Opposition Labour Party.

http://www.abc.net.au/compass/s1362997.htm

Eh? Sorry, but there are really no western countries in which the chief Christian-rightist party is seeking to abolish programs to "feed the poor" and "clothe the naked."

The chiefest indicator of this is that there are not large numbers of starving nudists running around Canada, where the Tories are in power, nor where there any in the U.S. during the six or so years that Republicans controlled everything.

In fact, last I heard, Republicans spent huge, huge quantities of money on new Medicare entitlements and education programs that liberals blasted as wasteful spending.

An individual's personal superstitions are a distraction from the actual issues. If a person genuinely cares about those issues, they will accept that it is inappropriate and selfish of them to try to sidetrack discussions about those issues onto theological tangents.

Their personal theology can be discussed in the appropriate context, if they wish, just as their personal preference for strawberry ice cream over vanilla can be discussed in the appropriate context. However, when it comes to discussing social or political problems requiring concrete solutions, their superstitions are as irrelevant as their preference in ice cream flavors.

In Australia, the conservative party has made the discussion of individual's personal superstitions into a political issue.

This should come as no surprise to those who understand that religion is a social tool for controlling group behaviour.

This is neither good nor bad, though it can be used for both, and often is.

Pat Robertson is a good example of this being used for selfish ends.

Archbishop Desmond Tutu is a good example of this being used for selfless ends.

To dismiss such a powerful tool of social control as superstition is somewhat dismissive in this context, I think.

Religion is a structure constructed by human beings to give social/political support to a belief ... it systematizes belief. In the course of creating that structure, those aspects of belief that won't support the structure are discarded, because at a certain point the structure becomes more important than the belief. Then we start to tailor the beliefs to the survival of the structure.

When religion is involved, faith, god, hope, charity, love, happiness are always the first to be sacrificed.

Those people within the monolithic structures of religion who try to revive these facets are dubbed heretic and destroyed.

An individual's personal superstitions are a distraction from the actual issues. If a person genuinely cares about those issues, they will accept that it is inappropriate and selfish of them to try to sidetrack discussions about those issues onto theological tangents.
I don't see how it's any less constructive for someone to say "we should help the poor by doing X, Y and Z, as Jesus said" than to say "we should help the poor by doing X, Y and Z, as Marx said". The only difference is that one was a religious figure.

What I mean is, does your opinion also apply to ideologies?

Their personal theology can be discussed in the appropriate context, if they wish, just as their personal preference for strawberry ice cream over vanilla can be discussed in the appropriate context.
Enough with the bloody ice cream analogies!

Well I have been thinking lately, and this kinda relates to this other topic I made a while ago. But I am quite disappointed that religion was seeminlgy been hijacked by the political right, and that individual non-issues as I call them, such as abortion and same sex marriage are somehow more important than issues of social justice and a collective aim.

It seems like the religious right in politics has become nothing but a gang of homophobic, pro-business, individualist, 'traditional family values' conservatives. My question is, how has the gospels been hijacked for such perverse ideals, and the whole social aspect of 'feeding the poor, clothing the naked' been lost, and all that matters are personal matters, when certainly Jesus was trying to affect a larger societal goal.

I infact would really like to see a return of Leftist Christian Socialism to the political arena, and see a debate on a more world scale as to proper political interpretation of the gospels. I would also like to quote an interview with an Australian Politician, Kevin Rudd, to add to my statement. Most Australians will know Kevin Rudd recently became leader of the Opposition Labour Party.

http://www.abc.net.au/compass/s1362997.htm

Religion has been hijacked for political goals. In Christianity its for things like gay marriage, in Islam its for things like terrorism. Sad really.

I don't see how it's any less constructive for someone to say "we should help the poor by doing X, Y and Z, as Jesus said" than to say "we should help the poor by doing X, Y and Z, as Marx said". The only difference is that one was a religious figure.

What I mean is, does your opinion also apply to ideologies?

Not the same thing. Marx, like him or not, was a political thinker who made an argument for certain policies based upon evidence and argument. Invoking the name of Marx is shorthand for invoking the arguments he made. Jesus was a spiritual leader who expressed a certain set of behaviors and vague attitudes as a reward in a given cosmology. These are not equal.

The problem with invoking religion in politics is that politics is, in western society, a secular game. Pulling faith into politics corrupts both and inevitably lowers the level of discourse as people stop arguing at policy and start arguing about theology. Further, bringing faith into the discussion derails compromise because faith is a matter of absolutes.