On School Prayer and the Pledge

Page 8 of 9 [ 131 posts ] Go to page Previous 1 ... 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 Next

Previous topic | Next topic

twoshots
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 26 Nov 2007
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,731
Location: Boötes void

29 May 2009, 12:16 pm

Orwell wrote:

Quote:

Well your wrong because then there are no real sets of morals.

I don't think the state should be in the business of legislating morality.

What is it in the business of legislating then?

_________________
* here for the nachos.

cognito
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 11 Apr 2009
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 675

29 May 2009, 12:26 pm

twoshots wrote:

Orwell wrote:

Quote:

Well your wrong because then there are no real sets of morals.

I don't think the state should be in the business of legislating morality.

What is it in the business of legislating then?

order, the public purse, war, peace negations, trade, enviromental procection, etc

also, may I point out something? That Athiest are better then christains in the moral department, because Christains either do it for a reward (heaven) or avoidance of punishment (hell), Atheist do it because they want to.

_________________
I am a freak, want to hold my leash?

Ancalagon
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 25 Dec 2007
Age: 46
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,302

29 May 2009, 1:11 pm

cognito wrote:

That Athiest are better then christains in the moral department, because Christains either do it for a reward (heaven) or avoidance of punishment (hell), Atheist do it because they want to.

Actually, the Christian doctrine is that they are already forgiven for all their sins. If their only motive was heaven or hell, why would they bother to do anything right, since they've got their get-out-of-jail-free card already?

You're also ignoring the possible motivation of Athiests by jail and social approval/disapproval.

_________________
"A dead thing can go with the stream, but only a living thing can go against it." --G. K. Chesterton

twoshots
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 26 Nov 2007
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,731
Location: Boötes void

29 May 2009, 3:46 pm

cognito wrote:

twoshots wrote:

Orwell wrote:

Quote:

Well your wrong because then there are no real sets of morals.

I don't think the state should be in the business of legislating morality.

What is it in the business of legislating then?

order, the public purse, war, peace negations, trade, enviromental procection, etc

Does not government exist to protect the rights of its citizens as well, no? An all out utilitarian theory is not terribly popular at this point, I don't think, so a rights based framework seems inescapable. If a right is not an arbitrarily defined moral imperative which the government can legitimately enforce, how else are we to construe it in such a way that the distinction is not artificial?

_________________
* here for the nachos.

cognito
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 11 Apr 2009
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 675

29 May 2009, 3:50 pm

twoshots wrote:

cognito wrote:

twoshots wrote:

Orwell wrote:

Quote:

Well your wrong because then there are no real sets of morals.

I don't think the state should be in the business of legislating morality.

What is it in the business of legislating then?

order, the public purse, war, peace negations, trade, enviromental procection, etc

well, I disagree, take the barring against state religion, it comes mostly from the Salem witch trials, where a theocracy ruled and this was big news to the founders, so that was more reason, not to mention their previous religous persuction.

_________________
I am a freak, want to hold my leash?

twoshots
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 26 Nov 2007
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,731
Location: Boötes void

29 May 2009, 3:59 pm

cognito wrote:

Disagree about what, the idea that governments ought to protect the rights of their citizens, or that rights are akin to moral imperatives?

I am not overly concerned with the idea that state and religion ought/ought-not be separated. My question is whether the separation is natural or artificial. If the distinction is artificial, then, at the very least, cheap slogans shouldn't be used, I would think.

_________________
* here for the nachos.

cognito
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 11 Apr 2009
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 675

29 May 2009, 4:03 pm

twoshots wrote:

cognito wrote:

I disagree rights=morals,

_________________
I am a freak, want to hold my leash?

twoshots
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 26 Nov 2007
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,731
Location: Boötes void

29 May 2009, 4:05 pm

What is the difference?

_________________
* here for the nachos.

cognito
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 11 Apr 2009
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 675

29 May 2009, 4:08 pm

morals have a a religious/spiritual connotation, while rights have a legal connotation.

_________________
I am a freak, want to hold my leash?

twoshots
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 26 Nov 2007
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,731
Location: Boötes void

29 May 2009, 4:16 pm

cognito wrote:

morals have a a religious/spiritual connotation, while rights have a legal connotation.

That's totally circular. We can't legislate religious conduct because we can't legislate morality, and we can't legislate morality because we can't legislate religious conduct? What is the substantial difference between the two other than the supposed connotation in order to justify the state's legitimacy in one arena but not in another. Why can the state legitimately exercise its power over things with a "legal connotation" in the first place?

I likewise disagree that rights do have a legal connotation. Perhaps I am ill-read on the subject, but they have a natural-law connotation to me; a natural-right is not contingent upon legalities.

_________________
* here for the nachos.

Awesomelyglorious
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 17 Dec 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,157
Location: Omnipresent

30 May 2009, 1:48 am

twoshots wrote:

Orwell wrote:

Quote:

Well your wrong because then there are no real sets of morals.

I don't think the state should be in the business of legislating morality.

What is it in the business of legislating then?

I was tempted to respond to that as well.

I think I took his comment to be "in the business of legislating moral culture" though, so I let it slide.

Good luck with your ensuing debate, however, your point seems clear enough. However, one could theoretically argue that the state is in the business of arguing personal preferences.(however, most people would probably view this as worse than legislating morality I would think)

Shadowgirl
Velociraptor

Joined: 20 Jan 2006
Age: 36
Gender: Female
Posts: 458

30 May 2009, 12:35 pm

Orwell wrote:

Shadowgirl wrote:

As a matter of fact I do push for school prayer.

That is shoving it down people's throats, and it's a violation of freedom of religion. If the state has the power to enforce a religion, you have to consider the possibility that they choose a religion that you don't believe in.

Quote:

Plus in my school we have Christian organizations so we can have optional prayer.

No problem with that whatsoever.

Quote:

If someone doesn't like it they should just be respectful to those who want it and leave us alone.

And if someone doesn't want it, we should just be respectful and leave them alone.

Quote:

Well your wrong because then there are no real sets of morals.

I don't think the state should be in the business of legislating morality.

If you want to believe I'm shoving it down peoples throats then fine go ahead believe what isn't true. If you don't like it you can ignore it and not answer to the post.
But for the last time I'm not shoving it at anyone I'm offering it.

_________________
How to Know God Personally through Jesus Christ
http://www.ccci.org/

Does God Exist? Here is proof he does.
http://www.everystudent.com/features/is ... 2godMANp2w

ed
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 19 Dec 2004
Age: 80
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,788
Location: Whitinsville, MA

30 May 2009, 1:05 pm

Shadowgirl wrote:

But earlier you said

Shadowgirl wrote:

As a matter of fact I do push for school prayer.

What is the difference between pushing and shoving?

vibratetogether
Supporting Member

Joined: 24 Aug 2008
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 589
Location: WA, USA

31 May 2009, 11:12 pm

Shadowgirl wrote:

You mean quiet and bowing down to atheist that's not what Jesus would do.

He is certainly not quiet, speaks his mind quite well in fact. He is not bowing down, he is being respectful, something you have yet to learn.

As for Jesus, I have a feeling we'd get along just fine. If he is worthy of worship, all that would be required is to be a good person. If anything else is required, he's not worthy of worship. It's as simple as that.

cognito
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 11 Apr 2009
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 675

01 Jun 2009, 2:43 pm

vibratetogether wrote:

Shadowgirl wrote:

You mean quiet and bowing down to atheist that's not what Jesus would do.

_________________
I am a freak, want to hold my leash?

pandabear
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 16 Aug 2007
Age: 66
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,402

25 Jul 2011, 9:43 am

I wonder why the Republicans haven't yet brought up the issue of School Prayer during this election round?

Ronald Reagan won a lot of points with this issue, back in the day.

Page 8 of 9 [ 131 posts ] Go to page Previous 1 ... 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 Next

Jump to:

Similar Topics
Last Day Of School Today! in School and College Life	24 May 2025, 12:56 am Texasmoneyman300
School Dinners in School and College Life	18 Apr 2025, 8:10 am SocOfAutism
Austria school massacre in News and Current Events	10 Jun 2025, 8:27 am ASPartOfMe
Elementary School Field Day in Parents' Discussion	04 Jun 2025, 6:56 am SocOfAutism

On School Prayer and the Pledge Post Reply New Topic

On School Prayer and the Pledge