Is the existence of Christianity better for this world

[Hans Blaster]

Whatever, it was relevant to what BCP said to refute him quickly instead of going into the details. The Woke and all that is relevant because it conflicts with Christain values which are claimed to underpin a better society.

If someone on the Left wants to denonce Christainity as being good for society and use ideas like project 21 then Christains should have the right to question the validity of the Lefts claim.

Even if I wanted to denounce your religion, the rules forbid it.

Oh don't be like that. The US and Australia has always had a good relationship.

I am not the US. And I have little current knowledge of Australian news or politics. If it weren't for the label under your avatar, I'd assume you were an American with bad spelling because ALL of your political references are to the US, though badly skewed.

I get my knowledge for the US, from the same people the US uses. CBS is a Left leaning media outlet. Everyone knows how bias the Left media was.

Of the 20 major news outlets studied 18 were left of center include CBS evening news.

https://www.college.ucla.edu/report/vol6_media-bias.pdf

CBS is corporate media. The audience of the CBS network actually skews older than the other networks (NBC, ABC).

The more you capitalize "Left" the more I think you don't know what you are talking about.

But it doesn't matter because my only point is to highlight that there is a definite divide on some important issues between each side on what makes a better society. So there's a clear difference on specific issues relation to abortion, marriage, religious and speech freedoms ect which can be measured as to which beliefs stack up and will actually make society better.

Maybe sometimes its good to get an outside perspective because maybe the 'over reacting' is more than oh their just over reacting never mind them they are like that all the time.

I think it went beyond over reacting and into dangerous territory. You can't just put that down to over reacting. It seems a cop out.

Anyway I don't care for my point is that the Left stand for a different and conflicting ideology to Christains. So we need to look at each sides ideology and see if would make society better.

These broad categories "the Left" and "Christians" in conflict with ideology, even though both groups (including all those you would put in each) are broad ideologically (in part because your definition is way to broad) and with significant overlap.

I would rather talk of politics with nuance, but you present a politics with categories defined as if so by the FNC prime time lineup.

Yes I agree.

 

[stevevw]

Even if I wanted to denounce your religion, the rules forbid it.

Hum So how can we possibly determine if Christainity is better for society and this world. I guess we could do it by looking at the data like I mentioned earlier. Like we are looking at whether a certain treatment or therapy works and makes things better.

So if we take say abortion or marriage which seems a very clear and different belief position between Christains and progressive ideology we could look at the data as to what each position may cause for society. That way its detatched from personal beliefs but is looked upon from a statistical and behavioural perspective.

I am not the US. And I have little current knowledge of Australian news or politics. If it weren't for the label under your avatar, I'd assume you were an American with bad spelling because ALL of your political references are to the US, though badly skewed.

I can apply most of what is happening in the US to Australia. In fact it can be applied to England and other Western nations like Canada. Though some aspects will be different like political systems the general issues like the divide on the Left anf Right ie Left (socialism and progressive) verses Right Conservative and Christain) is happening across western nations based on similar issues like immigration, trans, marriage and family issues.

CBS is corporate media. The audience of the CBS network actually skews older than the other networks (NBC, ABC).

Ok so here's one from the ABC which states the a disasterous loss to Trump

Democrats sift through 'unmitigated disaster' after Trump victory: ANALYSIS

Democrats sift through 'unmitigated disaster' after Trump victory: ANALYSIS

Democrats hoped that voters wanted to move on from Donald Trump. Instead, they wanted more of him.

abcnews.go.com

The more you capitalize "Left" the more I think you don't know what you are talking about.

lol I capitalize the Left to destinguish it from the general use of the word 'left'. Not because I don't understand the politics involved. That is the political divide between the Left and the Right of politics which is blatantly obvious at the moment with identity politics.

These broad categories "the Left" and "Christians" in conflict with ideology, even though both groups (including all those you would put in each) are broad ideologically (in part because your definition is way to broad) and with significant overlap.

Thats why I was narrowing it down to specific policies on each side. There are several policy positions the Republicans take and have for most of these history that align with Christain values.

The Democrates don't take these positions as they are a progressive party and have to accommodate all views including those that are opposed to Christainity. Like abortion or marriage and SSM. These are specific conflicting policies and we can measure whether these policies make society and the world better or not.

I would rather talk of politics with nuance, but you present a politics with categories defined as if so by the FNC prime time lineup.

Not sure what the FNC is.

 

[Hans Blaster]

Hum So how can we possibly determine if Christainity is better for society and this world. I guess we could do it by looking at the data like I mentioned earlier. Like we are looking at whether a certain treatment or therapy works and makes things better.

That's why I stuck to the science topic.

So if we take say abortion or marriage which seems a very clear and different belief position between Christains and progressive ideology we could look at the data as to what each position may cause for society. That way its detatched from personal beliefs but is looked upon from a statistical and behavioural perspective.

I'll cover this later.

I can apply most of what is happening in the US to Australia. In fact it can be applied to England and other Western nations like Canada. Though some aspects will be different like political systems the general issues like the divide on the Left anf Right ie Left (socialism and progressive) verses Right Conservative and Christain) is happening across western nations based on similar issues like immigration, trans, marriage and family issues.

That's the problem. It can't be. The parties and coalitions are all different. For example, you incorrectly have equated the "Left" with the Democratic Party (and here with socialism and porgressivism), when the Democrats *are not* a socialist party and the left-most faction of the Democratic Party is the "progressive wing". I don't even know the name of your parties and I don't pretend to.

Ok so here's one from the ABC which states the a disasterous loss to Trump

Democrats sift through 'unmitigated disaster' after Trump victory: ANALYSIS

Democrats sift through 'unmitigated disaster' after Trump victory: ANALYSIS

Democrats hoped that voters wanted to move on from Donald Trump. Instead, they wanted more of him.

abcnews.go.com

ABC is *also* corporate middle-of-the-road media. You might be familiar with their parent company: The Walt Disney Company.

lol I capitalize the Left to destinguish it from the general use of the word 'left'. Not because I don't understand the politics involved. That is the political divide between the Left and the Right of politics which is blatantly obvious at the moment with identity politics.

There is no need to do either. The context is clear. They are not proper nouns.

Thats why I was narrowing it down to specific policies on each side. There are several policy positions the Republicans take and have for most of these history that align with Christain values.

The Democrates don't take these positions as they are a progressive party and have to accommodate all views including those that are opposed to Christainity. Like abortion or marriage and SSM. These are specific conflicting policies and we can measure whether these policies make society and the world better or not.

Part of my problem with your "political commentary" is that you put of the false separation of "Christians" on one side and "Democrats" on the other. Even your examples don't follow the way you think they do. The basic positions that Democrats take on SSM and abortion are *majority* positions held by large fractions of Christians in the US. One stalwart faction of the conservative movement either didn't care about abortion or held positions similar to the Democratic party as recently as 40 years ago. (Abortion opposition was a very Catholic thing then and conservative activists "converted" evangelicals to it because opposition to desegregation was considered unsavory and they needed a new motivator.

Another aspect is that of Democratic Party politicians *more* of them are self declared Christians than they average American answering a phone survey. The general American public is far more non-religous than politicians of either party. There are plenty of left-leaning or Democratic Christian member of this site. The two things (Christian and Democrat) are not opposites.

Not sure what the FNC is.

Fox "News" Channel.

 

[stevevw]

That's why I stuck to the science topic.

But thats different to what you were saying with the church stopping scientific progress to using science to determine whether something is beneficial socially. Science cannot tell you something is morally good for society.

I'll cover this later.

That's the problem. It can't be. The parties and coalitions are all different. For example, you incorrectly have equated the "Left" with the Democratic Party (and here with socialism and porgressivism), when the Democrats *are not* a socialist party and the left-most faction of the Democratic Party is the "progressive wing". I don't even know the name of your parties and I don't pretend to.

Australian and British politics are similar to the US in that we also have Labor which is like the Dems and Conservatives which are like the republicans in their basic political philosophies. Labor and the Dems are more progressive and for the working class and Conservatives were more for business and privatisation.

But the parties were more towards the center in the past when the majority believed in God. There were some common beliefs. But in the last 60 odd years a divide and polarisation has happened. The Dems and Labor have allowed the radical fringes to take over. We seen this with Harris.

There are some nuances between nations but generally speaking each side has become more radical and polarised in their positions. This is a natural consequence of how politics has become more about identity and ideology than policy.

The Left generally have become socialist even hard socialist which has been a common policy for the Left throughout the world. Many nations in Europe who promoted generous immigration policies and lax laws came with Left wing governments.

ABC is *also* corporate middle-of-the-road media. You might be familiar with their parent company: The Walt Disney Company.

ABC is not middle of the road and neither is their parent company Disney but one of the most radical Left media outlets. I mean why do you think they are going broke. What do they say 'Go Woke and Go Broke' lol.

Disney Quietly Acknowledges Its Left-Wing Agenda Is Costing Shareholders

Disney Quietly Acknowledges Its Left-Wing Agenda Is Costing Shareholders

Disney quietly acknowledged last week its left-wing political agenda is out of step with the American public and reducing the company's profits.

dailycaller.com

Disney has harmed investors with ‘woke’ agenda

Disney has harmed investors with ‘woke’ agenda pushing ‘anti-police and anti-White content’: letter

An episode of “Muppet Babies” depicts Gonzo — a bird-like creature originally thought to be a boy — struggling to tell his friends that he wants to wear a dress to a party.

nypost.com

There is no need to do either. The context is clear. They are not proper nouns.

Ok well as you can see above in the heading that says Left-Wing that this is a common use of language today to describe the situation and most people know immediately what is mean by it.

Part of my problem with your "political commentary" is that you put of the false separation of "Christians" on one side and "Democrats" on the other. Even your examples don't follow the way you think they do. The basic positions that Democrats take on SSM and abortion are *majority* positions held by large fractions of Christians in the US.

I disagree. Though some churches have become more Woke most Christains disagree with supporting abortion and SSM. They may say that civil society has the right to allow people their own freedom of choice. Or that abortion is acceptable if theres threat to the life of the mother or baby. But they don't support abortion ot SSM morally.

They can't support abortion as the bible clearly states that God knows us in the womb from conception. We are a unique humans with a soul from conception. The same with SSM. They may say people have a right to get married under civil laws but they don't support SSM under God. If they do they are not Christains but false prophets which the bible also tells us about.

In fact its almost become trendy to water down Christ as some cool dude who hangs with prostitutes, gays and sinners and thus somehow is rationalised as He tolerates all these behaviours. Its just a modern watering down of the Gods word.

One stalwart faction of the conservative movement either didn't care about abortion or held positions similar to the Democratic party as recently as 40 years ago.

Yeah thats about when politics began to become all about identity and progressive ideology was filtering into society from academic critical theories. Everything was questioned and rationalised and Gods word and truth was being undermined.

In fact that is just after Roe V Wade so of course some Christains would jump of the progressive bandwagon to make themselves all relevant. Which only goes to show how socialisation can influence peoples beliefs. But it was not biblical.

(Abortion opposition was a very Catholic thing then and conservative activists "converted" evangelicals to it because opposition to desegregation was considered unsavory and they needed a new motivator.

I would have thought abortion is just a biblical and Christain thing. There's no Catholic or Protestant or Mormon interpretation. It is what it is. Abortion is wrong full stop unless in cases where a life is threatened. The idea of an abortion being a form of contraception has never been supported by Christains.

Another aspect is that of Democratic Party politicians *more* of them are self declared Christians than they average American answering a phone survey. The general American public is far more non-religous than politicians of either party. There are plenty of left-leaning or Democratic Christian member of this site. The two things (Christian and Democrat) are not opposites.

Actually its harder for a Democrate to be a Christain in todays secular progressive society as the basic position is that you have to treat all beliefs and moral determinations as equal without destinction to be democratic. You have to allow anti God ideology as well as Christainity. Therefore your not standing on your own Christainity but rather undermining it.

Being progressive they have to be relevant to secular progressive ideology which defies Gods laws and Christainity. What we end up seeing is not only do they have to allow all alternative ideologies they cannot remain neutral because in reality the radical progressive sections demand loyalty as well. They end up giving in to the radical elements.

Christianity is incompatible with the Democratic Party

Christianity is incompatible with the Democratic Party - Washington Examiner

Because it has chosen narcissism as its foundation for faith, the Democratic Party has cast out whatever Christian elements it may have once had.

www.washingtonexaminer.com

Today’s Democratic Party is increasingly secular, which complicates and limits traditional forms of faith outreach. “This emerging group of secular Democrats coexists a little uneasily with the more religious wing of the party,”

Why Democrats Struggle To Mobilize A ‘Religious Left’

For the past four decades, the notion that religious beliefs should guide voters’ decision-making has been largely monopolized by the Republican Party. But the …

fivethirtyeight.com

Fox "News" Channel.

OK. well all I am doing is reflecting what the voters were actually saying. In fact its what some Dem and Left media are now saying about themselves. So there must be some truth in their self reflections.

 

[Hans Blaster]

But thats different to what you were saying with the church stopping scientific progress to using science to determine whether something is beneficial socially. Science cannot tell you something is morally good for society.

We could talk about that, but you want to discuss your poor understanding of American politics...

Australian and British politics are similar to the US in that we also have Labor which is like the Dems and Conservatives which are like the republicans in their basic political philosophies. Labor and the Dems are more progressive and for the working class and Conservatives were more for business and privatisation.

And did those themes align with the rhetoric of the recent US election you claim the "Left" was "wiped out" in? No not really. No mention of privitazation for starters. (At least not until *after* the election. There isn't a lot that could be privitzed in the US, and the notion of privatizing it is rather unpopular.)

But the parties were more towards the center in the past when the majority believed in God. There were some common beliefs. But in the last 60 odd years a divide and polarisation has happened. The Dems and Labor have allowed the radical fringes to take over. We seen this with Harris.

There are some nuances between nations but generally speaking each side has become more radical and polarised in their positions. This is a natural consequence of how politics has become more about identity and ideology than policy.

For example, the GOP campaign was largely about Chrsitian identity, "americanism", and related grievances.

The Left generally have become socialist even hard socialist which has been a common policy for the Left throughout the world. Many nations in Europe who promoted generous immigration policies and lax laws came with Left wing governments.

Recall that this whole "Left" thing was because you said the "Left" was "wiped out" in the recent US election, but the problem with this claim is that the Democratic party (not "the LEft") is not socialist (or even hard socialist).

ABC is not middle of the road and neither is their parent company Disney but one of the most radical Left media outlets. I mean why do you think they are going broke. What do they say 'Go Woke and Go Broke' lol.

Disney Quietly Acknowledges Its Left-Wing Agenda Is Costing Shareholders

Disney Quietly Acknowledges Its Left-Wing Agenda Is Costing Shareholders

Disney quietly acknowledged last week its left-wing political agenda is out of step with the American public and reducing the company's profits.

dailycaller.com

Disney has harmed investors with ‘woke’ agenda

Disney has harmed investors with ‘woke’ agenda pushing ‘anti-police and anti-White content’: letter

An episode of “Muppet Babies” depicts Gonzo — a bird-like creature originally thought to be a boy — struggling to tell his friends that he wants to wear a dress to a party.

nypost.com

And as it always does you defense comes down to things posted in RW opinion media.

Ok well as you can see above in the heading that says Left-Wing that this is a common use of language today to describe the situation and most people know immediately what is mean by it.

But not the capitalization.

I disagree.

And here we come to the heart of the problem. I list some factual history about political positions various groups hold and you disagree with the facts. It is not relevant if you think some group is wrong to hold a position as that is not why I outlined them. I outlined them to demonstrate that you have a poor understanding of US politics.

Though some churches have become more Woke most Christains disagree with supporting abortion and SSM. They may say that civil society has the right to allow people their own freedom of choice. Or that abortion is acceptable if theres threat to the life of the mother or baby. But they don't support abortion ot SSM morally.

They can't support abortion as the bible clearly states that God knows us in the womb from conception. We are a unique humans with a soul from conception. The same with SSM. They may say people have a right to get married under civil laws but they don't support SSM under God. If they do they are not Christains but false prophets which the bible also tells us about.

In fact its almost become trendy to water down Christ as some cool dude who hangs with prostitutes, gays and sinners and thus somehow is rationalised as He tolerates all these behaviours. Its just a modern watering down of the Gods word.

Yeah thats about when politics began to become all about identity and progressive ideology was filtering into society from academic critical theories. Everything was questioned and rationalised and Gods word and truth was being undermined.

In fact that is just after Roe V Wade so of course some Christains would jump of the progressive bandwagon to make themselves all relevant. Which only goes to show how socialisation can influence peoples beliefs. But it was not biblical.

I would have thought abortion is just a biblical and Christain thing. There's no Catholic or Protestant or Mormon interpretation. It is what it is. Abortion is wrong full stop unless in cases where a life is threatened. The idea of an abortion being a form of contraception has never been supported by Christains.

Actually its harder for a Democrate to be a Christain in todays secular progressive society as the basic position is that you have to treat all beliefs and moral determinations as equal without destinction to be democratic. You have to allow anti God ideology as well as Christainity. Therefore your not standing on your own Christainity but rather undermining it.

Being progressive they have to be relevant to secular progressive ideology which defies Gods laws and Christainity. What we end up seeing is not only do they have to allow all alternative ideologies they cannot remain neutral because in reality the radical progressive sections demand loyalty as well. They end up giving in to the radical elements.

Christianity is incompatible with the Democratic Party

Christianity is incompatible with the Democratic Party - Washington Examiner

Because it has chosen narcissism as its foundation for faith, the Democratic Party has cast out whatever Christian elements it may have once had.

www.washingtonexaminer.com

Today’s Democratic Party is increasingly secular, which complicates and limits traditional forms of faith outreach. “This emerging group of secular Democrats coexists a little uneasily with the more religious wing of the party,”

Why Democrats Struggle To Mobilize A ‘Religious Left’

For the past four decades, the notion that religious beliefs should guide voters’ decision-making has been largely monopolized by the Republican Party. But the …

fivethirtyeight.com

OK. well all I am doing is reflecting what the voters were actually saying. In fact its what some Dem and Left media are now saying about themselves. So there must be some truth in their self reflections.

Which is why you should probably back off making claims about US politics. Stick to "my opinion is" and the like, instead of trying to analyze it.

 

[stevevw]

We could talk about that, but you want to discuss your poor understanding of American politics...

According to who. Your making another logical fallacy that you have to be American to understand US politics. But according to who do you make these claims. I am linking American sources for what I say so its not my take but Americans. So if we go with your logic these sources being American must be right because they are Americans who understand American politics.

And did those themes align with the rhetoric of the recent US election you claim the "Left" was "wiped out" in? No not really.

OK there was a bit of hyperbowl. But they were beaten fairly convincingly. More so in that the base they thought were with them large portions voted against them sending a clear message that they were out of touch.

No mention of privitazation for starters. (At least not until *after* the election. There isn't a lot that could be privitzed in the US, and the notion of privatizing it is rather unpopular.)

Are you kidding. Privatisation is an old idea from neo liberalism and people don't specifically mention that word today because its so inground in policies.

Look at Harris policy on price and business regulations to control business which is generally a go to policy of the Dems. The basic philosophy of the left is to milk the private sector for everything they can because they are the mean old capitalist and thats how they redistribute money to the minorities. Its just become more extreme that Harris with price controls and defunding police.

For example, the GOP campaign was largely about Chrsitian identity, "americanism", and related grievances.

Ah that was part of it but its wrong to make out that was the main issues. The main issues that won the election was the cost of living and immigration.

But I suspect also the abuse of power and hypocracy that people even potential Dem voters began to see with all the lawfare and going after Trump relentlessly and also conservatioves and Christains. Not because they were Christains but because they seen hypocracy and that they were doing exactly what they were accusing Trump supporters of doing.

Recall that this whole "Left" thing was because you said the "Left" was "wiped out" in the recent US election, but the problem with this claim is that the Democratic party (not "the LEft") is not socialist (or even hard socialist).

That is not what has panned out in reality. You can say idealistically that this is not the Dems but in reality this is what the Dems have become. Lets go back to Harris's policies. Open borders, defund the police, illegal immigrants are not immigrants but victims, price regulations, ect.

These are socialist policies which are about uplifting the victim groups which are now any cultural minorities and undermining the establishment. Todays Dems are not like they use to be for a long time. Its the culmination of ideology that has infiltrated into the party and worked its way to the top.

And as it always does you defense comes down to things posted in RW opinion media.

No it comes from the Dems themselves. Out of their own mouths.

But not the capitalization.

Are we really getting into semantics now. Look at Wikis own entry American Left. They use the word and capitalise it. Its to destinguish that its not just about left in the usual sense. That it represents a political position. But why make a big issue out of it.

And here we come to the heart of the problem. I list some factual history about political positions various groups hold and you disagree with the facts.

These were not the facts though. You have used your opinion and what the progressive left assume is what Christains believe. I just explained to you why this is a fasle assumption. Saying that abortion is ok in exceptional circumstances is not supporting abortion.

Saying that SSM is acceptable within a civil society is not supporting abostion. Your making a false comparison. That is why I disagree because your not reflecting the truth.

It is not relevant if you think some group is wrong to hold a position as that is not why I outlined them. I outlined them to demonstrate that you have a poor understanding of US politics.

But thats got nothing to do with the Christain beliefs on this. If Christain Dems justify abortion as ok because of their political ideology to align themselves with the Dems ideology then thats a false comparison. Your trying to say that the Christain position aligns with the dems progressive ideology in the first place. Which is false. Your using a false comparison of people who have allowed their political ideology to over rule their Christain beliefs.

The destinction is the Christains on the Right, the conservatives who can stand on the biblical truth and not have to compromise their beliefs for political gain. Otherwise your saying there is no difference between Christains on the Left or Right. That there is no biblical truth to this matter.

Roe V Wade is a generalised difference. The Dems and progressives support Roe V Wade and want to re install it. The Repulicans and conservatives which includes majority Christains want to uphold the ruling opposing Roe V Wade. You can't rationalise that somehow the Christains on the Left have the same beliefs on this.

Which is why you should probably back off making claims about US politics. Stick to "my opinion is" and the like, instead of trying to analyze it.

My opinion and information and even my analysis and comes from informed opinion and analysis. Since when is personal uninformed opinion the measure of fact and truth.

 

[Hans Blaster]

According to who. Your making another logical fallacy that you have to be American to understand US politics.

No, I didn't, but if you are not soaked in it, you do have to make a study of it.

But according to who do you make these claims. I am linking American sources for what I say so its not my take but Americans. So if we go with your logic these sources being American must be right because they are Americans who understand American politics.

OK there was a bit of hyperbowl.

Is that the game after the Super Bowl?

But they were beaten fairly convincingly. More so in that the base they thought were with them large portions voted against them sending a clear message that they were out of touch.

Really, do you usually call an election where the difference in total votes between two candidates or parties is 1.5% "beaten fairly convincingly"? I don't.

Are you kidding. Privatisation is an old idea and people don't specifically mention that word today because its so inground in policies that we have moved way beyond the simple words.

I didn't say it was new, I said they didn't campaign or talk about it during the campaign. But, lo and behold, within the first week after winning, now they talk about privatization (and reducing old age pensiond and medical care). It is odd how those things were not in the campaign. (OK, not really odd, exactly predictable as none of those things are popular.)

Look at Harris policy on price regulations and controlling business regulations generally by the Dems. The basic philosophy of the left is to milk the private sector for everything they can because they are the mean old capitalist and thats how they redistribute money to the minorities.

Ah that was part of it but its wrong to make out that was the main issues. The main issues that won the election was the cost of living and immigration.

But I suspect also the abuse of power and hypocracy that people even potential Dem voters began to see with all the lawfare and going after Trump relentlessly and also conservatioves and Christains. Not because they were Christains but because they seen hypocracy and that they were doing exactly what they were accusing Trump supporters of doing.

That is not what has panned out in reality. You can say idealistically that this is not the Dems but in reality this is what the Dems have become. Lets go back to Harris's policies. Open borders, defund the police, illegal immigrants are not immigrants but victims, price regulations, ect.

So you thing those policies...

These are socialist policies which are about uplifting the victim groups which are now any cultural minorities and undermining the establishment. Todays Dems are not like they use to be for a long time. Its the culmination of ideology that has infiltrated into the party and worked its way to the top.

... are socialist? Did I miss the part of any of them that involved state control of production? (No.)

No it comes from the Dems themselves. Out of their own mouths.

Are we really getting into semantics now. Look at Wikis own entry American Left. They use the word and capitalise it. Its to destinguish that its not just about left in the usual sense. That it represents a political position. But why make a big issue out of it.

In the title only. Read the first sentence of that article and note that only the first word and "American" are capitalized.

These were not the facts though. You have used your opinion and what the progressive left assume is what Christains believe. I just explained to you why this is a fasle assumption. Saying that abortion is ok in exceptional circumstances is not supporting abortion.

Saying that SSM is acceptable within a civil society is not supporting abostion. Your making a false comparison. That is why I disagree because your not reflecting the truth.

There are surveys that say otherwise. Support for SSM is at least 60% in the US. The same is true for basic access to abortion in early pregnancy including medication abortion. Neither my nor your opinion about the morality of these things is relevant to the general support among the US population as measured in surveys.

But thats got nothing to do with the Christain beliefs on this. If Christain Dems justify abortion as ok because of their political ideology to align themselves with the Dems ideology then thats a false comparison. Your trying to say that the Christain position aligns with the dems progressive ideology in the first place. Which is false. Your using a false comparison of people who have allowed their political ideology to over rule their Christain beliefs.

The destinction is the Christains on the Right, the conservatives who can stand on the biblical truth and not have to compromise their beliefs for political gain. Otherwise your saying there is no difference between Christains on the Left or Right. That there is no biblical truth to this matter.

Roe V Wade is a generalised difference. The Dems and progressives support Roe V Wade and want to re install it. The Repulicans and conservatives which includes majority Christains want to uphold the ruling opposing Roe V Wade. You can't rationalise that somehow the Christains on the Left have the same beliefs on this.

My opinion and information and even my analysis and comes from informed opinion and analysis. Since when is personal uninformed opinion the measure of fact and truth.

 

[stevevw]

No, I didn't, but if you are not soaked in it, you do have to make a study of it.

Yes and thats exactly what I have been doing for years. Because what happens in the US usually happens in Australia. So to a large extent we are soaked in US politics because we are soaked in Australian identity politics.

Is that the game after the Super Bowl?

Gee semantics again. I know 'bole' not 'bowl' lol. Though I did once lve in Punchbowl which was a suburb of western Sydney.

Really, do you usually call an election where the difference in total votes between two candidates or parties is 1.5% "beaten fairly convincingly"? I don't.

Well from what I see most people determine it by the College elctoral votes. They keep saying its not about the popular vote but the college electoral vote. On that measure he won convincingly and I think that is what all the media outlets are speaking about.

But to top of this he also won the popular vote which usually doesn't happen and when it does people declare it a pretty comprehensive win. On top of that even some democrates are now saying the Dems got it wrong and lost touch with their base and the nation as a whole.

I didn't say it was new, I said they didn't campaign or talk about it during the campaign. But, lo and behold, within the first week after winning, now they talk about privatization (and reducing old age pension and medical care). It is odd how those things were not in the campaign. (OK, not really odd, exactly predictable as none of those things are popular.)

I was actually referring to the Dems and their anti privatisation as a general policy which is based on their socialist philosophy. Privatisation in the 80's was supported by both parties and has been the case ever since because it was a good policy.

But the Dems have allowed radical Marxist thinking into their polcies as promoted by their presidential candidate. They often referred to Trump supporters and Conservatives as white priviledge and supremency and promote DEI ideology based on the oppressor/victim narrative. Thats Marxist speak. The Right have not hidden their support for private enterprise and merit.

So you thing those policies...

... are socialist? Did I miss the part of any of them that involved state control of production? (No.)

The socialist underpinnings are different to the class v capitalist wars in Marx day. Today these are cultural wars along race, sex and gender lines. You can hear it in their rhetoric and narratives around white priviledge and supremecy and the constant fear mongering about how big corps are destroying the US ect. The cheers from radicals when a CEO is assassinated. Its their MO.

You need to do a bit of digging to find the underlying ideology behind their policies and how they use government control through institutions and agents to enforce that ideology.

Why do you think universities cancelled all opposing views apart from the DEI and trans ideology they had been indoctrinated into. All whites, corporations, Jews, oppressors were the enermy they had to attack and dismantle. Its been going on for years.

In the title only. Read the first sentence of that article and note that only the first word and "American" are capitalized.

Ok well thats just how I have done it to destingish the Left or Right as a destinct political entity like Socilist, Conservatives, Feminist ect. With a capital denoting a noun or proper noun.

There are surveys that say otherwise. Support for SSM is at least 60% in the US. The same is true for basic access to abortion in early pregnancy including medication abortion. Neither my nor your opinion about the morality of these things is relevant to the general support among the US population as measured in surveys.

This is just silly. Its more or less doing the same thing as what progressives are doing with Christainity in watering it down. If we take your logic and believe all these different opinions on Gods truth then we would conclude that there is no destinction between anti God progressive ideology and Gods truth.

Which is irrational. There can't be a Gods truth if both abortion and anti abortion positions are ok within Christainity. You can't have a house divided. Either you are for or against Gods truth. You can't have both and yet you choose to believe what Dems say over Conservative Christains.

Is there any difference between Gods truth and secular ideology. Nothing. Are they the same. Then how can that even be rational.

I think you will find that those who are supporting chemical abortion are not in line with Gods word plain and simple. They claim to be Christain but they are false prophets. Chemical abortions is well known to be another form of contraception for convenience. Christains believe abortion is murder. How can Christains support the murder of innocent babies for convenience sake.

It doesn't matter what surveys say. Many people say they are Christains in siurveys while living a non Christain life. They equate saying they believe with actually being a Christain when Christainity is also about repenting from a sinful life.

Lets take Catholics which I am sure most Dem Christains are or at least a fair number. Here is the official church position

The Church has affirmed that every procured abortion is a moral evil, a teaching that the Catechism of the Catholic Church declares "has not changed and remains unchangeable" since the first century.

The Catholic Church states that its opposition to abortion follows from a belief that human life begins at conception and that "human life must be respected and protected absolutely from the moment of conception."[36]

Christianity and abortion - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

So how can Christain Dems rationalise this away.

This position has been the Christain position for 100'sof years. Its only been in the last 5 minutes of history that ideologues have come along and applied critical theories and postmodernist thinking and rationalised these long held truths away. Including the Woke churches that have popped up on the left side of politics.

Now according to them theres no truth, theres no objective reality and everything is relative. Therefore Gods truth is relative and can be reinterpreted by humans rather than God. This is false prophesy that has arisen in recent times.

 

[Hans Blaster]

[On the surveys]

This is just silly.

No it isn't, let me explain below.

Its more or less doing the same thing as what progressives are doing with Christainity in watering it down. If we take your logic and believe all these different opinions on Gods truth then we would conclude that there is no destinction between anti God progressive ideology and Gods truth.

Which is irrational. There can't be a Gods truth if both abortion and anti abortion positions are ok within Christainity. You can't have a house divided. Either you are for or against Gods truth. You can't have both and yet you choose to believe what Dems say over Conservative Christains.

Is there any difference between Gods truth and secular ideology. Nothing. Are they the same. Then how can that even be rational.

I think you will find that those who are supporting chemical abortion are not in line with Gods word plain and simple. They claim to be Christain but they are false prophets. Chemical abortions is well known to be another form of contraception for convenience. Christains believe abortion is murder. How can Christains support the murder of innocent babies for convenience sake.

It doesn't matter what surveys say. Many people say they are Christains in siurveys while living a non Christain life. They equate saying they believe with actually being a Christain when Christainity is also about repenting from a sinful life.

Lets take Catholics which I am sure most Dem Christains are or at least a fair number. Here is the official church position

The Church has affirmed that every procured abortion is a moral evil, a teaching that the Catechism of the Catholic Church declares "has not changed and remains unchangeable" since the first century.

The Catholic Church states that its opposition to abortion follows from a belief that human life begins at conception and that "human life must be respected and protected absolutely from the moment of conception."[36]

Christianity and abortion - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

So how can Christain Dems rationalise this away.

This position has been the Christain position for 100'sof years. Its only been in the last 5 minutes of history that ideologues have come along and applied critical theories and postmodernist thinking and rationalised these long held truths away. Including the Woke churches that have popped up on the left side of politics.

Now according to them theres no truth, theres no objective reality and everything is relative. Therefore Gods truth is relative and can be reinterpreted by humans rather than God. This is false prophesy that has arisen in recent times.

Your claim was that the Democrats had aligned politically *against* Christianity. I can think of two ways to consider what "Christianity" might mean in this context: The first being the doctrine of the Chrisitian church, the second being the mass of the Christian believers. (Your complaint is largely that they don't align, but, frankly, I don't care, and both versions make your claim untrue.

For the first (Democrats are in opposition to doctrine) ignores the fact that there is a wide variety in denominational doctrine and the only uniform, common things do not include social issues like abortion or SSM. That there are churches that allow or condone both is a simple fact. That may not be your church, but they do exist.

For the second the surveys are completely on point. Support in the US for basic abortion access and SSM can't get to 60% if 60% of the population (the Christians) are uniformly opposed. The surveys show that various sub-groupings of Christians support each of these at rates ranging from 25-75%, including large minorities of Evangenlicals and Catholics collectively.

Whether some denomimnation is not doing the bible correctly or some congregants are not following their denomination's doctrine correctly is not relevant to the facts on the ground, only to your opinion about what is proper. My statements weren't about what you or any specific person thought was proper doctrine or interpretation, but the actual facts of American politics -- the Democratic Party is not aligned against the body of Christians or the collective group of denominations. That claim would be false.

 

[stevevw]

[On the surveys]

No it isn't, let me explain below.

Your claim was that the Democrats had aligned politically *against* Christianity. I can think of two ways to consider what "Christianity" might mean in this context: The first being the doctrine of the Chrisitian church, the second being the mass of the Christian believers. (Your complaint is largely that they don't align, but, frankly, I don't care, and both versions make your claim untrue.

You forgot the most important factor. The actual Democrates position regardless of what the Christains within their party believe. The simple question would be 'does the DEms position on abortion align or conflict with the Rep position.

Why did Kamala stand on abortion as her number 1 difference in policy against the conservatives. What was different. This is the actual policy and not the belief in surveys which reflects the Dems true position.

For the first (Democrats are in opposition to doctrine) ignores the fact that there is a wide variety in denominational doctrine and the only uniform, common things do not include social issues like abortion or SSM. That there are churches that allow or condone both is a simple fact. That may not be your church, but they do exist.

Actually around 44% of Dems are Catholic and ironically there are more Dem Catholics than Rep. So already nearly half of Dems are out of step with their own churches position which is anti abortion from conception.

Religious Landscape Study | Pew Research Center

The Religious Landscape Study is a comprehensive survey of more than 35,000 Americans’ religious identities, beliefs and practices that’s been conducted in 2007, 2014 and 2023-24. Pew Research Center.

www.pewresearch.org

For the second the surveys are completely on point. Support in the US for basic abortion access and SSM can't get to 60% if 60% of the population (the Christians) are uniformly opposed. The surveys show that various sub-groupings of Christians support each of these at rates ranging from 25-75%, including large minorities of Evangenlicals and Catholics collectively.

Then the Catholics in the Dems are hyocrites going against their own church and cannot be trusted. This only shows that they will bend to their party doctrine over their beliefs and church doctrine.

I also don't trust surveys as they are so variable. It depends on how the question is framed. If a simple question is 'Do you support abortion' or support abortion within society' then your going to get a variety of positions from supporting abortion only in life saving situations, support at certain stages of pregnacy to unlimited abortion.

So unless the questions are specified ie 'Do you support abortion only in life threatening situations' or specifiy each state or unlimited abortion then the survey will be skewed.

Whether some denomimnation is not doing the bible correctly or some congregants are not following their denomination's doctrine correctly is not relevant to the facts on the ground, only to your opinion about what is proper.

No its not personal opinion. The Catholic Church is official doctrine that has been the same for 100's of years. Of course denomimnation not aligning with official doctrine is important as at least from the Catholics its aligned with biblical truth.

If we disregard that then we are not even talking about Christainity anymore but secular views that try to call themselves Christain. Otherwise we then have to start including all sorts of opinion on Christain truths and then theres no difference between Christainity and secular ideology.

My statements weren't about what you or any specific person thought was proper doctrine or interpretation, but the actual facts of American politics -- the Democratic Party is not aligned against the body of Christians or the collective group of denominations. That claim would be false.

Yes they are. Their own Catholics are standing against their own church if they support the policy position of the Dems on abortion. Otherwise they would lose nearly half their support on abortion. So clearly at least for nearly half the Dems we can show they are hyocrites and are swayed by identity politics.

Harris stood on abortion as the number 1 issue. Pro choice and not pro life. The Dems stand for pro choice and that choice over pro life. So theres a stark difference between the Dems and Rep potentially. If the Dem Catholics cannot even align with their own beliefs then how can they be trusted on such important fundemental issues as to what is the Christain position.

Even putting all this aside and accept that there are varying views we can still draw differences. The Dems allow within their varying positions 'abortion beyond 22 weeks and up to full term' for which is part of the Dems position. Christains within the republicans would never allow that. Theres one stark difference. I am sure we can find many more.

But none of this is dealing with whether Christainity would be better for society. We have to base Christainity on biblical truths and not peoples opinion about what is Christain truth to be able to measure whether Christainity is better for the world.

It is from this base that we can see if Christainity is better and not some human made opinion. That is anti abortion and abortion only in life threatening situations verses the potential of unlimited abortions and all the chaos that comes with that. This is the base depite people not living up to that standard.

 

[BCP1928]

You forgot the most important factor. The actual Democrates position regardless of what the Christains within their party believe. The simple question would be 'does the DEms position on abortion align or conflict with the Rep position.

Why did Kamala stand on abortion as her number 1 difference in policy against the conservatives. What was different. This is the actual policy and not the belief in surveys which reflects the Dems true position.

Actually around 44% of Dems are Catholic and ironically there are more Dem Catholics than Rep. So already nearly half of Dems are out of step with their own churches position which is anti abortion from conception.

Religious Landscape Study | Pew Research Center

The Religious Landscape Study is a comprehensive survey of more than 35,000 Americans’ religious identities, beliefs and practices that’s been conducted in 2007, 2014 and 2023-24. Pew Research Center.

www.pewresearch.org

Then the Catholics in the Dems are hyocrites going against their own church and cannot be trusted. This only shows that they will bend to their party doctrine over their beliefs and church doctrine.

I also don't trust surveys as they are so variable. It depends on how the question is framed. If a simple question is 'Do you support abortion' or support abortion within society' then your going to get a variety of positions from supporting abortion only in life saving situations, support at certain stages of pregnacy to unlimited abortion.

So unless the questions are specified ie 'Do you support abortion only in life threatening situations' or specifiy each state or unlimited abortion then the survey will be skewed.

No its not personal opinion. The Catholic Church is official doctrine that has been the same for 100's of years. Of course denomimnation not aligning with official doctrine is important as at least from the Catholics its aligned with biblical truth.

If we disregard that then we are not even talking about Christainity anymore but secular views that try to call themselves Christain. Otherwise we then have to start including all sorts of opinion on Christain truths and then theres no difference between Christainity and secular ideology.

Yes they are. Their own Catholics are standing against their own church if they support the policy position of the Dems on abortion. Otherwise they would lose nearly half their support on abortion. So clearly at least for nearly half the Dems we can show they are hyocrites and are swayed by identity politics.

Harris stood on abortion as the number 1 issue. Pro choice and not pro life. The Dems stand for pro choice and that choice over pro life. So theres a stark difference between the Dems and Rep potentially. If the Dem Catholics cannot even align with their own beliefs then how can they be trusted on such important fundemental issues as to what is the Christain position.

Even putting all this aside and we accept that there is varying views we can still draw differences. The Dems allow within their varying positions abortion beyond 22 weeks and up to full term and Christains within the republicans would never allow that. Theres one stark difference. I am sure we can find many more.

But none of this is dealing with whether Christainity would be better for society. We have to base Christainity on biblical truths and not peoples opinion to be able to measure whether Christainity is better for the world.

It is from this base that we can see if Christainity is better and not some human made opinion. That is anti abortion and abortion only in life threatening situations verses the potential of unlimited abortions and all the chaos that comes with that. This is the base depite people not living up to that standard.

For Catholic Democrats abortion is a Christian sin. The question is whether or not a Christian sin should be criminalized for the non-Christian citizens of a secular state.

 

[stevevw]

For Catholic Democrats abortion is a Christian sin. The question is whether or not a Christian sin should be criminalized for the non-Christian citizens of a secular state.

Actually thats a seperate question to whether Christainity is better for society. Of course secular society is not going to allow a theocracy. But that is seperate to whether Christain values and truths are good for society or not.

If we look at 50, 60 or 100 years ago or 100's of years ago Christain values were adopted by the State by law and social norms. Heck it was a law to go to church on Sundays in some places at one stage and no business was allowed on Sundays. Homosexuality, SSM and abortion were illegal. Divorce laws only came in around the 70's.

Social norms frowned on even sex before marriage. Its only been in the past 60 years and especially the last 30 years that this has changed.

But its changed because secular society and the State has taken the role over the church as the moral arbitor of social norms and therefore laws. .

 

[BCP1928]

Christain values and truths are good for society because Christain values and truths are good for society. QED

 

[Bradskii]

Christain values and truths are good for society because Christain values and truths are good for society. QED

They're good for society because they align with what almost everyone believes.

 

[BCP1928]

They're good for society because they align with what almost everyone believes.

But do they?

 

[Bradskii]

But do they?

With some variations, yes. As long as we're talking about values and truths that don't include specifically Christian religious beliefs. The golden rule, the societal rejection of murder, theft, lying etc. They are common values held everywhere. With some variation, as I say. But there's probably more variation within any given society than between societies.

Do you think that murder is a good means to solve problems?
Should you be able to take anyone's possessions should you so desire?
Should you lie or cheat to benefit yourself over others?
If someone helps you in a time of need, should you reciprocate?

We could come up with a dozen or so questions and ask a hundred random people and they'd all give similar answers and we'd have no idea what religious beliefs they held, if any.

 

[Hans Blaster]

You forgot the most important factor. The actual Democrates position regardless of what the Christains within their party believe. The simple question would be 'does the DEms position on abortion align or conflict with the Rep position.

Why did Kamala stand on abortion as her number 1 difference in policy against the conservatives. What was different. This is the actual policy and not the belief in surveys which reflects the Dems true position.

I don't know about #1 (that is difficult to judge), but she certainly made the abortion issue more forward than Democratic nominees for president have in the past. That is certainly true.

Actually around 44% of Dems are Catholic and ironically there are more Dem Catholics than Rep. So already nearly half of Dems are out of step with their own churches position which is anti abortion from conception.

Religious Landscape Study | Pew Research Center

The Religious Landscape Study is a comprehensive survey of more than 35,000 Americans’ religious identities, beliefs and practices that’s been conducted in 2007, 2014 and 2023-24. Pew Research Center.

www.pewresearch.org

And it would probably be higher if so many of us hadn't left the Church already.

Then the Catholics in the Dems are hyocrites going against their own church and cannot be trusted. This only shows that they will bend to their party doctrine over their beliefs and church doctrine.

Oh, no Steve, you've got this backward. These pro-abortion Catholics didn't join the Democratic party and then choose party doctrine on abortion over the Church. The Catholics that favored abortion were more likely to become or stay Democrats.

The parties weren't polarized on abortion decades ago. It was only because those favoring or opposing abortion clustered with other liberal/conservative ideas that the issue became more partisan with the reshaping of the US political parties into ideological groupings unlike before. The Democrats became a pro-abortion party because there members were for abortion access, not the other way around. (And the same with the anti-abortion position and the GOP).

I also don't trust surveys as they are so variable. It depends on how the question is framed. If a simple question is 'Do you support abortion' or support abortion within society' then your going to get a variety of positions from supporting abortion only in life saving situations, support at certain stages of pregnacy to unlimited abortion.

So unless the questions are specified ie 'Do you support abortion only in life threatening situations' or specifiy each state or unlimited abortion then the survey will be skewed.

Nearly everyone knows that and it isn't a problem. It does make it hard to compare surveys and the actual script should be reviewed, but when delineated properly, ( RvW = abortion by choice prior to viability, very limited access afterwards) a majority of Americans back the "RvW" ruling position.

No its not personal opinion. The Catholic Church is official doctrine that has been the same for 100's of years. Of course denomimnation not aligning with official doctrine is important as at least from the Catholics its aligned with biblical truth.

Steve, unless something is obvious, then it is an opinion, even if shared by 100 million or more. If there wasn't differences of opinion on how to interpret text, all denominations would have the same opinions on abortion. That you agree with the RCC doctrine only means that you agreement with them is your personal opinion that their position is "biblical truth". If you disagreed you might go to a different church than the one you do (or maybe abortion might not be a dealbreaker theologically). [Frankly, I never got the obsession of the RCC with abortion.]

If we disregard that then we are not even talking about Christainity anymore but secular views that try to call themselves Christain. Otherwise we then have to start including all sorts of opinion on Christain truths and then theres no difference between Christainity and secular ideology.

To me ideologies are ideologies, so I'm already there.

Yes they are. Their own Catholics are standing against their own church if they support the policy position of the Dems on abortion. Otherwise they would lose nearly half their support on abortion. So clearly at least for nearly half the Dems we can show they are hyocrites and are swayed by identity politics.

Harris stood on abortion as the number 1 issue. Pro choice and not pro life. The Dems stand for pro choice and that choice over pro life. So theres a stark difference between the Dems and Rep potentially. If the Dem Catholics cannot even align with their own beliefs then how can they be trusted on such important fundemental issues as to what is the Christain position.

Sigh.

1. No persons political opinions will agree with everything a party stands for unless they have complete control over what goes in the manifesto.
2. No persons theological opinions will match everything in their religion/denomination unless they just founded their own religion.
3. Disagreeing with your church on party doctrine or vice versa does not make you untrustworthy or a hypocrite (see above).

Even putting all this aside and accept that there are varying views we can still draw differences. The Dems allow within their varying positions 'abortion beyond 22 weeks and up to full term' for which is part of the Dems position. Christains within the republicans would never allow that. Theres one stark difference. I am sure we can find many more.

But none of this is dealing with whether Christainity would be better for society. We have to base Christainity on biblical truths and not peoples opinion about what is Christain truth to be able to measure whether Christainity is better for the world.

It is from this base that we can see if Christainity is better and not some human made opinion. That is anti abortion and abortion only in life threatening situations verses the potential of unlimited abortions and all the chaos that comes with that. This is the base depite people not living up to that standard.

This (the thread or even my comment about survey numbers) isn't about the details of abortion policy at all and I can see several things objectively wrong with what you wrote above, but let me leave you with one thing you probably don't think about as a non-Catholic.

There is a big disconnect between the laity in the pews and the priests and bishops on sex and family life because the priests and bishops don't have any. Their policies, doctrines, pronouncements, and sermons seem disconnected from the lived reality of the people in the pews. Listing to someone give sermons on things they have no experience with can erode your regard for their positions on that and related topics. That's how so many Catholics end up disregarding Church teaching on these types of issues.

 

[BCP1928]

With some variations, yes. As long as we're talking about values and truths that don't include specifically Christian religious beliefs. The golden rule, the societal rejection of murder, theft, lying etc. They are common values held everywhere. With some variation, as I say. But there's probably more variation within any given society than between societies.

Do you think that murder is a good means to solve problems?
Should you be able to take anyone's possessions should you so desire?
Should you lie or cheat to benefit yourself over others?
If someone helps you in a time of need, should you reciprocate?

We could come up with a dozen or so questions and ask a hundred random people and they'd all give similar answers and we'd have no idea what religious beliefs they held, if any.

Got it. I missed your point because Steve is always focussed on the sex stuff.

 

[Ana the Ist]

Twenty million killed in a civil war inspired by Christianity
was not a big help to China.

Is that the Taiping Rebellion you're referring to?

 

[Ana the Ist]

Oh, I definitely see patterns.

Hey....me too lol.