I don't think you can blame either of these things on the left. So who is it that is actually "destroying America" as you claim?
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
I hold FREE SPEECH as ubiquitous, the FIRST AMENDMENT the final arbitrator.
- Thread starter LeftyLen
- Start date
mikkel_the_dane
My own religion
Shadow Wolf
Certified People sTabber & Business Owner
The case study was not presented here accurately anyways. It was circumcision that led to the accident, the sex change was done under a belief (that has long since been discarded) that it's all in how you raise your child and you can raise a boy as a girl and the boy will be as any girl. And, of course, it shows you cannot change someone's innate sense of gender identity and that gender dysphoria is a very terrible thing to deal with.
Shadow Wolf
Certified People sTabber & Business Owner
I disagree. 37 and 38 refer to specifically Jehovah. And that's the greatest? Not helping to fix the world? Not making for a better tomorrow? Not even loving your family? 39, why love a neighbor as a I love myself if my neighbor wishes me harm? I'd rather save things like love for people who should get it from me rather than stretching myself thin by giving it to all, including those who give me grief.
LeftyLen
Active Member
If all morality is subjective then the basic structure of a society without its cultural, religious moorings will go adrift, crumble.
mikkel_the_dane
My own religion
Yeah, that is testable. You just give evidence for any version of objective morality.
LeftyLen
Active Member
As to 'secular' morality , in the micro the absence of ultimate meaning in life. Most irreligious individuals, quite understandably, do not like to acknowledge the inevitable and logical consequence of their irreligiosity that life is ultimately purposeless, leading to nihilism.
First, often Irreligious people, including atheists, may have meaningful lives as any religious person. They need neither God nor Judaism nor Christianity nor any other religion to have meaning. Second, secular and irreligious are not the same as atheistic; many secular individuals believe in God and therefore whatever meaning accrues from having a belief in God, they, too, have. They do not need religion or Judeo-Christian values to give their lives meaning.
The first denies a fact, not a subjective judgment: If there is no God who designed the universe and who cares about His creations, life is ultimately purposeless. This does not mean that people who do not believe in such a God cannot feel, or make up, a purpose and a meaning for their own lives. They do and they have to — because the need for meaning is the greatest of all human needs.. There are people who lead chaste lives who achieve happiness, while no one who lacks a sense of purpose or meaning can achieve happiness.
But my point is about the macro, the consequences of secularism in society.
mikkel_the_dane
My own religion
You still have to give actual evidence for objective purpose.
Your arguement is in effect about how you think/feel. That is subjective.
Please give actual objective evidence!
LeftyLen
Active Member
The 'objective' value of purpose is more often found in the macro. First the need religion or Judeo-Christian values, just a belief in God or, as is more popular today, in “spirituality” to imbue existence with meaning. Yes, there is some absurdity in believing in the God made known through texts whose authenticity one rejects. “I believe in the God made known to the world solely through the Old Testament but not in the Old Testament” is not logically compelling.
Whatever the logical inconsistencies or theoretical arguments in either direction, that you may see as rendering all beliefs as subjective, the fact remains that while secular individuals can believe that their own lives have meaning, secularism by definition denies that life has meaning. The clear 'objective' consequences have been devastating to society, lets see, increased unhappiness and depression, increased reliance on drugs and numbing entertainment to get people through life, moral confusion, belief in nonsense (such as Marxism, fascism, communism, male-female sameness, pacifism, moral equivalence of good and bad societies, and much more), and perhaps the worst deriving meaning from 'statism' as a substitute for religious meaning I see that in these forums all the time.
That the objective fact the need for meaning transcends all other human needs, its absence must create havoc individually and societally. In government, secularism is a blessing; bust as said over and over most everywhere else it is not.
mikkel_the_dane
My own religion
There are no objective defintions for subjective words like secular or god.
Here is the problem. Take the word "stone", a piece of rock. You can objectively point to it and explain all the objective properties of it. Now do the same with purpose. You can't. It is subjective, because purpose is what you think/feel it is.
LeftyLen
Active Member
So its all hindu'maya, ' So by such standards sociology psychology etc must all be nothing more than convoluted opinions, as opposed to sciences.
mikkel_the_dane
My own religion
What is science to you?
I accept science and the limits of science:
