Let's split the USA in half...

[columbus]

Sin is sin.

Sin is one of the most subjective words in the moral dictionary.
It's most common usage is "Behavior I consider wrong, without being able to coherently explain why."
Tom

 

[Robert.Evans]

Since only certain religions recognize "sin", and then only some of the adherents of those religions actually have problems with certain people's sin rather than realize that all are guilty of some sin and try to live in peace with each other (that whole love thy neighbor thing rearing its head again) then it would seem to stand to reason that the certain religious adherents that have issues should be the ones to wilfully remove themselves from society and stay together so they don't have to interact with those "sinners". Rather than force their perceptions of who should be separated upon others. But then, that sounds quite a bit like cult mentality doesn't it? Makes more sense than everyone else bending to the opinion of a few though, right?

Yep, that is another way of looking at it. But I was taking it as a whole.

 

[Robert.Evans]

Sin is only sin to you, and not to others. Just because you disapprove of certain actions doesn't mean others, who do not adhere to your religious dogma, should be expected to adjust their lives because you don't like what they are doing. If a homosexual couple wants a child, why prevent that or take the child away at the age of 18? Shouldn't it be sinful to deny a loving home to a child?

Well it all comes down to whose values doesn't it.
I will say it is from God's word and that will open up a whole new debate.
So we have what we have because of the mentality of society now.
But taht means that some groups will suffer abuse and die because they are mixed, and some murderers in England will be realeased back into society to re-offend (incl' pedophiles). I just don't happen to agree with that; and it is nothing I have to answer to as I would not have it that way.
We all have families and locks on doors - all I'm saying is that we extend what is already there - partly through race and wealth, it is already there, if you stop to look.

 

[Robert.Evans]

Sin is one of the most subjective words in the moral dictionary.
It's most common usage is "Behavior I consider wrong, without being able to coherently explain why."
Tom

I think it is explained

 

[leibowde84]

At this point, we just need 2 different countries.

On one side you can have:

Liberals
Gays
Hybrid cars
Tofu
Vegetarians/vegans
No guns
Higher taxes
Outlawed religion
Abortions
Welfare providing a free ride for life
Pacifists that bow down to other countries



On the other side we can have:

Conservatives
Traditional marriage
SUVs and 4x4s
Steak
Omnivores
Guns for law abiding citizens
Lower taxes
Religious freedom
Anti-abortion
Welfare until you get back on your feet
Red bloods that kick other countries' asses if they attack us

I know where I would live!

This is pretty dumb, as it clearly doesn't make sense. The vast majority of Americans believe in aspects of both. Not all democrats are the same, just like all republicans aren't the same. This is stereotyping to a completely illogical degree.

 

[Robert.Evans]

I'd see separation of family as 'sin', homosexuality not. Your 'objective' morality is not universal, so short of theocratic law...*shrugs*



Are we talking right or wrong, here, or are we talking separation of different groups, be they determined via ethnicity, religion, etc?
I thought it was the latter?



I'm Australian. The English justice system at one time meant transportation for theft of bread, removal of the mentally ill from society, and the ability of the peerage to escape justice entirely. Be careful with rose-coloured glasses.



Actually I'm much harder and less forgiving than you might expect. Despite having all the hallmarks of a leftie, for example, I'm actually not against the death penalty in certain circumstances. My issue isn't really with punishment for crimes committed. It's punishment by association. Belonging to the wrong group leading to prejudice and judgement, regardless of the actions of the individual. That seems to be the logical extension of your argument.

I was including all groups.
I am not lookign at a time when England was 'great', I am merely saying that a murderer, for ex, would not have set foot back in society at one time, and now they do, including pedos, and robbers, who might have hundreds of convictions. They say that prisons do not rehabilitate - so why let them out again. Think about it. We let them bac into society to reoffend. If they live in a parcel of land away from the main society, it is not a problem. That seems to be fair. They make their own bed, now let them lie in it. Is that not an eye for an eye?

 

[Shadow Wolf]

I will say it is from God's word and that will open up a whole new debate.

Not really. It's still your view (in this case, your god), and others should not be expected to adhere to your views if they believe otherwise.

 

[columbus]

I think it is explained

So do lots of others. It is not the same explanation, however.

It is you pretending that your subjective opinion is objective, when it isn't.
Tom

 

[Robert.Evans]

Not really. It's still your view (in this case, your god), and others should not be expected to adhere to your views if they believe otherwise.

Sure, my views; but that is not what we are really talking about are we? Governments do have the right to say what is right and wrong. That is one of the reasons homosxuality has been accepted.
I am merely saying what I am thinking is right.

 

[Robert.Evans]

So do lots of others. It is not the same explanation, however.

It is you pretending that your subjective opinion is objective, when it isn't.
Tom

But you opinion is I guess?

 

[columbus]

But you opinion is I guess?

Which one? I have lots of opinions.
The subjective nature of sin is a quite objective opinion. Anybody can see that different people have confidence in their opinions, but the opinions vary hugely. You, Katspur, FearGod, Thana, etc., all have opinions based on your interpretation of whatever scripture you have subjectively chosen.
But they're all different because sin is such a subjective concept. It's a batch of subjective opinions rolled into one.
Tom

 

[Robert.Evans]

Which one? I have lots of opinions.
The subjective nature of sin is a quite objective opinion. Anybody can see that different people have confidence in their opinions, but the opinions vary hugely. You, Katspur, FearGod, Thana, etc., all have opinions based on your interpretation of whatever scripture you have subjectively chosen.
But they're all different because sin is such a subjective concept. It's a batch of subjective opinions rolled into one.
Tom

I guess that is why we elect governments. Now altogether, arrrrr!

 

[columbus]

I guess that is why we elect governments. Now altogether, arrrrr!

It would be stupendously great if there were a God who cared enough to be clear.
But all we've got is a bunch of humans claiming to speak for God, which is not at all the same.
Tom

 

[Robert.Evans]

It would be stupendously great if there were a God who cared enough to be clear.
But all we've got is a bunch of humans claiming to speak for God, which is not at all the same.
Tom

He is clear. But we answer for the sins you don't believe in - which is an inherant problem I think.

 

[columbus]

He is clear.

What you and I have here is yet another human claiming to speak for God. Specifically, you.
I don't find any religionist particularly credible on the subject of morality. And God chooses not to enlighten me.

So I have to do it myself, and I don't claim to be especially good at it. But I do the best with what I've got.
Tom

 

[columbus]

But we answer for the sins you don't believe in - which is an inherant problem I think.

Like eating a bacon cheese burger? Or have you dismissed that behavior as being sinful?
Tom

 

[Draka]

He is clear. But we answer for the sins you don't believe in - which is an inherant problem I think.

Wait wait wait. Are you trying to say that you pay for sins that other people, who don't even follow your religion, commit? Or do you just believe you pay for your own sins? If that's the case then what does it matter to you what other people do? Do you believe you will be punished for not stopping others from sinning? Educate me here, because I'm lost on who is paying for whose sins.

 

[Robert.Evans]

Wait wait wait. Are you trying to say that you pay for sins that other people, who don't even follow your religion, commit? Or do you just believe you pay for your own sins? If that's the case then what does it matter to you what other people do? Do you believe you will be punished for not stopping others from sinning? Educate me here, because I'm lost on who is paying for whose sins.

I would say the second. Ambiguous statement I feel. Though, I usually find that where a lie is, there is also truth; and where wrong, also right. So I am considering greatly, your words.

You asked: "Do you believe you will be punished for not stopping others from sinning?"

I could say yes* and I could also say no. You have opened a can of worms I feel.

EDIT:
It is interesting that the "yes"* was omitted when I first typed it. Typo. But if we follow the pattern of Christ, and there is only one consciousness per universe, then it appears it must be right.

 

[Robert.Evans]

Perhaps that is why we are so concerned about others. We have a vested interest.

 

[allfoak]

This is the projected future map of the USA.
No need to split it up, that will happen on it's own soon enough.