Would anyone here really want to live under a theocracy?

[PureX]

It would depend in the ethical imperatives that the state religion seeks to impose. All human societal imperatives need to be imposed upon the individuals within it, and those imperatives have to be determined, somehow. Religions can be very good at doing this, or very bad at doing it. So whether or not I would want to live under a religiously driven set of ethical imperatives would depend on the ethical imperatives the religion imposed. And on the value of the results of it's doing so.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

My answer to this is an emphatic 'No.'
My idea for this thread came from a recent conversation I had with a gentleman who said he wants the United States to become a Christian theocracy. Personally I like our current model of a secular government that allows people to worship, or not worship, how they see fit.
Thoughts?

I'm with you. NO!

And not even if it were a Christian theocracy. In the US, that seems to be the most likely form a theocracy would take as likely some sort of syncretic version of religion, politics and nationalism.

I cannot speak for other religions, but according to the views of Judaism and Christianity, God granted us the gift of free will. How would being forced to believe and follow a religion be an exercise of that gift and not subverting it for others?

 

[Koldo]

My answer to this is an emphatic 'No.'
My idea for this thread came from a recent conversation I had with a gentleman who said he wants the United States to become a Christian theocracy. Personally I like our current model of a secular government that allows people to worship, or not worship, how they see fit.
Thoughts?

No, however... that is way down in my list of priorities. I would, for example, prefer living in a theocracy with a very high HDI than in a non-theocratic country with low HDI.

 

[Debater Slayer]

It would absolutely make sense that it comes up in your region given that theocracies are more prevalent in that region.

However, such conversations aren't as prevalent here in the States. If @McBell was, indeed, from your neck of the woods, I wouldn't have given the post a send thought.

That's fair. I've read that some, especially in the Bible Belt, support theocracy or at least an increased number of theocratic laws, although I'm not sure how common such views are in the US and especially among voters.

 

[SalixIncendium]

That's fair. I've read that some, especially in the Bible Belt, support theocracy or at least an increased number of theocratic laws, although I'm not sure how common such views are in the US and especially among voters.

They do to an extent, but actually putting such ideas into legislation has never gained any traction because doing so would violate the Constitution.

 

[Soandso]

Nah I'm good. I grew up under a legalistic religion and to think that such a religion could legally dictate what one can and cannot do is terrifying to me

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

My idea for this thread came from a recent conversation I had with a gentleman who said he wants the United States to become a Christian theocracy.

And I'm sure that there are RF members that feel the same way, although they understand not to speak using that language to an audience of secularists living in a country whose constitution prohibits religion in government.

I find it odd that on a religious forum, no one thus far as suggested that the want to live under a theocracy of their own religious values

They don't need to use that language. Did they vote for Trump so that he would nominate Supreme Court Justices to change the law of the land to conform with their religious beliefs? If so, they support a Christian theocracy.

So do all of these people who have risen to prominence. Although they're uninhibited extoling Christian theocracy, they also don't use the word:

• "The long term goal of Christians in politics should be to gain exclusive control over the franchise. Those who refuse to submit publicly to the eternal sanctions of God by submitting to his Church's public marks of the covenant-baptism and holy communion-must be denied citizenship, just as they were in ancient Israel." - Gary North
• "I want you to let a wave of hatred wash over you. Yes, hate is good ... our goal is a Christian nation. We have the biblical duty, we are called on by God to conquer this country. We don't want equal time. We don't want pluralism"- Randall Terry, Director of Operation Rescue
• "Why stoning? There are many reasons. First, the implements of execution are available to everyone at virtually no cost...executions are community projects--not with spectators who watch a professional executioner do `his' duty, but rather with actual participants...That modern Christians never consider the possibility of the reintroduction of stoning for capital crimes indicates how thoroughly humanistic concepts of punishment have influenced the thinking of Christian." - Christian Dominionist Gary North bemoaning the influence that humanism has had
• "I hope to see the day when, as in the early days of our country, we won't have any public schools. The churches will have taken them over again and Christians will be running them. What a happy day that will be." - Jerry Falwell
• "There will never be world peace until God's house and God's people are given their rightful place of leadership at the top of the world." - Pat Robertson

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Depends. There's various ways of making it work. You could make almost any political system work. It could still guarantee freedom of worship. I'd have to know what such a group proposes first.

 

[David1967]

How would being forced to believe and follow a religion be an exercise of that gift and not subverting it for others?

I would go so far as to say, if a person is forced to believe, is it really belief?

 

[David1967]

That's fair. I've read that some, especially in the Bible Belt, support theocracy or at least an increased number of theocratic laws, although I'm not sure how common such views are in the US and especially among voters.

It's more common than one might think. Among fundamentalist Evangelicals at least, and only when it is the version of Christianity that they follow.

 

[Mock Turtle]

Would anyone here really want to live under a theocracy?​

Nah, not really, and apart from a few other systems, like a dictatorship or similar as to authoritarian control, I can hardly think of a worst one as to allowing the freedoms that I would prefer to see within societies - given that few theocracies seem to have freedoms as being top priorities.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

It would depend in the ethical imperatives that the state religion seeks to impose. All human societal imperatives need to be imposed upon the individuals within it, and those imperatives have to be determined, somehow. Religions can be very good at doing this, or very bad at doing it. So whether or not I would want to live under a religiously driven set of ethical imperatives would depend on the ethical imperatives the religion imposed. And on the value of the results of it's doing so.

Do you have an example of a religion that has been "very good at doing this?"

 

[Ebionite]

How would you recognise a theocracy (or the lack of one) if you were living in one but it was called a democracy? You could vote for different leaders but the leaders were bound to follow religious traditions that were part of the constitution.

 

[Eddi]

The thing with Theocracy is that it's not as if it is God himself who rules, that would be one thing

It is however the clerics who rule. Which is something else entirely

What makes clerics closer to God than other people? Nothing, IMO

And let it be said that I think government should be totally secular, so even God himself shouldn't rule

Although I think it would be impossible for God to occupy any political office, totally absurd

 

[Sand Dancer]

And I'm sure that there are RF members that feel the same way, although they understand not to speak using that language to an audience of secularists living in a country whose constitution prohibits religion in government.

They don't need to use that language. Did they vote for Trump so that he would nominate Supreme Court Justices to change the law of the land to conform with their religious beliefs? If so, they support a Christian theocracy.

So do all of these people who have risen to prominence. Although they're uninhibited extoling Christian theocracy, they also don't use the word:

• "The long term goal of Christians in politics should be to gain exclusive control over the franchise. Those who refuse to submit publicly to the eternal sanctions of God by submitting to his Church's public marks of the covenant-baptism and holy communion-must be denied citizenship, just as they were in ancient Israel." - Gary North
• "I want you to let a wave of hatred wash over you. Yes, hate is good ... our goal is a Christian nation. We have the biblical duty, we are called on by God to conquer this country. We don't want equal time. We don't want pluralism"- Randall Terry, Director of Operation Rescue
• "Why stoning? There are many reasons. First, the implements of execution are available to everyone at virtually no cost...executions are community projects--not with spectators who watch a professional executioner do `his' duty, but rather with actual participants...That modern Christians never consider the possibility of the reintroduction of stoning for capital crimes indicates how thoroughly humanistic concepts of punishment have influenced the thinking of Christian." - Christian Dominionist Gary North bemoaning the influence that humanism has had
• "I hope to see the day when, as in the early days of our country, we won't have any public schools. The churches will have taken them over again and Christians will be running them. What a happy day that will be." - Jerry Falwell
• "There will never be world peace until God's house and God's people are given their rightful place of leadership at the top of the world." - Pat Robertson

That's positively terrifying.

 

[Ebionite]

And I'm sure that there are RF members that feel the same way, although they understand not to speak using that language to an audience of secularists living in a country whose constitution prohibits religion in government.

Can you name a single country that prohibits religion in government? An oath is an act of religion.

 

[Dao Hao Now]

the leaders were bound to follow religious traditions that were part of the constitution.

You answered your own question.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Theocracy has to be the most absolutely terrible form of government possible

I don't think I even need to explain why, it is simply that bad

It would be another version of authoritarianism.

 

[Eddi]

It would be another version of authoritarianism.

More like totalitarianism

 

[Dan From Smithville]

More like totalitarianism

Perhaps. Somewhere on that spectrum at least.