• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

2012 Dem Party Platform Draft for Gay Marriage and Repeal of Defense of Marriage Act

Wakeforest22890 said:
I don't really mean to derail this thread and can take this elsewhere, but social conservatism is the absolute most ridiculous set of views in the mainstream political arena. There are at least debates to be had about economics and the financial viability of various plans/schemes, but for 95% of social issues the conservative viewpoint embraced by the majority of the Republican Party and the Tea Party is just abhorrent.
Click to expand...

A strong country needs a solid moral fabric foundation.
 
keeper said:
A strong country needs a solid moral fabric foundation.
Click to expand...

I think I agree with this, but it's difficult to establish a solid moral fabric foundation in a country as diverse and large as America. 300 million people cannot and will not agree on anything. This is why the concept of a social contract and the implicit understanding that living here is acceptance of the broader moral code is so important. Primarily this is why the Constitution, although antiquated in a literal interpretation in a lot of aspects, provides a valuable base for the nation. The country has a solid moral fabric foundation and in my opinion it's the work of the forefathers and the Constitution. Legislatures and courts can then interpret these beliefs to a more modern understanding and concept.

The "moral foundation" we need cannot be based upon a religious foundation, and the forefathers recognized this.
 
Wakeforest22890 said:
I think I agree with this, but it's difficult to establish a solid moral fabric foundation in a country as diverse and large as America. 300 million people cannot and will not agree on anything. This is why the concept of a social contract and the implicit understanding that living here is acceptance of the broader moral code is so important. Primarily this is why the Constitution, although antiquated in a literal interpretation in a lot of aspects, provides a valuable base for the nation. The country has a solid moral fabric foundation and in my opinion it's the work of the forefathers and the Constitution. Legislatures and courts can then interpret these beliefs to a more modern understanding and concept.

The "moral foundation" we need cannot be based upon a religious foundation, and the forefathers recognized this.
Click to expand...

One nation under GOD
 
That phrase does not trace back to the forefathers though, in fact it was a direct response based upon a conservative theory of debunking Communism in the 1950's.
 
Wakeforest22890 said:
That phrase does not trace back to the forefathers though, in fact it was a direct response based upon a conservative theory of debunking Communism in the 1950's.
Click to expand...

Correct. How about In God We Trust? Explain that one.
 
keeper said:
Correct. How about In God We Trust? Explain that one.
Click to expand...

I'm not arguing that there are not Judeo-Christian values present in some people who crafted laws in the late 18th century, I'm stipulating that they are not present in what I would put forward as the decided "moral foundation" of our nation: the Constitution.

It doesn't take very long to get to the portion of "separation of church and state" in the Constitution. If God was so important to the country and the Constitution, He would appear all over it. Except "God" is never in it. Not once. Neither is "Jesus" or "Christianity".
 
Wakeforest22890 said:
I'm not arguing that there are not Judeo-Christian values present in some people who crafted laws in the late 18th century, I'm stipulating that they are not present in what I would put forward as the decided "moral foundation" of our nation: the Constitution.

It doesn't take very long to get to the portion of "separation of church and state" in the Constitution. If God was so important to the country and the Constitution, He would appear all over it. Except "God" is never in it. Not once. Neither is "Jesus" or "Christianity".
Click to expand...

Why is it on our currency?
 
Wakeforest22890 said:
Because Congress put it there, once again based upon a conservative response to Communism in the 1950's.
Click to expand...

It first appeared on a two cent coin in 1864 according to an article I just read. Your father probably still has one.
 
Well that's good to hear. We can agree on that. Your complete non-sequiturs aren't even an attempted refutation of anything I said in my initial post though. Citing modern examples of religion in public policy is entirely unrelated to the idea that 300 million people are certainly not going to embrace the same tenets of religion for a moral structure of a nation.
 
Wakeforest22890 said:
Well that's good to hear. We can agree on that. Your complete non-sequiturs aren't even an attempted refutation of anything I said in my initial post though. Citing modern examples of religion in public policy is entirely unrelated to the idea that 300 million people are certainly not going to embrace the same tenets of religion for a moral structure of a nation.
Click to expand...

majority rules
 
Wakeforest22890 said:
Well that's good to hear. We can agree on that. Your complete non-sequiturs aren't even an attempted refutation of anything I said in my initial post though. Citing modern examples of religion in public policy is entirely unrelated to the idea that 300 million people are certainly not going to embrace the same tenets of religion for a moral structure of a nation.
Click to expand...

That is why we have elections. We had them in May here and we'll have others in November. Do you plan to vote in two states this year? Without photo ID you probably can. If you do, please write in Virginia Foxx up there.
 
keeper said:
That is why we have elections. We had them in May here and we'll have others in November. Do you plan to vote in two states this year? Without photo ID you probably can. If you do, please write in Virginia Foxx up there.
Click to expand...

This may be the first post you've ever had that made me laugh. I plan to vote in North Carolina and vote for Motsinger.

Elections also don't determine the moral foundation of the country. The foundations have, by definition, already been established since the birth of the country. Aren't you a huge originalist with regards to how the Constitution should be interpreted?
 
Wakeforest22890 said:
This may be the first post you've ever had that made me laugh. I plan to vote in North Carolina and vote for Motsinger.

Elections also don't determine the moral foundation of the country. The foundations have, by definition, already been established since the birth of the country. Aren't you a huge originalist with regards to how the Constitution should be interpreted?
Click to expand...

Yes and I don't see anything in it that says your President can force me to buy anything including health insurance. Can't wait for November. Motsinger goes down easily.
 
If morality should not be determined by faith (or religion as you put it), then how should morality be determined? Regardless of how you spin it, you are going to make a faith assumption when you make a morality claim. It might be a very selfish claim ("I know right and wrong when I see it") it may be an anti-faith claim ("no one can no right and wrong") but you are going to stake your morality at some point on a leap of faith. It is ridiculous to try and separate faith and morality. Faith is the building block of any morality.

What you are trying to say is, that Judeo Christian faith should not be emphasized over your faith. That is an argument one can have, but lets not pretend you are not making your own faith assumptions. By dismissing the Judeo-Chrisitian faith and a proper foundation for morality you are making a claim that Judeo-Christian values are a falsehood. Again that is a leap of faith no matter how you determine it. You believe that, but there is no proof other than opinion. Is gay marriage wrong? That is an opinion, it is a leap of faith whichever side you choose.

This idea that we can remove faith from morality is foolishness.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top