Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Location: By the sea, by the sea, by the beautiful sea
68,329 posts, read 54,381,135 times
Reputation: 40736
Advertisements
Quote:
Originally Posted by malamute
The problem is that Hillary and Obama both thought all they had to do is snap their fingers, supply some terrorist groups with high powered weapons, encourage them to bring down their governments and Hillary and Obama would impose a democracy on these countries and go down in history books as saviors of the world.
They have no depth of understanding whatsoever why democracy has never existed in those nations. They have no understanding of those cultures, of the true nature of Islam. And they have no understanding of democracy or how it comes about.
They were so very very proud of their "Arab Spring" just a few months ago. Now look how many thousands of people are being killed.
Care to compare the cost in American blood and $$$ of the 'Arab Spring' to that of the inane attempt to bring democracy to Iraq?
How is it you equate NO religious expression with "what is and isn't acceptable religious expression"?
It doesn't matter whether secularism claims to make "NO religious expression". The fact is that secularism replaces the traditional functions of religion in society.
Location: By the sea, by the sea, by the beautiful sea
68,329 posts, read 54,381,135 times
Reputation: 40736
Quote:
Originally Posted by WesternPilgrim
It doesn't matter whether secularism claims to make "NO religious expression". The fact is that secularism replaces the traditional functions of religion in society.
Or perhaps religion attempts to replace the traditional functions of secularism in society.
At least secularism doesn't attempt to control people, telling them what they can eat, what they can drink, how they should dress, etc.
The two are absolutely entangled. How can you have individual liberty without a government that is purely neutral on religion?
Being "neutral" on religion doesn't achieve that at all. On the contrary, as we are witnessing today, our religiously "neutral" government is propelled inexorably toward violating the liberty of religious believers. The best hope for individual liberty is for the government to favor a religion that infuses individual liberty with purpose and provides it with a meaningful context.
My thesis is that when nobles, kings, and the founding fathers started adopting enlightenment and secular ideas in the 18th century the madness stopped ....
As a populace becomes more educated and is introduced to a broader world view, they become less religious and more secular. The OP's argument is fallacious, as religious people are more prone to "lose their religion" than vice-versa, which is why religious people right so hard against atheism and science. One example is the number of people who emigrate from Islamic countries and choose not to practice their faith or adhere to its tenants when they come to the US or other Western countries.
Secularism doesn't have the resources to resist the encroachments of Islam. Here's why:
1. Man is incurably religious, and secularism creates a religious void that Islam is eager to fill.
2. The secularist dogma of religious pluralism gives Islam a foothold in the West.
3. The secularist dogma of non-discrimination makes it impossible to resist Islam on religious grounds.
4. Secularists in historically Christian nations make common cause with Islam because it dilutes Christian influence.
5. Secularism is a worldly, hedonistic ideology. When Islamists gain enough power to present secularists with a choice - "convert, or lose all of your worldly advantages!" - secularists will convert.
Only science and logic can thwart religious extremism/cultism.
We don't need to use religion to destroy and conquer religious extremism.
Location: By the sea, by the sea, by the beautiful sea
68,329 posts, read 54,381,135 times
Reputation: 40736
Quote:
Originally Posted by WesternPilgrim
Being "neutral" on religion doesn't achieve that at all. On the contrary, as we are witnessing today, our religiously "neutral" government is propelled inexorably toward violating the liberty of religious believers. The best hope for individual liberty is for the government to favor a religion that infuses individual liberty with purpose and provides it with a meaningful context.
Thankfully the founders had more common sense than that. <LARGE sigh of relief>
Secularism doesn't have the resources to resist the encroachments of Islam. Here's why:
1. Man is incurably religious, and secularism creates a religious void that Islam is eager to fill.
2. The secularist dogma of religious pluralism gives Islam a foothold in the West.
3. The secularist dogma of non-discrimination makes it impossible to resist Islam on religious grounds.
4. Secularists in historically Christian nations make common cause with Islam because it dilutes Christian influence.
5. Secularism is a worldly, hedonistic ideology. When Islamists gain enough power to present secularists with a choice - "convert, or lose all of your worldly advantages!" - secularists will convert.
The fly in your theory is that thos is not a war between Christianity and Islam, no matter how much YOU WANT IT TO BE.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
