Apparent Disconnect In Debate On Role Of Government

[Socrates]

[quote name='stevil' timestamp='1316898530' post='2309347']
What's the alternative?
Have a governing body that does not represent the people within society? That does not allow its society members to make informed adult decisions themselves?
[/quote]
Democracy does not in itself guarantee freedom nor good and just government, and frequently leads to tyranny. After all, Adolf Hitler was democratically elected Chancellor of Germany.

Alexander Hamilton, Federalist Papers: "We are a Republican Government, Real liberty is never found in despotism or in the extremes of democracy...it has been observed that a pure democracy if it were practicable would be the most perfect government. Experience has proved that no position is more false than this. The ancient democracies in which the people themselves deliberated never possessed one good feature of government. Their very character was tyranny; their figure deformity."

John Adams: "Democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There never was a democracy yet that did not commit suicide."

Thomas Jefferson: "A democracy is nothing more than mob rule, where 51% of the people may take away the rights of the other 49%."

James Madison: "Democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention; have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property; and have in general been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their death."

John Quincy Adams: "The experience of all former ages had shown that of all human governments, democracy was the most unstable, fluctuating and short-lived."

[stevil]

[quote name='Socrates' timestamp='1316983877' post='2310012']
God is Himself the author of life and death. A God that was subject to rules made up by humans or the whims of human opinion wouldn't be much of a God.
[/quote]
A leader that leads by example is not a hypocrite.


[quote name='Socrates' timestamp='1316983877' post='2310012']
By your prison population remark, you seemed to be trying to imply a causal relation between religious faith and criminal behavior.
[/quote]
A statement was made on this thread implicating lack of religion to violent offences within society.
I was merely rebutting with an example of a survey with regards to the fact that Atheists are on average performing less crime that those who affiliate to religion.


[quote name='Socrates' timestamp='1316983877' post='2310012']
Yet you have failed to explain how a Faith which teaches "Thou shalt not kill," "Thou shalt not steal," "thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's goods," "love thy neighbor as thyself," "love thy enemy; do good to those that hurt you," "turn the other cheek," "forgive thy neighbor not seven times, but seventy times seven" and to see Christ in their neighbor is to blame for acts of criminal violence.
[/quote]
I don't know why religious people are failing more so than atheists with regards to behaving in a socially acceptable way and hence keeping out of prisons.
I do however believe (yes, I have a belief) that Atheists do tend to find an intuitive morality standard which is above the morality standard of any religion. Our standard tends to be with regards to the golden rule, and respecting other people's lifestyles, want's and needs as long as those do no harm to others.

[quote name='Socrates' timestamp='1316983877' post='2310012']
Your statement about atheists being under-represented in prison (if it indeed has any factual basis) would probably be that those who self-identify as "atheist" tend to be predominantly upper-middle class whites, a demographic category which is under-represented in prison as opposed to those who grew up on the mean streets. The numbers in that demographic in prison tend to be low, whether they are devout Christians or atheists.
[/quote]
I have no idea whether Atheists tend to be upper-middle class whites. What does money and skin colour have to do with religious belief?

[stevil]

[quote name='Socrates' timestamp='1316984286' post='2310016']
Democracy does not in itself guarantee freedom nor good and just government, and frequently leads to tyranny. After all, Adolf Hitler was democratically elected Chancellor of Germany.

Alexander Hamilton, Federalist Papers: "We are a Republican Government, Real liberty is never found in despotism or in the extremes of democracy...it has been observed that a pure democracy if it were practicable would be the most perfect government. Experience has proved that no position is more false than this. The ancient democracies in which the people themselves deliberated never possessed one good feature of government. Their very character was tyranny; their figure deformity."

John Adams: "Democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There never was a democracy yet that did not commit suicide."

Thomas Jefferson: "A democracy is nothing more than mob rule, where 51% of the people may take away the rights of the other 49%."

James Madison: "Democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention; have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property; and have in general been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their death."

John Quincy Adams: "The experience of all former ages had shown that of all human governments, democracy was the most unstable, fluctuating and short-lived."
[/quote]
Hitler was voted in, but once he got to power, democracy left and voting no longer became an option.

With regards to democracy being mob rule, well it is certainly better than dictatorship where 1 person gets what he wants and millions do not get what they want.

But actually with most democracies, governments don't tend to oppress. The people generally get to choose many things, job, career, where to live, what religion to obey or ignore, what music to listen to, what gender person to fall in love with, how many children to have, whether to use contraceptives or not.
Choice is a good thing!

[Mr.Cat]

To present the authors of the United States Constitution as anti-democratic or unquestionable authorities I think borders on absurdity. They established a democratic republic or a liberal democracy... which heavily use democratic methods of selecting and managing government.

Usually a majority of people will choose to accommodate themselves, which normally implies all the same ins and outs, pitfalls and strengths of government. This is sadly how someone like Hitler was able to manipulate the people into electing him and eventually suspend their own constitution. The people were so desperate and angry that they elected extreme politicians and policies.

A lesson that modern Americans should listen to, can anyone notice a growing desperate and angry population, willing to elect extreme politicians and enact extreme policy change? I know I can.

Edited September 26, 2011 by Mr.Cat

[stevil]

Bush was borderline.
Certainly a war lord, and scary with his black and white think, You are for us or against us.
Don't know why American's voted him in for a second term.

[Socrates]

[quote name='stevil' timestamp='1317013497' post='2310305']
A leader that leads by example is not a hypocrite.[/quote]
Look to Jesus Christ for a leader who truly leads by example.

He is the example all Christians are called to follow in their moral life.


[quote]A statement was made on this thread implicating lack of religion to violent offences within society.

I was merely rebutting with an example of a survey with regards to the fact that Atheists are on average performing less crime that those who affiliate to religion.[/quote]
You haven't actually rebutted anything. Does your survey (which you have still failed to provide) say anything about how many of those criminals actually actively practice their identified faith - ie. whether they regularly pray, attend church, etc.? I'll bet the bank very few of those imprisoned for serious crimes fall in that category. There are many, many people who are not self-professed atheists, and who may even be baptized Christian, who are not actively religious at all - they may have been baptized as a baby, but have never darkened the door of a church since, and simply don't care a fig about religion one way or the other; they're generally too preoccupied with sex, drugs, and gangsta rap to bother with religion. I've known such people, some of whom have done prison time. I've also known quite a few of very actively religious Catholics, and none of them has been involved with crime or been to prison. And there are plenty testimonies of those who had lived a life of crime who since converted to following Christ and abandoned their criminal ways.

Thus far, you've provided absolutely nothing to show that religious belief leads to crime, much less explain why this would be the case, as Christian teaching expressly forbids murder, theft, lying, and all unprovoked violence.



[quote]I don't know why religious people are failing more so than atheists with regards to behaving in a socially acceptable way and hence keeping out of prisons.[/quote]
Again, you've failed to show that the people in your study were in fact actively religious, as opposed to simply non-atheist. There is a significant difference.

[quote]I do however believe (yes, I have a belief) that Atheists do tend to find an intuitive morality standard which is above the morality standard of any religion. Our standard tends to be with regards to the golden rule, and respecting other people's lifestyles, want's and needs as long as those do no harm to others.[/quote]
Wow! I guess I'll just have to bow to your superior high holiness.

(Though logically, your assertion makes no sense. Atheism - which means simply the lack of belief in a God - is purely a negation, and thus itself does not provide any code of morality. The non-existence of God does not dictate moral behavior.)

[quote]I have no idea whether Atheists tend to be upper-middle class whites. What does money and skin colour have to do with religious belief?[/quote]
That's an observation. They're mostly upper-middle class (a demographic which, in America at least tends to be largely white).

There are lies, d[font=arial,helvetica,sans-serif]am[/font]n lies, and statistics.

I bring that up because you're trying to use prison statistics to prove the moral superiority of atheists. Demographically, blacks and Hispanics are over-represented in prison. So are those from the lower socio-economic classes, and young males.

Trying to blame religious belief as a cause for these people's criminal behavior is no more logical than saying that being black or Hispanic makes them commit crimes.
Correlation does not equal causality. Surely you can do better than this!

Edited September 27, 2011 by Socrates

[Socrates]

[quote name='stevil' timestamp='1317013834' post='2310311']
Hitler was voted in, but once he got to power, democracy left and voting no longer became an option.

With regards to democracy being mob rule, well it is certainly better than dictatorship where 1 person gets what he wants and millions do not get what they want.

But actually with most democracies, governments don't tend to oppress. The people generally get to choose many things, job, career, where to live, what religion to obey or ignore, what music to listen to, what gender person to fall in love with, how many children to have, whether to use contraceptives or not.
Choice is a good thing!
[/quote]
As my point with Hitler illustrates, historically democracy has often led to tyranny. As James Madison, the "Father of the Constitution," said, Democracy was the right of the people to choose their own tyrant."

In times of crisis, mobs are often all too happy to vote in tyrants if they think it will improve their condition.

The American founding fathers in their writings were all strongly opposed to democracy and saw its dangers. They envisioned instead a republic, which is between the extremes of democracy and autocratic rule, with checks and balances on government power. (I've provided only a few quotes for sake of brevity, but there are plenty more.)

Today, we have much, much more oppressive government taxation and interference in all areas life than they went to war against King George for. As Ben Franklin said, "When the people find that they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic." That is indeed what has led to the demise of our Republic in America.

I'm certainly not for totalitarian government - my point is that there is nothing inherently great with democracy, and that is properly a means to an end, rather than an end in itself.

[Mr.Cat]

[quote name='Socrates' timestamp='1317164725' post='2311210']As my point with Hitler illustrates, historically democracy has often led to tyranny. As James Madison, the "Father of the Constitution," said, Democracy was the right of the people to choose their own tyrant."

In times of crisis, mobs are often all too happy to vote in tyrants if they think it will improve their condition.

The American founding fathers in their writings were all strongly opposed to democracy and saw its dangers. They envisioned instead a republic, which is between the extremes of democracy and autocratic rule, with checks and balances on government power. (I've provided only a few quotes for sake of brevity, but there are plenty more.)

Today, we have much, much more oppressive government taxation and interference in all areas life than they went to war against King George for. As Ben Franklin said, "When the people find that they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic." That is indeed what has led to the demise of our Republic in America.

I'm certainly not for totalitarian government - my point is that there is nothing inherently great with democracy, and that is properly a means to an end, rather than an end in itself.[/quote][quote name='Socrates' timestamp='1316984286' post='2310016']After all, Adolf Hitler was democratically elected Chancellor of Germany.[/quote]To continue a parody and to stop all this nazi nonsense, [i]since you were the first to compare democracy to nazis[/i], I call violation of godwin's law.

To condense So-crates' nonsense down into something that an intelligent free thinking person would understand... appealing to the majority is an informal logic fallacy. Merely because a majority supports it does not make it reasonable. Which can be further examined in this case by understanding the criticisms of "[i]majoritarian democracy[/i]". Since hypothetically, in a representative democracy it is possible to have a minority of the population elected to a majority of a legislative body.

But the point so-crates is missing that liberal democracies have better histories of preserving peace, freedom, and individuality. So there is a reason to have a preference to democratic methods where politicians are at least hypothetically kept accountable for their actions to the people.

Edited September 27, 2011 by Mr.Cat

[stevil]

[quote name='Socrates' timestamp='1317163106' post='2311200']
Thus far, you've provided absolutely nothing to show that religious belief leads to crime, much less explain why this would be the case, as Christian teaching expressly forbids murder, theft, lying, and all unprovoked violence.
[/quote]
My intent was to show that atheism does not lead to a higher crime rate, I am not trying to show that religious belief leads to crime.
I've posted a reference to the survey before, I'm at work at the moment and don't have time to look for it right now. Survey was done by Federal Bureau of Prisons

[Socrates]

[quote name='stevil' timestamp='1317171024' post='2311261']
My intent was to show that atheism does not lead to a higher crime rate, I am not trying to show that religious belief leads to crime.
I've posted a reference to the survey before, I'm at work at the moment and don't have time to look for it right now. Survey was done by Federal Bureau of Prisons
[/quote]
Fair enough. Though I do think a general disregard for religion and moral rules (which is not necessarily the same thing as formal atheism) is a factor in the rise of acts of senseless crime and violence in modern society.

And just something to think about:
There's plenty of cases of persons turning from a life of crime, violence, and vice after having a sincere conversion to following Christ.
I've yet to hear of a single case of a "conversion" to atheism turning anyone from crime or vice to a life of virtue. (Though I'm open to correction).


And, if you're really interested in issues regarding belief in God and Christianity, have you ever looked into the apologetical works of C.S. Lewis? He was a former atheist who became one the most brilliant Christian apologists of the 20th century (though he never became Catholic).

[Winchester]

Someone needs to read more Hoppe, Rothbard, and Hayek.

[kamiller42]

[quote name='Winchester' timestamp='1317259840' post='2312037']
Someone needs to read more Hoppe, Rothbard, and Hayek.
[/quote]
Hayek, he put up a good fight.

[media='']http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GTQnarzmTOc[/media]

[Winchester]

Keynes sux.

[kamiller42]

This is why the federal government has an interest in the composition of marriage. Issues like this come up, and it's the tip of the iceberg.

[quote][size=5]No Same-Sex Weddings at West Point's Catholic Chapel, Says Military Archdiocese[/size]


[b](CNSNews.com)[/b] – Will same-sex marriage ceremonies be allowed at the Catholic Chapel of the Most Holy Trinity at the U.S. Military Academy at West Point?
“The answer is ‘no,’” said Taylor Henry, director of public affairs and media relations for the Catholic Archdiocese for the Military Services, USA, and spokesman for Archbishop Timothy Broglio, who certifies all Catholic chaplains for the armed services.

...

Archbishop Broglio, meanwhile, has denounced directives [url="http://cnsnews.com/news/article/rep-akin-admistration-bordering-lawlessness-letting-military-chaplains-perform-gay"]issued[/url] last week by Under Secretary of Defense Clifford Stanley and DoD General Counsel Jeh Johnson clearing military chaplains to perform same-sex weddings in military chapels.

“The Pentagon's new policy, as outlined in these two memos, appears to ignore the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), which was signed into law 15 years ago and remains in effect,” Broglio said in a statement released last week.

[url="http://cnsnews.com/news/article/no-same-sex-weddings-west-points-catholic-chapel-says-military-archdiocese"]Source[/url][/quote]