Secularism

[Peter Quill]

What do you think of secularism? Is it good? Is it bad? 

Give me your opinion below.

(Note: no "religion is bad" comments" or something like that)

[Ibrahim (Banned)]

History will not look kindly on Secularism. (It's not an opinion.)

 

I don't think I need to elaborate on the vast crimes of these secular countries:

 

1) America

2) Soviet Russia

3) Communist China

4) North Korea

5) Nazi Germany

6) Britain

7) France

8) Spain

9) Belgium

10) Israel

11) Rawanda

12) Serbia

13) Cambodia

 

Etc etc

 

[Peter Quill]

History will not look kindly on Secularism. (It's not an opinion.)

 

I don't think I need to elaborate on the vast crimes of these secular countries:

 

1) America

2) Soviet Russia

3) Communist China

4) North Korea

5) Nazi Germany

6) Britain

7) France

8) Spain

9) Belgium

10) Israel

11) Rawanda

12) Serbia

13) Cambodia

 

Etc etc

Sighs It's you.

 

What wrong stuff did Spain do? If you're talking about colonization, no, you're wrong.

Spain was far from secular when it had a big empire.

 

And how about places like the Middle East and Iran? Granted, standard of living is better in the Middle East than in Iran, but they have committed several human rights violations.

 

But you're okay with that because you're Muslim.

Edited September 21, 2015 by idp5601

[Thalmor]

Secularism in culture, or secularism in government?

[Peter Quill]

Secularism in culture, or secularism in government?

Secularism in government.

Edited September 21, 2015 by idp5601

[Ibrahim (Banned)]

What wrong stuff did Spain do? If you're talking about colonization, no, you're wrong.

Spain was far from secular when it had a big empire.

 

I am talking about the Cochinchina Campaign, Spanish Civil War, Hispano-Moroccan War (1859–60), Chincha Islands War, Ten Years' War, Third Carlist War, little war, Philippine Revolution, War in Afghanistan, Iraq war, and the bombing of Libya to name but a few and Spain was very much secular. Also, White Terror (Spain).

Edited September 21, 2015 by Ibrahim

[Thalmor]

It's essential to liberty that a government recognizes that the rights of the citizens come from God, and not the government. It makes trying to take them away under a tyrannical government harder in every aspect.

 

The church and the state, on a functional level, should leave each other alone. The government shouldn't control what the church does or say (within reason) whereas the church shouldn't use the government as a tool to enforce it's idea of morality.

 

Churches give back to the community through special events and other things, so I don't think they should be taxed.

[Ibrahim (Banned)]

I believe God is the only legislator. Not human beings.

[TheNG]

I think that in terms of governments, both secular and non-secular states can possess and maintain long-lasting and effective governance, and provide for the people they serve, which is, or should be, the end goal for a government. Incorporating religious teachings/structure into government doesn't preclude effective governance, although if done poorly or overzealously the results can be disastrous. The same can be said for secular governments, which can either effectively provide for their nation, or fail catastrophically.

Honestly, if you want to run a religious state or a secular one, then good for you, just try to do the right thing, which may not necessarily be what your religion or ideology tells you to do.

Also, all you trying to condemn secular or non-secular states based on past wars or crimes are truly idiotic. Virtually every country or state in history has fought wars, so it is useless to use conflict to gauge the effectiveness of such diverse groups of nations. If every state that fought a war is a disaster, then every nation in human history has been a failed state, which is clearly not the case. For every horrific or brutal act committed by an authoritarian secular state, I could name an equal number of disgusting crimes committed by genocidal and repressive theocracies, just like I could name an equal number of rational and effective governments both secular and non-secular. Get a better metric for governance next time.

Edited September 21, 2015 by TheNG

[Ibrahim (Banned)]

Also, all you trying to condemn secular or non-secular states based on past wars or crimes are truly idiotic.

 

I just don't like the double standard. Say China invades America, whips out the American population, and annex's the American homeland. Would you condemn their actions? Or would it be perfectly acceptable since America was founded on the ethnic cleaning of the native Indians.

 

Virtually every country or state in history has fought wars, so it is useless to use conflict to gauge the effectiveness of such diverse groups of nations.

 

So the use of violence, even genocide, has to be overlooked? Okay, then at least be fair about it and apply that logic universally.

 

For every horrific or brutal act committed by an authoritarian secular state, I could name an equal number of disgusting crimes committed by genocidal and repressive theocracies,

 

Not true. I can count the number of modern theocracies on the palm of one hand, most existed before the development of modern weapons of war (when people fought with swords/bow and arrows), and Stalin alone killed far more people than all of them combined.

Edited September 21, 2015 by Ibrahim

[TheNG]

I just don't like the double standard. Say China invades America, whips out the American population, and annex's the American homeland. Would you condemn their actions? Or would it be perfectly acceptable since America was founded on the ethnic cleaning of the native Indians.

 

 

So the use of violence, even genocide, has to be overlooked? Okay, then at least be fair about it and apply that logic universally.

 

 

Not true. I can count the number of modern theocracies on the palm of one hand, most existed before the development of modern weapons of war (when people fought with swords/bow and arrows), and Stalin alone killed far more people than all of them combined.

 

You appear to have severely misunderstood my post, I'm not condoning war or other crimes, I simply pointed out that using the crimes committed by a country as a judge of whether it's government, be it secular or non-secular, is particularly effective or just is foolish given every country has committed some condemnable act at some point in history, thus making war, or any hypothetical war crimes, a poor metric on its own.

This topic is about secular and non-secular forms of governance, and whether they are "good" or "bad", as per the OP. I am of the stated opinion that both forms can and have worked excellently, creating just and efficient states, while there are also a number of examples of religious and secular states that failed to provide for their people and oftentimes did commit horrible actions. In quoting me, you completely ignored the crux of my post regarding the topic at hand in favor of cherry-picking a few sentences and sentence fragments out of context, then attempting to use them to make me support "double standards" and "genocide", completely ignoring what I was trying to say.

If anyone would like to respond to my entire idea expressed in the post, then go ahead, a good debate never hurt anyone. But I would recommend staying on topic, make your own thread if you want to talk about genocide.

[Doktor Avalanche]

"God wills it!" was chanted by most Kings and Emperor's before they slaughtered thousands of innocent people, so all those who point to God being the one who appoints leaders to govern and rule are quite wrong. Power appoints rulers, not a deity. The end of a sword has given more power to despots and tyrants than some wench in a pool or a spider web in a cave.

Edited September 21, 2015 by VasiliusKonstantinos

[Ibrahim (Banned)]

You appear to have severely misunderstood my post, I'm not condoning war or other crimes, I simply pointed out that using the crimes committed by a country as a judge of whether it's government, be it secular or non-secular, is particularly effective or just is foolish given every country has committed some condemnable act at some point in history, thus making war, or any hypothetical war crimes, a poor metric on its own.

 

This topic is about secular and non-secular forms of governance, and whether they are "good" or "bad", as per the OP.

 

I believe you have severely misunderstood the OP (despite quoting him). We are judging whether or not secular governments are morally good or morally bad. Not about how efficient (or otherwise) they are.

Edited September 21, 2015 by Ibrahim

[Spite]

I think the UK should establish a Christian theocracy and deport Ibrahim for being an infidel.

 

Also pull down all the mosques and annul all non-Christian marriages and execute anyone who resists.

Edited September 21, 2015 by Spite

[Rozalia]

So the use of violence, even genocide, has to be overlooked? Okay, then at least be fair about it and apply that logic universally.

 

Lets not forget you're the person who when faced with the evil deeds of Islam in Persia against the Persians/Zoroastrians, decided to cowardly not say anything (after posting a video to try and whitewash it) instead of apologizing and owning up to it being a misdeed. You overlook all Islamic crimes and have even defended ISIS. You have no authority on any such talk, more so your laughable appeal to universal logic when you are the biggest case of someone who does not use such a thing.

[Bilal the Great]

Secularism is humanity's only hope against the religion menace and advancing our species.

[Aisha Greyjoy]

I believe God is the only legislator. Not human beings.

But who gets to say what God legislates?

[Spite]

But who gets to say what God legislates?

A nomad with a beard.

[Caecus]

History will not look kindly on Secularism. (It's not an opinion.)

 

I don't think I need to elaborate on the vast crimes of these secular countries:

 

5) Nazi Germany

 

Meh, for the record, the Nazi Regime was officially secular, but had religious themes throughout. Reading William L. Shirer's Rise and Fall of the Third Reich as a popular primary source, he tells stories of how Catholic church altars were replaced with a sword and a book of Mein Kampf, to which Germans would supposedly swear oaths to. In Nazi imagery, there are a number of religious symbolism, culminating into something strikingly similar to imperial cult worship. Picture below shows the infamous toothbrush mustache guy carrying a flag, with an eagle (or an angel, perhaps) above him, holy light shining down on him. Assuming that the object above his head is not an angel but an eagle (which would be more consistent with Nazi "secularism"), that still follows back to Roman worship of the Eagle, which was believed to be the physical manifestation of the god Jupiter. The "Third Reich" roughly translates to the third kingdom, where Hitler believed that the Roman Empire was the first, the Charlemagne empire the second, and his own the third. He was mostly trying to tie his Reich with the military successes of the previous two, but in doing so, he digs up a lot of old religious themes that he consistently uses both in his propaganda and his ideology.

 

The holy light, however, is much more consistent with neo-Roman/Gothic ideas on light (diffused in a building) as a means of holy essence. The light is most commonly interpreted as a divine favor or an essence of the divine himself. In this way, he relates himself to the old imperial cult worships of Roman emperors, who were believed to be divine. Below Hitler is the phrase in German (roughly, forgive my translation those of you who do speak German) "long live the fatherland," suggesting finally that he is a savior of Germany.  

 

http://www.pra.org/publicdl/Historical%20Documents/WWII%20Propaganda%20Posters/WWII%20Nazi%20Propaganda%20Posters/adolf%20hitler%20-%20es%20lebe%20deutchland.jpg

[The Governor]

History will not look kindly on Secularism. (It's not an opinion.)

 

I don't think I need to elaborate on the vast crimes of these secular countries:

 

1) America

2) Soviet Russia

3) Communist China

4) North Korea

5) Nazi Germany

6) Britain

7) France

8) Spain

9) Belgium

10) Israel

11) Rawanda

12) Serbia

13) Cambodia

 

Etc etc

As opposed to the crimes committed by Theocracies that existed throughout the vast majority of human history?

[Ibrahim (Banned)]

As opposed to the crimes committed by Theocracies that existed throughout the vast majority of human history?

 

As I said before: "Most existed before the development of modern weapons of war (when people fought with swords/bow and arrows), and Stalin alone killed far more people than all of them combined."

[The Governor]

As I said before: "Most existed before the development of modern weapons of war (when people fought with swords/bow and arrows), and Stalin alone killed far more people than all of them combined."

Stalin was an Atheist, but you can't dare say that the USSR was secular. They made their people worship the state as if it was a deity; as if the state was their savior.

[Ibrahim (Banned)]

Stalin was an Atheist, but you can't dare say that the USSR was secular. They made their people worship the state as if it was a deity; as if the state was their savior.

 

You are right, I concede my previous points. You can cross off the Atheist utopia's of USSR, Communist China, and North Korea from my list of criminal Secular states and also Nazi Germany while your at it (a nod to Caecus counterargument). There was no secularism in the USSR, in fact, they went out of their way to destroy religion altogether and to impose their austere atheist ideology on the people by force.

 

 

I find It funny how atheists who love to bash religion, at every given opportunity, suddenly become deftly quite whenever these points are raised about atheism 

 

 

I would give America as the primary example of a secular state who has killed many times, more people, than all theologies thorough out history combined.

[Kyoko]

 

And how about places like the Middle East and Iran? Granted, standard of living is better in the Middle East than in Iran, but they have committed several human rights violations.

What in gods name are you talking about, Iran is almost universally considered to be in the Middle East. And Standard of Living isn't bad in Iran compared to the rest of the middle east, its also a lot more stable than most of the middle east, less human rights violations too.

Also I'd like to add a lot of human rights violations and low standards of living can be traced to the history of Western Imperialism and "Interventions" in the area.

[Peace and War]

You are right, I concede my previous points. You can cross off the Atheist utopia's of USSR, Communist China, and North Korea from my list of criminal Secular states and also Nazi Germany while your at it (a nod to Caecus counterargument). There was no secularism in the USSR, in fact, they went out of their way to destroy religion altogether and to impose their austere atheist ideology on the people by force.

 

 

I find It funny how atheists who love to bash religion, at every given opportunity, suddenly become deftly quite whenever these points are raised about atheism 

 

 

I would give America as the primary example of a secular state who has killed many times, more people, than all theologies thorough out history combined.

If it wasn't for the Americans you would be speaking German right now.