Morally Wrong Behavior vs. What the Civil Government Should Prohibit

[seer]

So you'd prefer to live in a theocracy?

When all those things that were illegal, even in my life time, were we a theocracy then?

[JimL]

When all those things that were illegal, even in my life time, were we a theocracy then?

You said you want a government that follows your theocratic beliefs, right?

[seer]

You said you want a government that follows your theocratic beliefs, right?

First answer me:When all those things that were illegal, were we a theocracy then? Yes or no?

[JimL]

First answer me:When all those things that were illegal, were we a theocracy then? Yes or no?

I didn't say we were a theocracy then, but you're suggestion was that you wish we were.

[seer]

I didn't say we were a theocracy then, but you're suggestion was that you wish we were.

Good, so you agree that we can have a religious influence on the law without being a theocracy?

[JimL]

Good, so you agree that we can have a religious influence on the law without being a theocracy?

There is a difference between religious influence and religious authoritarianism.

[seer]

There is a difference between religious influence and religious authoritarianism.

Well all the things I mentioned as being illegal were so because of religious influence and not religious authoritarianism.

[Tassman]

When all those things that were illegal, even in my life time, were we a theocracy then?

In effect the US was a theocracy then in that the vast majority of the population was Christian.

[Tassman]

And why is totalitarian rule bad? But the point I was making is that diversity was not necessary to create Western Civilization, nor is diversity necessarily a good. It could in fact undermine social cohesion.

Modern Western society has fought for (and seems to prefer) egalitarianism and democracy to the totalitarian patriarchal societies of earlier times.

Nonsense Tass, again I will ask where does the NT tell us to oppress anyone? Are we not taught to love our fellow man, and to follow the golden rule? Again, what do I believe that is different from the NT writers?

Christian slave owners said the same thing as did the oppressors of women and minority groups – and they all managed to justify their prejudices with scriptural quotes just as you do.

Now you are moving the goal posts, you were speaking of variants of human/animal sexuality. Which both rape and pedophilia are. Now you are pointing to consent! You think our primate cousins care about consent? So now you are attaching a moral judgement to natural sexual behavior.

Moral judgement applies to ALL human behavior, e.g. would you describe Harvey Weinstein or Jeffery Epstein as exhibiting natural human behavior or perversions of natural human behavior? I would argue the latter.

[seer]

In effect the US was a theocracy then in that the vast majority of the population was Christian.

No it wasn't! Were you forced to join a church or worship in a particular way? Or worship at all?

[seer]

Modern Western society has fought for (and seems to prefer) egalitarianism and democracy to the totalitarian patriarchal societies of earlier times.

That doesn't change anything I said. Modern Western society was born of patriarchal societies. It was the patriarchy that produced them. And the point that diversity was not, and is not, necessary. Diversity is a meaningless meme. China is doing fine in a patriarchal, non-diverse society.

Christian slave owners said the same thing as did the oppressors of women and minority groups – and they all managed to justify their prejudices with scriptural quotes just as you do.

I asked a specific question: where do my beliefs differ from NT principles?

Moral judgement applies to ALL human behavior, e.g. would you describe Harvey Weinstein or Jeffery Epstein as exhibiting natural human behavior or perversions of natural human behavior? I would argue the latter.

But why would you call them perversions? We find the same behaviors in higher primates, and historically in humans, so who decided that those behaviors are now immoral? Or are you merely justifying your personal biases?

[JimL]

Well all the things I mentioned as being illegal were so because of religious influence and not religious authoritarianism.

Right, but my point was that you would prefer to live under religious authoritarianism. A christian theocracy. Right?

[seer]

Right, but my point was that you would prefer to live under religious authoritarianism. A christian theocracy. Right?

Nope, because you can not force one to believe in or receive Christ. Nor, like Islam, should you try.

[Tassman]

That doesn't change anything I said. Modern Western society was born of patriarchal societies. It was the patriarchy that produced them.

Quite the reverse. Modern Western society was born of changing social values and the rejection of patriarchal dominance and this changed us into the diverse inclusive society we enjoy in the West today.

And the point that diversity was not, and is not, necessary. Diversity is a meaningless meme. China is doing fine in a patriarchal, non-diverse society.

It’s a question of what’s preferable rather than what’s necessary. Totalitarian regimes will survive OK – whether absolute monarchies or fascist dictatorships. But I personally would rather live in the free world, wouldn’t you?

I asked a specific question: where do my beliefs differ from NT principles?

Where did the beliefs of the Christian slave owners the oppressors of women and minority groups differ from NT principles? They justified them with their particular understanding of scripture just as you justify your beliefs. This difference in the interpreting of scripture is why there are so many religious wars in the name of Jesus – each side just knows they are the ones who have got it right. Don’t you.

But why would you call them perversions?

Humans have rarely tolerated rape or preying on the vulnerable as acceptable – except in war, tragically. And the frequency of child-rape in families or by priests and pastors – or anyone in a position of power and authority - has never been accepted as appropriate or normal.

We find the same behaviors in higher primates, and historically in humans, so who decided that those behaviors are now immoral?

I know of no accounts of forced sex with juveniles among nonhuman primates. Admittedly bonobos engage in frequent sex in "all possible combinations"—including adults with juveniles—but they do not have sex with unwilling partners.

Or are you merely justifying your personal biases?

You are, not I.

[Tassman]

Nope, because you can not force one to believe in or receive Christ. Nor, like Islam, should you try.

But you can attempt to force non-believers to live in a society governed according to your personal religious principles.