Nope, I want religion to be out of office, not the people who believe it.
And how do you separate the two? People's eligious beliefs are a part of them. The deity part aside it's a moral code, behavioural norms, a way of life. All of which would affect any policy decisions they're involved in. Just as an environmentalist's views would affect his policy making. Can I say I want environmentalism out of office, but not the people who believe in it? Or socialism out of office, but not socialists? Sounds ridiculous to me.
They never proposed taking the religion out of the office holders nor did any of them propose excluding religion from the public dialogue.
But they did propose taking religious dialogue out of the discussions by office holders. That's the important factor. They can hold their beliefs, but they shouldn't be governing based on them.
$1:
The government was designed to be a secular government for a religious nation and the idea was that the power of government would be held in check by the convictions of the men running it.
Men without convictions know no limits to their behavior aside only from that which they impose on themselves and that rarely ends well.
The implication is one can not have convictions without Religion?
They never proposed taking the religion out of the office holders nor did any of them propose excluding religion from the public dialogue.
But they did propose taking religious dialogue out of the discussions by office holders. That's the important factor. They can hold their beliefs, but they shouldn't be governing based on them. [quote]
What should they base their governance on then? 2d20?
They never proposed taking the religion out of the office holders nor did any of them propose excluding religion from the public dialogue.
But they did propose taking religious dialogue out of the discussions by office holders. That's the important factor. They can hold their beliefs, but they shouldn't be governing based on them.
$1:
What should they base their governance on then? 2d20?
I have no idea what a 2d20 is...
Depends on the area I suppose, for instance, injection religion into this:
What should they base their governance on then? 2d20?
In a lot of ways such a system would make for an absolutely awesome world. Roll an 88 and you kill the dragon. Roll under that and you lose all your health care coverage for the next ten years.
Then you want religious people excluded from representative office? Hope you have an army to back that up because that's what you'll need.
Nope, I want religion to be out of office, not the people who believe it. So did your Founding Fathers.
They never proposed taking the religion out of the office holders nor did any of them propose excluding religion from the public dialogue.
The government was designed to be a secular government for a religious nation and the idea was that the power of government would be held in check by the convictions of the men running it.
Men without convictions know no limits to their behavior aside only from that which they impose on themselves and that rarely ends well.
I don't care what people believe in what God...I do care that there appears to be a mannequin in the Prime Minister position (and he won 3 F'ing elections!!! That is just alarming.).
If a mannequin can become PM it just goes to show how plastic and unappealing those other parties leadership candidates are.
Oh that's right, based on your criteria for PM, the Liberals will win the next election because their mannequin is prettier than the Conservative mannequin.
I'd say there's a good chance you'll be even more alarmed in couple of years.
The implication is one can not have convictions without Religion?
Certainly one can. Might one govern according to those convictions? It's ok as long as they're not religiously based?
Depends, are they based in nonsense as well?
Define nonsense. is Elizabeth May's version of environmentalism nonsense? A lot of people would say so. Should she be barred from politics? What about Mulcair's economic ideas? If I think they're based on nonsense can I have him excluded from the political process?
What should they base their governance on then? 2d20?
In a lot of ways such a system would make for an absolutely awesome world. Roll an 88 and you kill the dragon. Roll under that and you lose all your health care coverage for the next ten years.
I honestly can't say for sure if we would be any worse off.
Can I apply for the DM job? I'd like to get to decide what you have to roll to legalize pot, or bring back the death penalty.
What should they base their governance on then? 2d20?
In a lot of ways such a system would make for an absolutely awesome world. Roll an 88 and you kill the dragon. Roll under that and you lose all your health care coverage for the next ten years.
I honestly can't say for sure if we would be any worse off.
Can I apply for the DM job? I'd like to get to decide what you have to roll to legalize pot, or bring back the death penalty.
Ohhhh can I be the Chaotic Evil player even if I lose all my stuff do to my own fault I can steal everyone else's things. Wait would make me a liberal or a politician?
What should they base their governance on then? 2d20?
In a lot of ways such a system would make for an absolutely awesome world. Roll an 88 and you kill the dragon. Roll under that and you lose all your health care coverage for the next ten years.
Just goes to show you how long I've been out of that scene - we used to use two 10-sided dice for such rolls...