Make a government aethiest

[User1001]

Whats your opinion of the government approaching problems acting as aethiests.

 

[DanJ]

Could you please rephrase your question.

 

[Witling]

Not to speak for DanJ, but many people confuse aethiests with "proselytizing aeitheists." Ideally, IMO, peoples religious beliefs should not be directly available. I do not think that the nature of god or whether a god exists is a proper sphere of concern for government. I also think that the particular phrasing of religious text has some serious (well, at least, not inconsequential) ramifications. Well before the famed Christian "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you." came "Do not do to others what you do not want done to you." [This statement to get rid of the "Hey, I'm just posting the Ten Commandments" bvllshit.]

There is a large philosophical difference between these two similar statements. The government can legislate what it wants and needs, but it should stay completely out of other realms. I can persecute the unbelievers without official government permission.

 

[sandorski]

No, the government should stick to being a neutral party. "God" or "no God" should have nothing to do with it and it should have no opinion on such matters..

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: sandorski
No, the government should stick to being a neutral party. "God" or "no God" should have nothing to do with it and it should have no opinion on such matters..

I agree

 

[DanJ]

Originally posted by: sandorski
No, the government should stick to being a neutral party. "God" or "no God" should have nothing to do with it and it should have no opinion on such matters..

Yep.

 

[wkabel23]

Originally posted by: sandorski
No, the government should stick to being a neutral party. "God" or "no God" should have nothing to do with it and it should have no opinion on such matters..

Well put.

 

[Moonbeam]

Since God is God everybody should live by the Bible. When things are absolute they are absolute.

 

[Bowfinger]

Originally posted by: User1001
Whats your opinion of the government approaching problems acting as aethiests.

I think "agnostic" would be more appropriate, neither believing nor disbelieving.

 

[Witling]

A major disconnect between parts of a sentence,

First, "Since God is God"

Second, "everybody should live by the Bible."

First has absolutely nothing to do with second unless you impose some major assumptions.

 

[Czar]

Originally posted by: sandorski
No, the government should stick to being a neutral party. "God" or "no God" should have nothing to do with it and it should have no opinion on such matters..

jebb, this is how it should be, a compromise everyone should be happy with because it creates a state where everyone can practice what religion they want, I doubt christians want Islamic laws in the country laws and also the other way around

 

[chess9]

Perhaps you should ask God what she wants. I mean, we don't want to piss off any deities here on AT. Our lives are too difficult as it is.

Get back to us with her views and we'll form a committee to investigate whether we need a bill to have a pilot project to study the possibility of implementing a God Influence Administration. Or GIA. Just don't expect funding.



-RObert

 

[0roo0roo]

unless the government states definitively that there is no god, its not athiest.

 

[b0mbrman]

Originally posted by: Bowfinger

Originally posted by: User1001
Whats your opinion of the government approaching problems acting as aethiests.

I think "agnostic" would be more appropriate, neither believing nor disbelieving.

Well an agnostic may take issue with me being absolutely certain that there wasn't a God...

I'd really prefer government to not have an opinion at all about the matter...