Excerpts from Romney's speech about his religion - Page 16 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 12-08-2007, 09:57 PM   #226
Refugee
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,943
Local Time: 07:57 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by phillyfan26
But they're not a democracy...
Their not a democracy, but certainly claimed to give everyone equal rights, although in reality that was not the case. Just because a country is a democracy does not mean all of its citizens have equal rights.
__________________

__________________
Strongbow is offline  
Old 12-08-2007, 09:59 PM   #227
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,697
Local Time: 01:57 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Strongbow

Just because a country is a democracy does not mean all of its citizens have equal rights.
And you're fine with that?
__________________

__________________
BVS is online now  
Old 12-08-2007, 10:00 PM   #228
Refugee
 
MadelynIris's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Craggy Island
Posts: 1,504
Local Time: 02:57 PM
Quote:
He even alluded to this whole thing as a "holy war", or something similar to that.
If our enemy thinks its a holy war, is it?
__________________
MadelynIris is offline  
Old 12-08-2007, 10:01 PM   #229
Refugee
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,943
Local Time: 07:57 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by BonoVoxSupastar


For completely different reasons.

In a democracy I haven't seen one secular argument against gay marriage. Not one, just those of narrow religious interpretations.
Well, what are the two different reasons, and how do you know that both have not been expressed in a democracy before? Was slavery and the slave trade justified through religion?
__________________
Strongbow is offline  
Old 12-08-2007, 10:01 PM   #230
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 30,343
Local Time: 02:57 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Strongbow
Just because a country is a democracy does not mean all of its citizens have equal rights.
I think you need to clarify this statement.
__________________
phillyfan26 is offline  
Old 12-08-2007, 10:04 PM   #231
ONE
love, blood, life
 
indra's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 12,689
Local Time: 03:57 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by yolland
I have to say I didn't personally detect any generalized animosity towards religious people in the thread. Perhaps if I were a moderate or progressive evangelical some of it might have hit unpleasantly closer to home; I'm not sure. What melon actually said was that people of faith "has become a loaded term" for reactionary zealot, yet that in a "connotation-free world", he too would feel fully comfortable labeling himself a person of faith. In other words, in evangelical conservative political rhetoric there's a pattern of invoking a symbolic, 'person-of-faith' Everyman voter who embodies not just the presence of religious belief, but a commitment to a political agenda of getting certain specifically religious goals important to evangelicals enshrined in legislation (keeping gay marriage illegal, making abortion illegal, opposition to sex education in schools, getting creationism into school science curriculums, etc.). That goes a bit beyond what the rather innocent-sounding phrase 'influenced by religious beliefs' suggests in that it's highly organized, and organized along openly religious lines at that. I think it's a bit misleading to analogize that process to, say, African-American or women's groups hosting forums in which candidates court their votes by promising to prioritize certain issues important to those groups, because it's quite possible (and, indeed, the norm) for the candidates they ultimately throw their support behind to not be black/female at all--just someone whose platform they like on "our" issues, which is all they were hoping for to begin with. I really don't think you can credibly say that's the norm for evangelical conservative groups, both because the candidate's personal faith really does matter to them, and (relatedly) because the prioritization and framing of those issues is so intimately linked to an evangelical conservative perspective that any candidate who doesn't fit that description themselves is unlikely to satisfy. While it would be hyperbole to equate the realization of those goals with established state religion per se, I think one can understand the concern--after all, had established state religions not had the history they did (and do) of circumscribing personal liberties for the sake of religious-mandated imperatives, they probably wouldn't hold anything like the disreputable place they generally do in the Western mind.

While Romney's speech, as several posters have already noted, was clearly looking to play up what Romney has in common with evangelical conservatives ("There is one fundamental question about which I often am asked. What do I believe about Jesus Christ? I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God and the Savior of mankind") while offering a few feelgood nods in the direction of certain affinity-inspiring traits associated with some religious minorities (the "ancient traditions of the Jews", the "commitment to frequent prayer of the Muslims"), I can certainly understand why nonreligious Americans might have found it particularly alienating, on account of the "freedom requires religion just as religion requires freedom" theme running throughout it--wholly uncountered by anything resembling e.g. GWB's "good people of no faith at all" nod, which Irvine cited earlier. Taken literally, it would appear to suggest that nonreligious Americans are innately less capable of cherishing and preserving "freedom" than religious Americans--and, after all, who wants someone who doesn't value "freedom" influencing politics, let alone holding public office? And while Romney doesn't explicitly say so, it's difficult not to get the impression that when he invokes the "establishment" of a "new" (state?) "religion" of "secularism," he means that to be taken in light of his "freedom requires religion" theme...ergo, opposition to the agenda of those whose support he seeks, and in particular to its explicitly religious-based nature, constitutes an attack on "freedom." Effectively: You're telling me it violates others' personal liberty to deny marriage to gay people on the grounds that our religion says homosexuality is wrong...well, right back at ya: you're violating our personal liberty by protesting that that's an illegitimate basis for defining the law of the land. It's a clever rhetorical maneuver, because it dances around the loaded question of just how different the tailoring of laws which affect everyone to suit the explicitly religious agenda of some particular religious group really is in practice from having an established state religion.
Damn. Now that's a hell of a good post!
__________________
indra is offline  
Old 12-08-2007, 10:05 PM   #232
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,697
Local Time: 01:57 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Strongbow


Well, what are the two different reasons, and how do you know that both have not been expressed in a democracy before? Was slavery and the slave trade justified through religion?
Actually slavery was justified by religion by many. Same as interracial marriage ban.

We are living in a democracy, you bringin up the USSR is just a diversionary tactic to avoid the fact that you can't discuss the actual topic at hand.

If we're discussing women's rights, would you bring up the Middle East? I mean come on, pal.
__________________
BVS is online now  
Old 12-08-2007, 10:12 PM   #233
Refugee
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,943
Local Time: 07:57 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by BonoVoxSupastar
Strongbow, would you support someone who wanted to make it a law that you couldn't lay with a woman who was mensturating?

Does that have a place in our political environment?
No, and Mitt Romney is not going to make a law that you can't lay with a mensturating women. This is the governor of Massachusetts, the most liberal state in the Union, remember. You would find out a lot more about how Romney would govern by examining his record in Massachusetts rather than this overreaction to general religious comments in a speech.
__________________
Strongbow is offline  
Old 12-08-2007, 10:15 PM   #234
Refugee
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,943
Local Time: 07:57 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by BonoVoxSupastar


And you're fine with that?
Uh, no its a statement of fact.
__________________
Strongbow is offline  
Old 12-08-2007, 10:20 PM   #235
Blue Crack Addict
 
Moonlit_Angel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In a dimension known as the Twilight Zone...do de doo doo, do de doo doo...
Posts: 19,271
Local Time: 01:57 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by MadelynIris
If our enemy thinks its a holy war, is it?
As pointed out by Strongbow, I got it wrong, "crusade" was the word I was thinking of (thanks for the correction, Strongbow).

But either way...so, we're basically agreeing with our enemy? If they want to use religion as their reason for the war, that's their problem to deal with. But we should be above that and just not go there.

Quote:
Originally posted by Strongbow
Peoples beliefs, faith or non-faith, are the same in this respect. Both could be seen as influencing policy on different issues by people.
I fully agree. But we're talking about people of faith right now, since the whole topic is about the influence of religion on politics. If we were talking about an atheist's influence on politics, then talking about the non-faith based reasons for making laws would make sense.

Angela
__________________
Moonlit_Angel is offline  
Old 12-08-2007, 10:20 PM   #236
Refugee
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,943
Local Time: 07:57 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by BonoVoxSupastar


Actually slavery was justified by religion by many. Same as interracial marriage ban.

We are living in a democracy, you bringin up the USSR is just a diversionary tactic to avoid the fact that you can't discuss the actual topic at hand.

If we're discussing women's rights, would you bring up the Middle East? I mean come on, pal.
I was not the one who claimed that being against gay marriage derives only from a purely religious point of view.

One can support a wide variety of policies without being a religious person.

I think there is little to get all excited about in Romney's speech, unless your fishing for it.
__________________
Strongbow is offline  
Old 12-08-2007, 10:21 PM   #237
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,697
Local Time: 01:57 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Strongbow


No, and Mitt Romney is not going to make a law that you can't lay with a mensturating women. This is the governor of Massachusetts, the most liberal state in the Union, remember. You would find out a lot more about how Romney would govern by examining his record in Massachusetts rather than this overreaction to general religious comments in a speech.
You missed the point. The point is if you allow something that is strictly a religious view to become law, you open yourself to this law as well. These types of views need to be kept within the private lives, not the law.
__________________
BVS is online now  
Old 12-08-2007, 10:21 PM   #238
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,697
Local Time: 01:57 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Strongbow


Uh, no its a statement of fact.
One that some of us are trying to change, I'm sorry you aren't.
__________________
BVS is online now  
Old 12-08-2007, 10:23 PM   #239
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,697
Local Time: 01:57 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Strongbow


I was not the one who claimed that being against gay marriage derives only from a purely religious point of view.

You didn't have to claim that, it's fact.

Like I said there isn't one logical secular reason for it.
__________________
BVS is online now  
Old 12-08-2007, 10:25 PM   #240
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,697
Local Time: 01:57 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Strongbow

I think there is little to get all excited about in Romney's speech, unless your fishing for it.
Or if you put it in context with the political environment of today.

No one's fishing, just putting it in context.
__________________

__________________
BVS is online now  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:57 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com