Thread: Theists only please. Country or religion.

You can imagine any situation you like, but if one did occur in which you had to choose between your country or your religion, which would you choose ?

Before I vote, is it an "all other things being equal" poll? IOW, are both causes of equal value (equally good or bad)?

Yes all other things are equal. I didn't give an actual situation so it can be equally good or bad. I should also point out (just to be nice) that I'm not judging anyone or any group, I'm just interested to know.

Well in that case I choose my country over my religion.

I'm not really into religion (I'll more readily identify as a theist than as a Christian), and I know that my country is real, whereas my religion may be false. I may be fighting for a false cause in the latter, whereas it's more likely that I'll be fighting for a good cause in the former.

I didn't cast a vote but I think that just about anyone could imagine a situation where they would oppose their country's actions on moral grounds, if those actions were heinous enough, whether they are theists or not.

Awww... a bit unfair to have it theists only (in a sense), because, without voting I can't see the result of the vote! Will have to rely upon your reportage Cat.

In response to Harold, I suspect that the question might be more easily considered in the Rawlsian 'lexical' sense - that is that one consideration needs to be fulfilled before the other can begin to be fulfilled. If that were the choice, would religion (and the loyalty it might require of you) come first, or would you suggest that the domain of religion (again, not morality, since that is part of good citizenship in any case) has to stop when civil authority is involved?

Originally Posted by sunshinewarrio

Awww... a bit unfair to have it theists only (in a sense), because, without voting I can't see the result of the vote! Will have to rely upon your reportage Cat.

In response to Harold, I suspect that the question might be more easily considered in the Rawlsian 'lexical' sense - that is that one consideration needs to be fulfilled before the other can begin to be fulfilled. If that were the choice, would religion (and the loyalty it might require of you) come first, or would you suggest that the domain of religion (again, not morality, since that is part of good citizenship in any case) has to stop when civil authority is involved?

just click "view results" under "submit vote"

Originally Posted by geezer

Originally Posted by sunshinewarrio

Awww... a bit unfair to have it theists only (in a sense), because, without voting I can't see the result of the vote! Will have to rely upon your reportage Cat.

In response to Harold, I suspect that the question might be more easily considered in the Rawlsian 'lexical' sense - that is that one consideration needs to be fulfilled before the other can begin to be fulfilled. If that were the choice, would religion (and the loyalty it might require of you) come first, or would you suggest that the domain of religion (again, not morality, since that is part of good citizenship in any case) has to stop when civil authority is involved?

just click "view results" under "submit vote"

[Slapping-head-with-realisation of stupidity-e]

Ta.

[Slapping-head-with-realisation of stupidity-e]

Yeh, at least you asked it and not me! Oh shit, I just admitted it...

Only one vote up to now, this could get interesting. Especially with the accompanying comments.

Originally Posted by sunshinewarrio

Awww... a bit unfair to have it theists only (in a sense), because, without voting I can't see the result of the vote! Will have to rely upon your reportage Cat.

In response to Harold, I suspect that the question might be more easily considered in the Rawlsian 'lexical' sense - that is that one consideration needs to be fulfilled before the other can begin to be fulfilled. If that were the choice, would religion (and the loyalty it might require of you) come first, or would you suggest that the domain of religion (again, not morality, since that is part of good citizenship in any case) has to stop when civil authority is involved?

The question is way too vague and smacks of the kinds of arguments that were made when John F. Kennedy was running for President. People said he was Catholic, so maybe he would put his Catholicism first and turn the reins of government over to the Pope.

We need a specific scenario, in order to make any intelligent response.

Betray God or betray Britain!? I'd rather kill myself than do any!

Actually, If I had to betray one, I'd actually betray both so that neither has been fully neglected. In other words I'd become a Buddhist and go and live in America (or Spain).

I'm not religious so cant vote, however what I will say is I'm human first and foremost I hold no allegiance to any country or creed or religion, only to my fellow man, unfortunately the rest of the world does not think as I do, and are willing to kill each other for irrational reasons.

Originally Posted by pavlos

the rest of the world does not think as I do, and are willing to kill each other for irrational reasons.

Are there rational reasons for killing your fellow man? If so what are those reasons and why are they more rational than someone else's reasons to kill their fellow man?

Originally Posted by Harold14370

Originally Posted by pavlos

the rest of the world does not think as I do, and are willing to kill each other for irrational reasons.

Are there rational reasons for killing your fellow man? If so what are those reasons and why are they more rational than someone else's reasons to kill their fellow man?

I agree, there are many reasons that men kill other men. I've heard of atheist men who have killed another out of jealousy (say wife knocking off), that other man being athiest too. That murder had nothing to do with religion or nationality.

Well I didn't make up a scenario because every time I do the debate seems to centre on the scenario itself rather than the question, but if you want one, here goes……

Just for you Harold.

------------------------------

In the year 2012 the USA has just elected the fictional political party ‘Atheists forever’. Over the last 5 years the US has seen a major sift towards atheistism, and the party came to power with a record 90% of the votes mainly because of the promise to remove religion from American society. The new government with the support of the people has already started knocking down churches, mosques, synagogues, etc. All TV programs, newspapers, radio stations and all other forms of media have either close down or removed any reference to religion. Your religion is being systematically removed from your country. Religious belief has become a criminal offence, if you are caught you will receive a long prison sentence. Other than that everything is the same.

All is not lost though. Across the border, Canada with their newly elected Christian government is offering citizenship to all Americans who wish to emigrate there, however Canada has made a complete u-turn economically and socially over the last 5 years, completely unrecognisable to today’s Canada. Unemployment is as high as anywhere else in the world, human rights are being violated on a daily bases, high crime rate. It is not the kindest place in the world to live but they will allow you your religious freedom.

Your friends and family have been divided by the recent events, half have happily moved to Canada and half have stayed in the US with full backing for the government. Your wife (remember this is fictional) has run-off with the milkman so everything is 50/50. Most other countries in the world have followed a similar trend to the US, the small number that haven’t are mostly third world non-English speaking countries so it would be extremely difficult finding work there. All it comes down to in the end is a simple choice between your country or your religion. You are being forced to either choose your country but lose your religious freedom and in time your beliefs, or choose your religion but lose your country.

--------------------------------------------

Yes I know, it’s a stupid example and I also realise that it is not a good/good or bad/bad choice, but it’s the best I could do. Please try not to read too much into the details, it’s simply a choice between religion or country, one of them has to go.

Originally Posted by Cat1981(England)

Well I didn't make up a scenario because every time I do the debate seems to centre on the scenario itself rather than the question, but if you want one, here goes……

Just for you Harold.

------------------------------

In the year 2012 the USA has just elected the fictional political party ‘Atheists forever’. Over the last 5 years the US has seen a major sift towards atheistism, and the party came to power with a record 90% of the votes mainly because of the promise to remove religion from American society. The new government with the support of the people has already started knocking down churches, mosques, synagogues, etc. All TV programs, newspapers, radio stations and all other forms of media have either close down or removed any reference to religion. Your religion is being systematically removed from your country. Religious belief has become a criminal offence, if you are caught you will receive a long prison sentence. Other than that everything is the same.

All is not lost though. Across the border, Canada with their newly elected Christian government is offering citizenship to all Americans who wish to emigrate there, however Canada has made a complete u-turn economically and socially over the last 5 years, completely unrecognisable to today’s Canada. Unemployment is as high as anywhere else in the world, human rights are being violated on a daily bases, high crime rate. It is not the kindest place in the world to live but they will allow you your religious freedom.

Your friends and family have been divided by the recent events, half have happily moved to Canada and half have stayed in the US with full backing for the government. Your wife (remember this is fictional) has run-off with the milkman so everything is 50/50. Most other countries in the world have followed a similar trend to the US, the small number that haven’t are mostly third world non-English speaking countries so it would be extremely difficult finding work there. All it comes down to in the end is a simple choice between your country or your religion. You are being forced to either choose your country but lose your religious freedom and in time your beliefs, or choose your religion but lose your country.

--------------------------------------------

Yes I know, it’s a stupid example and I also realise that it is not a good/good or bad/bad choice, but it’s the best I could do. Please try not to read too much into the details, it’s simply a choice between religion or country, one of them has to go.

In that case, I would opt for religious freedom. It wouldn't be a question in my mind of religion vs country, it would be freedom vs tyranny. This would be a prime example of the reason for the Second Amendment.

Originally Posted by Cat1981(England)

Well I didn't make up a scenario because every time I do the debate seems to centre on the scenario itself rather than the question, but if you want one, here goes……

Just for you Harold.

------------------------------

In the year 2012 the USA has just elected the fictional political party ‘Atheists forever’. Over the last 5 years the US has seen a major sift towards atheistism, and the party came to power with a record 90% of the votes mainly because of the promise to remove religion from American society. The new government with the support of the people has already started knocking down churches, mosques, synagogues, etc. All TV programs, newspapers, radio stations and all other forms of media have either close down or removed any reference to religion. Your religion is being systematically removed from your country. Religious belief has become a criminal offence, if you are caught you will receive a long prison sentence. Other than that everything is the same.

All is not lost though. Across the border, Canada with their newly elected Christian government is offering citizenship to all Americans who wish to emigrate there, however Canada has made a complete u-turn economically and socially over the last 5 years, completely unrecognisable to today’s Canada. Unemployment is as high as anywhere else in the world, human rights are being violated on a daily bases, high crime rate. It is not the kindest place in the world to live but they will allow you your religious freedom.

Your friends and family have been divided by the recent events, half have happily moved to Canada and half have stayed in the US with full backing for the government. Your wife (remember this is fictional) has run-off with the milkman so everything is 50/50. Most other countries in the world have followed a similar trend to the US, the small number that haven’t are mostly third world non-English speaking countries so it would be extremely difficult finding work there. All it comes down to in the end is a simple choice between your country or your religion. You are being forced to either choose your country but lose your religious freedom and in time your beliefs, or choose your religion but lose your country.

--------------------------------------------

Yes I know, it’s a stupid example and I also realise that it is not a good/good or bad/bad choice, but it’s the best I could do. Please try not to read too much into the details, it’s simply a choice between religion or country, one of them has to go.

It just shows you what Germans in WWII had to face, especially when it came to the Jewish. The example you put here Cat is very much dictatorial if it happened. But your example clearly puts it into reality of the choice if it were real.

Other than the ability to leave the country for a new country, your scenario closely resembles the Soviet Union before Gorbechev and apparently where it is headed under Putin as well as Communist China under Mao and other communist countries, Islamic republics, or those run by despots -- read that Myanmar. And who knows what the socio-political basis of North Korea is?

As many as could or can leave those regimes were or are more than happy to; others have sometimes been killed or imprisoned as a result of their attempts to escape. I am not sure that religion was the entire basis of their attempts to leave their homeland. I think, as Harold suggests, it was more a matter of repression. Sometimes, even Muslims seek to escape the repression of their government, especially when that government is involved in sectarian discrimination.

But, more telling, where is it they want to go? Here, to countries that make up the highly Christian influenced Western civilization. Countries that enjoy freedom of political thought, freedom of expression and freedom of religion.