America's decline of morality

[pattygreen 5]

You are correct, there are plenty of religious schools in this country, but they are all private schools. Most American's can't afford to send their children to private school. At least I know I didn't send my daughter to private school, because I couldn't afford it.

True. And I feel that those who don't want christianity (prayers to God and bible teachings) in school should pay to go to private schools that exclude God. Not the other way around. We were doing just fine with prayers to God in public schools before 1960's or around there.

You are also correct that the founding fathers did not want an established government religion. That was a large part of the reason from breaking away from England in the first place. Britain has The Church of England. Our founders didn't want an established government church, which does not mean they didn't want any religion at all in our schools or other public places.

exactly!

There is a huge difference in having a government run church, and having a prayer said prior to a sporting event beginning. Madeline O'Hare made sure all of that stopped back in the 1960's. One of the worst people that ever got her agenda passed in MHO.

I wholeheartedly agree.

Again, they were definitely against a government run religion. I personally think they would be appalled by what goes on in this nations schools on a daily basis concerning the total lack of God in school.

More like shocked!

A specific religion shouldn't be taught, but the existance of God should be. That's not a religion. Kids can't even hand out candy canes at Christmas, nor learn the possibility of creationism instead of Darwin's theory of evolution in our science classes. I think both should be taught and let the kids make up their own minds, with the help of their parents discussing it with them at home. I was taught both in school, and it didn't hurt me. I don't think it would hurt today's children any more than it did us.

I have to agree with the original post that the morals of this country are in the dirt. If it feels good then it's ok seems to be the norm these days. Of course, the president making the oval office into a sex room for himself and an intern didn't teach our children any morals either. Whole different thread, so I won't get started on that.

How can we correct the morals of this country without a guide book, for everyone out there has a differing opinion on what is right and wrong for each individual? We can't make laws that we agree upon because the liberals and the conservatives are sooooo far apart in their thinking, that they will never agree upon the issues. This is why God gave us the scriptures.

Joan

.................................................................

[pattygreen 5]

I do though take issue with people like Patty saying that “everything” in the Bible is good and wonderful or folks like you that choose to pretend the bad things aren't there, neither of those seem very right or ok to me.

I have never stated that everything in the bible is good and wonderful. Just that everything in the bible is true. I believe that the bible needs to be read in its full context and even studied some in order to understand some of the things that God has allowed. Mankind is truly sinful. We kill and destroy and lie and steal and the list goes on and on. God shows us our sinfulness in scripture so that we will recognize our need for a Savior. We just can't be good on our own. Many of the stories in the bible, especially in the O.T., show us this. Not everything God has willed or planned for man to do. Man does what he feels is right in his own eyes, and always has and will. God has ordered war in the days of old for many differing reasons, just like leaders today order war for their own reasons. (sometimes it is for vengeance, sometimes for protection, sometimes for freedom rights, sometimes it's simply to keep the land that belongs to you, etc.) But it's not wrong to go to war. Yes, people are killed in war,and that's a tragedy, but sometimes war is an evil necessity.

[pattygreen 5]

Since a school is a public institution, as soon as a particular religion’s prayer is sponsored in school, that religion just became the official government sponsored religion. Just how would you propose which one is the right one to choose? How would you feel if the choice was not your religion of preference?

The one to choose is the one that we began with!

How is teaching about God not teaching about religion? Which God would you have them teach about? Creationism is purely in the realm of religion and has no basis in science, as such it is totally inappropriate to teach in public school science classes.

And evolution is just some mans theory, and shouldn't be taught either.

Again, the creationism you speak of is specific to only a few religions, if it is taught in public schools that would mean that the government is embracing a particular religion, that is simply not acceptable in a secular democracy.

Creationism is merely the teaching that God made mankind. If there is a painting, there must be an artist.

..................................................................

[pattygreen 5]

It's absolutely laughable to claim the America of days gone by was somehow more "moral" than today. The "sins" may have been different and the media spotlight didn't exist the way it does today so it may have been easier to ignore, that's all. There were no hidden cameras or bugged offices. Wake up: Bill Clinton was in no way the first president to use the Oval Office for illicit dalliances, you know. He was just unlucky enough to get caught.

Really, if anyone thinks America's history of slaughtering native peoples, slavery, child labor, voting inequity, political corruption on massive scales, and all the rest constitute a higher moral ground just because there may have been a morning prayer in the public schools...well, I have no words.

False piety has been used to cover up appalling behavior from time immemorial--it's high time we look to some other code of morality.

Mankind has always been full of iniquity. But, it is one thing to privately commit sin and be privately immoral. It is quite another to openly do it and then to want others to accept it and to change the laws against it and then to say altogether that there is nothing wrong with what you are doing and then to turn it completely around and say that those who are against what you do are the ones who are haters and intollerant and bigots for not just allowing you to do whatever you feel is okay.

Immorality has always been there, like you say, but not as accepting as today. Today, anything goes. What once wasn't even spoken about privately is now shouted publicly. I believe God is not pleased with mankinds laxidaisy attitude about sin.

[Lydiafree 0]

Because, unless we're reading different Bibles, I can't for the life of me remember the passage indicating rape is a-ok. Perhaps you can un-sugarcoat my memory?

Then you're either reading the Children's Bible or you're feigning confusing. Either way, one who's actually read it and not trying to pretend it's a pretty, flowerly moral story would easily recognize:

Judges 21:10-24

Numbers 31:7-18

Zechariah 14:1-2

Deuteronomy 20:10-14

Deuteronomy 21:10-14

Deuteronomy 22:28-29 (my personal "favorite" - force a rape victim to marry the pig that attacked her)

Deuteronomy 22:23-24 (or your stone HER to death)

And, before anyone tries to claim that Jesus changed everything:

Matthew 5:17-19

"Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil."

But oh no, the bible never advocates rape. Nosiree.

[pattygreen 5]

Well, I dont have anything meaningful to contribute to this thread but I wanted to take a moment to appreciate Lydiafree for this quote:

“The way to see by faith is to shut the eye of reason.” Benjamin Franklin Poor Richard's Almanack, 1758

Which is why it is next to impossible to have logical disagreements on subjects like this. I admire those who try. There is an awesome book by Susan Jacoby named 'Freethinkers: A History of American Secularism.'

• This incomplete quote has the opposite meaning of the original which reads:
  

"The Way to see by Faith, is to shut the Eye of Reason: The Morning Daylight appears plainer when you put out your Candle." He has also said: "I believe there is one Supreme most perfect being. ... I believe He is pleased and delights in the happiness of those He has created; and since without virtue man can have no happiness in this world, I firmly believe He delights to see me virtuous. "And: If Men are so wicked as we now see them with Religion what would they be if without it?

And: I've lived, Sir, a long time, and the longer I live, the more convincing Proofs I see of this Truth — That God governs in the Affairs of Men.

He also is the one who at the Constitutional convention reminded the men there of the importance to open each assembly with prayer to God for help and guidiance in governing. (which they still do to this day thankfully)

[Lydiafree 0]

the girls were to be used as brides (thus the virgin stipulation)

BTW, romantic love wasn't considered an important part of marriage until the Victorian era

My goodness this is chilling misogyny. USED as brides - with not even a moment's thought to what the "bride" wanted. That's rape.

And if she was married, and therefore dirty, she should be killed.

Extra disgusting points for pretending that rape has anything to do with "victorian era" marriage.

So, this wonderful loving god in one passage advocates rape and murder. how uplifting.

Edited June 11, 2009 by Lydiafree

[Lydiafree 0]

“The way to see by faith is to shut the eye of reason.” Benjamin Franklin Poor Richard's Almanack, 1758

I notice that Ms. Green's "expanded" version lacks source info. Where did she get it?

Which is why it is next to impossible to have logical disagreements on subjects like this. I admire those who try. There is an awesome book by Susan Jacoby named 'Freethinkers: A History of American Secularism.'

There is no "logical" disagreement because only one side is using logic. "True" believers simply regurgitate whatever someone else told them to say, however mindbogglingly illlogical, nonsensical or outright stupid it is.

She also wrote: The Age of American Unreason. It's frankly chilling how this convo alone has proven so much of her book correct.

[pattygreen 5]

My goodness this is chilling misogyny. USED as brides - with not even a moment's thought to what the "bride" wanted. That's rape.

And if she was married, and therefore dirty, she should be killed.

Extra disgusting points for pretending that rape has anything to do with "victorian era" marriage.

So, this wonderful loving god in one passage advocates rape and murder. how uplifting.

When in the cases where God sent men to war, these women were not like the women of today. They were much like children who depended on their parents for survival. These men took the women who were left husbandlesss by war and cared for them by marrying them. It was the righteous thing to do. You wouldn't leave a child behind on the battlefield where all the adults were killed, would you? They weren't raped, either. They were married and then cared for. They were also given a time to mourn their losses before being entered into the new married union. They were thankful for the men who took them. Some women were left behind and who knows what happened to them. Since women didn't have jobs to support themselves, many turned to prostitution, and with all the men killed in the war, who would pay them for their bodies? All I'm saying is you don't see the full picture. You read the story, yet didn't go back in time to their predicament. Also, the bible needs to be read in its full context to understand what God is doing and saying and all of his purposes.

Edited June 11, 2009 by pattygreen

[gingerbug 3]

• This incomplete quote has the opposite meaning of the original which reads:
  

"The Way to see by Faith, is to shut the Eye of Reason: The Morning Daylight appears plainer when you put out your Candle." He has also said: "I believe there is one Supreme most perfect being. ... I believe He is pleased and delights in the happiness of those He has created; and since without virtue man can have no happiness in this world, I firmly believe He delights to see me virtuous. "And: If Men are so wicked as we now see them with Religion what would they be if without it?

And: I've lived, Sir, a long time, and the longer I live, the more convincing Proofs I see of this Truth — That God governs in the Affairs of Men.

He also is the one who at the Constitutional convention reminded the men there of the importance to open each assembly with prayer to God for help and guidiance in governing. (which they still do to this day thankfully)

the point being, in order to view your world through the eyes of 'believing' you have to reject reason. You can spin it anyway you like but it all comes down to that. The discussion is even impossible to have with you because you base your beliefs on hearsay, not logic.

[pattygreen 5]

Also, in Judges 21, God did not tell these men to do what they did. Men are sinful, and do wrong all the time. God simply tells the story of their actions in the bible. If you read the last verse in that chapter, it reads, "In those days, Israel had no king. Everyone did as he saw fit."

[Lydiafree 0]

They weren't raped, either. They were married and then cared for.

Against their will. That. Is. Rape.

They were also given a time to mourn their losses before being entered into the new married union.

Oh how nice. They were allowed to mourn their slaughtered families before being raped for the rest of their lives.

They were thankful for the men who took them.

And you know this how? Assuming this "thankfulness" is even mentioned, it was reported and recorded BY THE RAPISTS.

The truth is smacking you in the face here, Ms. Green.

All I'm saying is you don't see the full picture. You read the story, yet didn't go back in time to their predicament. Also, the bible needs to be read in its full context to understand what God is doing and saying and all of his purposes.

All I'm saying is you don't see the full picture. You read the story, you will do backflips to manufacture excuses for calling rape something else so you can continue to lie to yourself about how wonderful your imaginary master is. Also, the bible needs to be read in its full context - which includes the perspectives of OTHER people aside from the victors and rapists. History recorded by the winners is never an honest, accurate portrait of events.

[pattygreen 5]

I notice that Ms. Green's "expanded" version lacks source info. Where did she get it?

The same almanac. I don't recall who posted it, but they just left out the 2nd half of what he wrote.

[pattygreen 5]

Against their will. That. Is. Rape.

If you take a child off the battlefield,and care for him to protect him, it is also against his will, because they would rather be with their parents. But it was the right thing to do. Women were just as children back then. They depended on men for their survival. In the end, they were grateful.

Oh how nice. They were allowed to mourn their slaughtered families before being raped for the rest of their lives.

Women were grateful to be married and to be able to have children with their husbands. Their husbands that were killed in the war before they were taken were most likely not the men they would have chosen either. Women married who they were told to marry back then, not who they loved or wanted to marry. So, they weren't being raped, they were fulfilling their marital duty and did not see it as a person today who is raped views unwanted sex.

And you know this how? Assuming this "thankfulness" is even mentioned, it was reported and recorded BY THE RAPISTS.

No. It was recorded by God. Everything written in the bible is exactly as God wanted it written.

The truth is smacking you in the face here, Ms. Green.

All I'm saying is you don't see the full picture. You read the story, you will do backflips to manufacture excuses for calling rape something else so you can continue to lie to yourself about how wonderful your imaginary master is. Also, the bible needs to be read in its full context - which includes the perspectives of OTHER people aside from the victors and rapists. History recorded by the winners is never an honest, accurate portrait of events.

.................................................................

[Lydiafree 0]

God isn't cruel. He is very loving. But, He is also very just. If you refuse to acknowledge him, he will refuse to acknowledge you. Why isn't that fair?

If, as you say, he controls everything, my not acknowledging him is his plan, something he knew I would do, and something I couldn't chose not to do owing to his controlling everything and planning it.

He therefore first created me to be an atheist and then punishes me for it.

That's the very definition of "unfair".

First of all, that was not his plan for you. His plan was for you to believe in Him. "It is not God's will that any should perish."(2Peter3:9)

So you don't feel he's omnipotent and omniscient then? Not much of a supreme diety, then.

BTW, hell is a place of torment because the people living there know that they could be some place far better if they had not rejected their creator.

Which he created, and then placed there all the people he created and created to reject him.

You make your god out to be like a kid holding a magnifying glass burning insects.

Yes, all who believed in him are in Heaven with Him.

Then hell is fine with me.

Who says it's a lie? Your own dearly departed believed it. Were they duped, too?

Yes, they were. I will continue to be convinced it’s a lie until I see proof otherwise.

It's a self-serving lie as well. You've said, multiple times now, that being obedient to your imaginary master means YOU get rewarded for it. So, are you only doing it to be rewarded? How is that moral?

But why settle on Hell when you can have Heaven?

Why does your god first create atheists (and Muslims, Buddhists, etc etc) and then punish them for it?

What does it matter to such a powerful being that I (and billions upon billions of others) don't believe in him? If we're good people, why does it matter? Why is he so selfish and vain?