View Single Post
Old 11-17-2012, 16:55   #3
Chronos
Senior Member
 
Chronos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 3,985
Quote:
Originally Posted by Syclone538 View Post
I'm not sure I agree with this.



If I did agree that these U.S. were historically moral, which I'm unsure on, I would disagree with this anyway.

Capitalism was the key to growth and prosperity.



I think moral religious people are moral despite their religion, not because of it.



I could be wrong, but I'm thinking the minimal government that we are supposed to have, and did have in the past, didn't give many people the option of using state force against others. I don't think it's because they didn't want to.



Well we no longer have capitalism, we have crony capitalism, and that's what happens.



I think so, because I think that even religious people have reason based ethics, and that's why they ignore the worst parts of their chosen holy book.

And I strongly disagree with "but-excellent ethics (religious guidelines)".
So, condensing my thoughts into a post, and now reading your thoughts has me leaning toward your position, for the following reason. There were historically a huge number of countries that were highly christian, but where prosperity never really broke out in a manner comparable to the US. This seems to suggest the fundamental ethical principle was completely independent of the religious background -- if they reinforced each other in the US, it was merely because they had both already been widely adopted.

Anyway, thanks for some quality thoughts on this -- I regard this as a very important issue to get straight.
__________________
If you've already accepted that "violence against the innocent" is a morally legitimate means of funding the government, who are you to complain when the majority apprporiates your legacy and sells your children into a lifetime of debt slavery?

Last edited by Chronos; 11-17-2012 at 16:56..
Chronos is offline   Reply With Quote