[Paul7]

"Many laws make bad government. When the law is written on a people's heart, it need not be written in books. If the law is not written on their hearts, no multitude of laws and lawyers will maintain the rule of law. Written laws don't make people better, they make them behave."

Franklin Sanders


It does explain the decline of our society as people have turned from God. It is what the Founders meant when they said our system of government was made 'only for a moral and religious people, and is wholly inadequate for any other.'

[Animal Mother]

Originally Posted by Paul7

"Many laws make bad government. When the law is written on a people's heart, it need not be written in books. If the law is not written on their hearts, no multitude of laws and lawyers will maintain the rule of law. Written laws don't make people better, they make them behave."

Franklin Sanders


It does explain the decline of our society as people have turned from God. It is what the Founders meant when they said our system of government was made 'only for a moral and religious people, and is wholly inadequate for any other.'

How exactly has our society declined? When did this decline begin?

[Norske]

I believe that it is entirely possible to be a moral person but at the same time, NOT a religious person.

It is entirely possible to be a "religious" person yet NOT be a "moral" person.

Such as, the Rev. Jim Jones.

Any and all priests of the Spanish Inquisition.

Any and all Islamic suicide bombers.

Any and all religions lend themselves to fanacticism at some point in time.

When the fanatics hold sway, their religious beliefs take precedence over morality. At that point, NO evil is beyond them.

I think that mankind would be wise to simply abandon any and all religions and simply do its best to instill morality within the individuals who make up that society.

[Japle]

Many laws make bad government.

That depends on the laws. Bad laws make bad government.

When the law is written on a people's heart, it need not be written in books.

The problem with that is, you can’t get a dozen people to agree on what to have for breakfast, much less on which laws they like. If the laws “written on a peoples’ heart” are religion based, you’re going to have to get them to agree on a religion, and they won’t. It’s unrealistic to expect anything different.

If the law is not written on their hearts, no multitude of laws and lawyers will maintain the rule of law.

See above.

Written laws don't make people better, they make them behave.

No, written laws punish people when they misbehave. That is if you can catch them and get a jury to agree they misbehaved.

[Paul7]

Originally Posted by Norske

I believe that it is entirely possible to be a moral person but at the same time, NOT a religious person.

It is entirely possible to be a "religious" person yet NOT be a "moral" person.

Such as, the Rev. Jim Jones.

Jim Jones was more one of you guys:

"While Jones always spoke of the social gospel's virtues, before the late 1960s Jones chose to conceal that his gospel was actually communism.[12] By the late 1960s, Jones began at least partially openly revealing in Temple sermons his "Apostolic Socialism" concept.[12] Specifically, "those who remained drugged with the opiate of religion had to be brought to enlightenment — socialism."[36] Jones often mixed those concepts, such as preaching that "If you're born in capitalist America, racist America, fascist America, then you're born in sin. But if you're born in socialism, you're not born in sin."[37]

By the early 1970s, Jones began deriding traditional Christianity as "fly away religion," rejecting the Bible as being white men’s justification to subordinate women and subjugate people of color and stating that it spoke of a "Sky God" who was no God at all.[12] Jones authored a booklet titled "The Letter Killeth," criticizing the King James Bible.[38] Jones also began preaching that he was the reincarnation of Jesus of Nazareth, Mahatma Gandhi, Buddha, Vladimir Lenin, and Father Divine. In the documentary Jonestown: The Life and Death of Peoples Temple, former Temple member Hue Fortson, Jr. quoted Jones as saying, "What you need to believe in is what you can see ... If you see me as your friend, I'll be your friend. As you see me as your father, I'll be your father, for those of you that don't have a father ... If you see me as your savior, I'll be your savior. If you see me as your God, I'll be your God."[6]

By the spring of 1976, Jones began openly admitting even to outsiders that he was an atheist."

Wikipedia

I think that mankind would be wise to simply abandon any and all religions and simply do its best to instill morality within the individuals who make up that society.

What, whatever 51% think is right at a given time?

[Norske]

Originally Posted by Paul7

Jim Jones was more one of you guys:

"You" guys? If you mean "secularists", you are painting with too broad a brush. Jim Jones played his con based on the mindless acceptance of the religious "faithful". He convinced hundreds of his mind-numbed robots that God wanted them to feed cyanide to their kids and drink it themselves. Secularists would have told him to urinate up a rope, if they did not shoot him first!

Originally Posted by Paul7

"While Jones always spoke of the social gospel's virtues, before the late 1960s Jones chose to conceal that his gospel was actually communism.[12] By the late 1960s, Jones began at least partially openly revealing in Temple sermons his "Apostolic Socialism" concept.[12] Specifically, "those who remained drugged with the opiate of religion had to be brought to enlightenment — socialism."[36] Jones often mixed those concepts, such as preaching that "If you're born in capitalist America, racist America, fascist America, then you're born in sin. But if you're born in socialism, you're not born in sin."[37]

By the early 1970s, Jones began deriding traditional Christianity as "fly away religion," rejecting the Bible as being white men’s justification to subordinate women and subjugate people of color and stating that it spoke of a "Sky God" who was no God at all.[12] Jones authored a booklet titled "The Letter Killeth," criticizing the King James Bible.[38] Jones also began preaching that he was the reincarnation of Jesus of Nazareth, Mahatma Gandhi, Buddha, Vladimir Lenin, and Father Divine. In the documentary Jonestown: The Life and Death of Peoples Temple, former Temple member Hue Fortson, Jr. quoted Jones as saying, "What you need to believe in is what you can see ... If you see me as your friend, I'll be your friend. As you see me as your father, I'll be your father, for those of you that don't have a father ... If you see me as your savior, I'll be your savior. If you see me as your God, I'll be your God."[6]

By the spring of 1976, Jones began openly admitting even to outsiders that he was an atheist."

Wikipedia

Communist Secularists hate Religion because religion competes with Communism for the hearts and minds of their respective gullible followers. Both demand that the individual liberties of the individual be subsumed by the needs of the greater masses.

I am a secularist, true, but I am a secularist who believes in individual liberties.

As such, I denounce both Communism and Religion equally.

Mankind would be wise to abandon both.

Originally Posted by Paul7

What, whatever 51% think is right at a given time?

If 99.999999999% of my fellows were to vote that I should be enslaved, I would spend my remaining hours on this earth doing whatever was necessary to maintain my individual liberties. And in so doing, I would not be going to whatever awaits us all on the other side of death alone.

That millions or even billions adopted Communism in the last 150-odd years since Marx published his delusions, or that uncounted Billions of equally deluded individuals have embraced any and all religions for the past 10 or 15,000 years or so, does not make either Communism nor Religions any the less the delusions they equally, are.

[Paul7]

Originally Posted by Animal Mother

How exactly has our society declined? When did this decline begin?

http://www.disastercenter.com/crime/uscrime.htm

See the table listing various crimes per 100,000 people. Almost all categories are well above 1960 levels.

[Animal Mother]

Originally Posted by Paul7

http://www.disastercenter.com/crime/uscrime.htm

See the table listing various crimes per 100,000 people. Almost all categories are well above 1960 levels.

And they've also declined since the late-80s and early-90s. Not to mention the evidence that increasing rates were driven as much by increased technology and ability to solve crimes as they were by an increase in actual criminal activity. Nevertheless, if these raw statistics are the evidence, society is apparently rebounding from the decline described in the OP.

[Japle]

Almost all categories are well above 1960 levels.

You may think people are less religious than they were pre-1960, but I doubt it. People are much more likely to reveal their lack of religion now, because it was much less socially acceptable back then.

People in 1930 were just as smart as they are now. They knew nonsense when they saw it.

[Paul7]

Originally Posted by Animal Mother

And they've also declined since the late-80s and early-90s. Not to mention the evidence that increasing rates were driven as much by increased technology and ability to solve crimes as they were by an increase in actual criminal activity. Nevertheless, if these raw statistics are the evidence, society is apparently rebounding from the decline described in the OP.

My point stands that crime rates are much higher now than they were in 1960, and it corresponds from a general turning from God. IMHO whatever declines have happened have been partly due to more people owning guns and getting CCW permits. Why did they feel the need to be better armed?

[Japle]

Posted by Paul7:
My point stands that crime rates are much higher now than they were in 1960, and it corresponds from a general turning from God.

It also corresponds with an increase in ethanol production and flat-screen TVs and personal computers and the ownership of Japanese cars and digital cameras and the rise of the DJIA and gun control in the UK.

So what? Any connection is purely a matter of your opinion.

[Paul7]

Originally Posted by Japle

It also corresponds with an increase in ethanol production and flat-screen TVs and personal computers and the ownership of Japanese cars and digital cameras and the rise of the DJIA and gun control in the UK.

So what? Any connection is purely a matter of your opinion.

Nice dodge.

[Japle]

Nice dodge.

Not suprising that you don't even try to respond.

[Paul7]

Originally Posted by Japle

Not suprising that you don't even try to respond.

How do you respond to irrelevant analogies?

[Danny Reid]

My quote for the day

" I am frustrated because GOD won't reveal himself to me. But then I remember HE doesn't exist...so HE can't. Right? "

Lewis Black

[Animal Mother]

Originally Posted by Paul7

My point stands that crime rates are much higher now than they were in 1960, and it corresponds from a general turning from God.

Even if this were true, and I question both claims, correlation does not imply causation.

IMHO whatever declines have happened have been partly due to more people owning guns and getting CCW permits.

In 1960, the idea of a CCW permit wasn't an issue, most places didn't even have gun licenses and firearms purchases weren't regulated beyond NFA items.

[Japle]

Originally Posted by Japle:
Not surprising that you don't even try to respond.

Response by Paul7:
How do you respond to irrelevant analogies?

That was my point. Your analogies didn’t mean anything, either.
As AM said, correlation does not imply causation

[Paul7]

Originally Posted by Japle

That was my point. Your analogies didn’t mean anything, either.
As AM said, correlation does not imply causation

The Founders thought there was one when it came to this subject.

[juggy4711]

Originally Posted by Paul7

...It does explain the decline of our society as people have turned from God. It is what the Founders meant when they said our system of government was made 'only for a moral and religious people, and is wholly inadequate for any other.'

The vast majority of folks in the US ( 70+%) are Christian, so if society has declined it's y'all's fault. Turns out the moral part was far more important than the religious part. I am almost certain of your response to this but wonder if you are silly enough to post it.

[Japle]

Originally Posted by Japle:
That was my point. Your analogies didn’t mean anything, either.
As AM said, correlation does not imply causation.

Reply by Paul7:
The Founders thought there was one when it came to this subject.

Cite please.

[packsaddle]

hey, norske, if the origin of morality is not the Holy Bible/Christianity, go ahead and start a new thread explaining to us how morality evolved.

be sure and include all scientific evidence (observeable, testable, repeatable) that conclusively validates your claim.

remember, no storytelling or miracle words (i.e. "emerged", "appeared", etc.), just good old-fashioned scientific evidence.

also, please include your position on moral absolutes (the ethical view that certain actions are absolutely right or wrong).

looking forward to participating in the thread.

thanks!

[Animal Mother]

Originally Posted by packsaddle

hey, norske, if the origin of morality is not the Holy Bible/Christianity, go ahead and start a new thread explaining to us how morality evolved.

Hey packsaddle, if the origin of morality is the Holy Bible/Christianity, go ahead and start a new thread explaining to us how morality existed prior to the either of those things.

\also, please include your position on moral absolutes (the ethical view that certain actions are absolutely right or wrong).

Please, in your thread, state a moral absolute or two so we can discuss it.

[packsaddle]

haha, right on cue.

so, how about it norske, show us what you got.

(apologies to the OP for the minor threadjack)

i won't post in this thread anymore.....will wait for norske to enlighten us in a new thread.

carry on!

[GreenDrake]

Cherry picking statistics can go on for eternity to try and prove validity of a statement. Case in point.

[Kingarthurhk]

Originally Posted by Norske

I believe that it is entirely possible to be a moral person but at the same time, NOT a religious person.

It is entirely possible to be a "religious" person yet NOT be a "moral" person.

Such as, the Rev. Jim Jones.

Any and all priests of the Spanish Inquisition.

Any and all Islamic suicide bombers.

Any and all religions lend themselves to fanacticism at some point in time.

When the fanatics hold sway, their religious beliefs take precedence over morality. At that point, NO evil is beyond them.

I think that mankind would be wise to simply abandon any and all religions and simply do its best to instill morality within the individuals who make up that society.

If I won the lottery by some fluke of statistics, and paid you for your dental expenses would you stop hating God?