What's Wrong With America? A Debate On Judeo-Christian Values Between Ben Shapiro And Sean Illing

  
Via:  john-russell  •  2 weeks ago  •  46 comments

What's Wrong With America? A Debate On Judeo-Christian Values Between Ben Shapiro And Sean Illing

S E E D E D   C O N T E N T


Sean Illing

You open the book with a parade of statistics showing how bad things are — record drug overdoses, declining marriage rates, increased rates of depression, high levels of distrust, etc. And the reason for this, you write, is that we’re abandoning our “Judeo-Christian heritage” and that “facts have been buried to make way for feelings; a society of essential oils and self-esteem has replaced a society of logic.”

What’s astonishing to me is that in noting all of this, you dismiss material conditions as a relevant causal factor. Wages have been stagnant for 40 years, Americans are working longer hours for less pay, the vast majority of wealth being produced is going to ever smaller numbers of people, more people are facing economic precarity due to rapid technological change — you don’t see that as part of the story here?

Ben Shapiro

I think it’s part of the story. I don’t think it’s the main part of the story. The reason I say that is because we’ve obviously had much worse economic conditions in America with much less political polarization. And frankly, some of those stats you cite I just don’t agree with. I think some of the metrics that have been used, for example, to measure the growth in income inequality are not accurate. There are at least some questions about how these things get measured.

But in any case, I believe that economic inequality doesn’t matter nearly as much as poverty. I really don’t care if Bill Gates is making the lion’s share of wealth if other people are also increasing their wealth. By any historical standard, we live in the best available age. While there’s a truth in the claim that some people are being left behind, I don’t think that’s solvable merely through economic means.

The collapse of our social fabric, the collapse of communities, is a much graver crisis.

Sean Illing

Part of what I’m getting at is the overly simplistic story you want to tell about history. You write, “We used to believe in the Founding vision. We used to see each other as brothers and sisters. … We weren’t enemies. We were a community, forged in fire and tethered together by a set of values stretching back to the Garden of Eden.”

Who is the “we” in this American story? Because from the perspective of black and brown Americans, and of poor people generally, this reads like nostalgia for a target audience. The violence, the oppression, the long history of slavery and segregation, the bitter fights for labor rights — all of this was hard and contentious, and it all happened under the banner of Christianity.

Ben Shapiro

What I meant is that Americans used to have in common a belief that the principles of the Declaration of Independence were correct, that the principles of Judeo-Christian morality were correct. The story of America is the gradual realization of those principles over time. I obviously don’t mean that racists in the South agreed with the founding principles. In the book, I talk about the evils that have taken place in Western civilization.

The thing that’s lost, and this is particularly true of the last 10 years, is that there was a directionality to America — we were getting better. And I think that’s been reversed. So when I say we used to believe that we were brothers and sisters, if you look at the polls of racial polarization, you can see that it’s getting significantly worse over the past decade or so, and that’s a huge reversal. And I don’t think it’s justified by public policy alone.




It may be too broad a statement to say that we all used to believe we were brothers and sisters, but it was at least a principle to which we could appeal. This is what Martin Luther King Jr. was able to do so effectively, for instance.

Sean Illing

MLK was also protesting the Vietnam War and American capitalism.

Ben Shapiro

Well, one of my bugaboos is that the stuff most Americans revere MLK for is not the stuff the left wishes we revered him for.

Sean Illing

I’d say the stuff the right wants to forget about MLK is the stuff the left thinks we should remember, and that the more inconvenient things he said are erased from history such that most people don’t even know about it.

But back to your book: There’s this sense that America’s moral clarity stems from its religious roots, that the founders were all Christians, and that the country could not exist without this religious ground. But America is a secular republic. The word “Christianity” does not appear in our founding documents. Thomas Jefferson’s version of the New Testament erased all references to the divinity of Jesus.

To say that America is a product of religion and ancient Greece is at the very least woefully incomplete. We’re much more the product of Roman law and secular Enlightenment philosophy.

Ben Shapiro

Of course secularism is equally important. I think people are misreading the book as a rejection of secularism and the Enlightenment. My argument is that secularism and secular humanism are outgrowths of Judeo-Christian thought and Greek philosophy that has evolved over the course of several thousand years. The Enlightenment didn’t spring from nowhere, in other words.

I do concede that the Enlightenment that occurred in Europe was more aggressively secular than the more Burkean form of Enlightenment that motivated the American Founders, which was much more grounded in the Judeo-Christian heritage. People are missing the fact that the book is half about Greek reason, but they want to focus on the religious stuff because they’re upset about Christians and the Bible.

But the entire thrust of the book is that when you’re talking about Judeo-Christian values, you’re talking about values that are still undergirding the secular Enlightenment worldview. The belief that human beings are fundamentally equal, for example, comes from the Christian tradition.

Sean Illing

The issue here is your claim that religion was a moral anchor for the American founders. These same men, who you say knew that slavery was a moral crime, nevertheless refused to end it, and that was the original sin of America.

And yet you seem to think that woke progressivism is the great moral poison in our body politic dividing us along racial lines. I actually agree with you that identity politics on the left often does more harm than good, but this kind of revisionist history blots out a critical part of the story and ignores the causes of our social turmoil. There would, after all, be no need for racial justice movements if the country wasn’t founded on racial plunder.

Ben Shapiro

I’m pretty straightforward in the book about how evil slavery and segregation was. But I don’t think slavery and segregation are major problems today.

There are basically two visions of American history. One is that America was founded on great moral principles that we failed to live up to historically and we’ve been striving to fulfill. The other is that America is rooted in racism, bigotry, sexism, and homophobia, and that these great moral principles were the founders merely flattering themselves. Obviously I’m arguing for the former over the latter.

So I’m not saying we don’t feel the impact of slavery and segregation today; that’s obviously true. But I think the biggest problem in our politics today is not that people are stumping for slavery or Jim Crow.

Sean Illing

A lot of this comes down to what you choose to emphasize and what you choose to ignore, and what that reveals. For example, you claim that the Nazis rejected Judeo-Christian values, but here’s what you conveniently ignore: At the start of World War II, over 94 percent of Germans were Christian. Germany had a thoroughly Christian culture. Whatever it was that sent that Nazis over the moral abyss, it wasn’t a lack of Christianity.

Ben Shapiro

Well, I think the problem is that Christianity was rendered subservient to other principles, meaning this wasn’t a Christian crusade. This was a secular fascist crusade, a race-based crusade. This was not Christians deciding to crusade in the name of Christ. I was trying to be specific about the Judeo-Christian principles that I thought were being left behind there.

Sean Illing

The church was both complicit in and compatible with Nazism. You cannot have a country that thoroughly permeated by Christian culture careen into moral barbarism and absolve the faith that cleanly.




The original European fascism (Mussolini in particular) was largely a phenomenon of the Catholic right wing. This is slightly less true of Nazism, but Hitler never repudiated his membership in the church and the Vatican offered prayers to Hitler on his birthday until the very end. Hell, 50 percent of the SS [the armed wing of the Nazi party] were practicing Catholics.

All of these facts are conspicuously left out of your book.

Ben Shapiro

So I think those are definitely important details, and this is why I also suggest there has to be a proper balance between Judeo-Christian principles and Greek reason. Fascism is essentially an outgrowth of a European Enlightenment that decided to sever the bonds between certain Judeo-Christian principles and reason and then reason went off into a murderous direction.

The question is not whether Christianity is compatible with evil — of course it is. But I think the problem of political totalitarianism of the last century or two is the result of not overtly religious movements co-opting religion as a tool.

Sean Illing

I’m glad you went there, because this is another claim you make in the book that I think is just historically wrong. You say that forgetting our religious roots means losing the notion that history has meaning and direction.

But this is exactly what was wrong with the totalitarian political ideologies of the 20th century. It was the belief that history was simply the unfolding of some higher plan that provided the justification for the labor camps and the Gulag. These political ideologies replaced God with history and then sacrificed the present in the name of some future goal, only it was a communist utopia or a Thousand-Year Reich, not heaven.

From my point of view, whether crime is in the name or God or reason or history, it’s the totalizing impulse behind it that we should worry about; it’s the blinding commitment to ideas over people, abstractions over experience. So ideologies weren’t co-opting religion; they became religions.

Ben Shapiro

I agree with that. I think a lot of secular movements kept the utopianism of religion. That’s why my book is really an argument for fusing reason and religion, for balancing these things.

Sean Illing

Well, the problem is that fusing incompatible approaches is not that simple, but I’ll put it another way: The problem is movements based on unchallengeable assumptions about the way the world is, and how we should behave in it. This is something religion brought into the world, and political ideologies have replicated it. You think we can continue to do this without sliding into absolutism, and I think history shows we can’t.

Ben Shapiro

I’d say that all of human life is based on people making unchallengeable assumptions. So I guess that statement is just too broad for me to get on board with.

Sean Illing

Part of the reason I’m pressing you on this is that I think you fail to recognize that religions and ideologies are guilty of the same crimes and for practically the same reasons. The history of religion is the history of human beings using their faith as an unchallengeable excuse for the worst crimes imaginable. Slavery, conquest, misogyny, child slaughter — these all receive divine sanction in the Bible. God is a justification as much as a guide for human behavior — that American slaveholders and abolitionists both found scriptural support for their causes is the ultimate example of this.

Ben Shapiro

Of course that’s true. But just because people don’t show a proper balance between reason and revelation doesn’t mean that there isn’t a proper balance between reason and revelation. The real question I’m asking in the book, and I’m fully aware of all the horrible things done in the name of religion, is why do good things exist? Why do people favor human equality? Why do they favor justice? These things are unique, and I think they come from our religious heritage. A lot of people on the left think things will get better if we get rid of religion, but I don’t think that’s true at all.

Sean Illing

I want to pivot to some of your other claims about the relationship between religion and science. You write: “Without Judeo-Christian foundations, science simply would not exist as it does in the West.” I’m honestly not sure what that means.




So I’ll say this and you can respond however you like: that science emerged in the West long after Judaism and Christianity does not mean it would’ve been impossible without it. Like much of the early Renaissance art, science was supported and funded by religious authorities because that was the only game in town. But there’s nothing about science or the scientific method that requires religious presuppositions. And in any case, science in the West would not have been possible without the Arab world preserving Greek philosophy and revolutionizing mathematics for the European world.

Ben Shapiro

The argument you’re making, which is frankly a pretty good counterargument, is that everybody was a Christian, so of course the scientists were Christians. But the reason I say that science in the West has religious roots is that there are certain fundamental assumptions even scientists have to make that they’re not recognizing that they’re making.

For example, science effectively makes the principle of “sufficient reason” argument, which says there’s a cause for every effect and that we can investigate those causes and we’re capable of reaching an objective truth. There’s nothing in evolutionary biology that suggests that objective truth is even a thing.

So the idea that your mind reflects the universe to the extent that you can understand things, the idea that you have a mandate to explore nature, the search for higher principles — all of this doesn’t necessarily have practical foundations. I think it comes from our Judeo-Christian roots, at least in the West.

Sean Illing

I’m not sure that’s an accurate characterization of the scientific method, but let’s not go down that rabbit hole. I want to linger on the facts you overlook, because facts are so important to your approach to everything.

You write: “Contrary to popular opinion, new discoveries weren’t invariably seen as heretical or dangerous to the dominion of the Church; in fact, the Church often supported scientific investigation.” But that’s a strange claim since many scientists were burned at the stake.

I mean, the church was clearly hostile to science that undermined its dogmas — do you disagree with that?

Ben Shapiro

No, I don’t disagree with that. I guess the use of the word “invariably” there is important. The way the church is often portrayed, that it was a giant obstacle to science, is just not true. A lot of the persecution coming from the church was coincident with the Protestant Reformation, as I explain in the book. But yes, you’re right that the church was often hostile to inconvenient scientific facts.

The point I’m making is that there’s this simplified version of history, this one-sided version of history, in which the church is responsible for all bad things and reason segregated from religion is responsible for all good things. I don’t think either of those stories are true.

Sean Illing

I actually agree with that, but that’s not quite the claim you make in the book, and it’s a pretty important caveat.

Ben Shapiro

That’s a totally fair critique.

Sean Illing

I know you have to run, so I’ll just say this: there’s an argument you could’ve made in this book, an argument that defended the religious perspective, but I honestly don’t think you made it. To me, the book reads like philosophical catnip for your audience. They were primed to accept it before they read it, and they’ll feel even more passionate about it after. But you didn’t make an effort to challenge them in any way or wrestle with the critiques you very narrowly skim through.

Ben Shapiro

First, I hope that’s not true. If it lacks in that way, then that’s unfortunate. As I say in the introduction, this is a very brief book because I don’t think most people will read a 400-page tome on the history of philosophy. It’s meant to be an introduction to a lot of philosophers who we’ve forgotten about, and, in the main, an attack against an attitude in modern politics that’s dismissive of the foundations upon which we stand.

As far as being too dismissive of the arguments I discuss, that’s a natural byproduct of writing a 240-page book that spans 3,500 years of philosophical history. This book easily could’ve been 1,000 pages, but I didn’t write it to be 1,000 pages, nor did I want it to be 1,000 pages.

But I hope it’s useful for people who don’t have a background in philosophy, and I encourage readers in the introduction to go read more if they’re interested. Because ultimately, the book is an invitation to engage.

Tags

jrDiscussion - desc
Find text within the comments Find 
 
JohnRussell
1  seeder  JohnRussell    2 weeks ago

Personally , I think things are going to change so much over the next 50 to 100 years that whether or not America is a "Judeo-Christian" nation will become a moot point. And I'm not talking about Muslims taking over, I'm talking about technology taking over. Judeo Christianity as a complete way of life that impresses it's values on everyone will be a thing of the past.

Of course, a lot of evangelical Christians think the world will end by then anyway.

 
 
 
Greg Jones
1.1  Greg Jones  replied to  JohnRussell @1    2 weeks ago

AOC and a sizeable number who support her believe the world as we know it will end in only 12 years.

A hundred years from now, it's likely that white humans in the US will have literally pretty much gone extinct. They certainly won't have any power

The major factions fighting for power at that time will be illegal immigrants of all sorts and the patient Muslims who will have gradually taken over city and state governments, and even have a large presence in the Federal Government. Both these groups will conspire against blacks attempting to make them second rate citizens.

It will get ugly and violent in those times, and I am glad I won't be here to witness it.

 
 
 
epistte
1.1.1  epistte  replied to  Greg Jones @1.1    2 weeks ago
AOC and a sizeable number who support her believe the world as we know it will end in only 12 years.

When did she or anyone else say that?

A hundred years from now, it's likely that white humans in the US will have literally pretty much gone extinct. They certainly won't have any power

Does it bother you that white people will not be the racial majority in a century? Do you see other people as people or do you see them as a race?  Are you scared that other races will treat you as you treat them, instead of obeying the Golden Rule and treating them as equals? 

It will get ugly and violent in those times, and I am glad I won't be here to witness it.

Why are you so convinced that social period will be violent? Do you think that because there is supposedly a white majority is the only idea that is preventing wide-spread violence, civil anarchy, anarchy, and civil rights abuses? 

 
 
 
Tacos!
1.1.2  Tacos!  replied to  epistte @1.1.1    2 weeks ago
 
 
 
epistte
1.1.3  epistte  replied to  Tacos! @1.1.2    2 weeks ago

Her cataclysmic statement is a bit hyperbolic but the environment will definitely change from what he currently know it if we do not address climate change in real ways very soon. It could be argued that the time has already passed to prevent serious changes because of the climate change currently occurring.  The tipping point may have already passed.

 
 
 
Texan1211
1.1.4  Texan1211  replied to  Tacos! @1.1.2    2 weeks ago

Isn't it strange that people who purport to know so much don't keep up with the news very well?

 
 
 
Texan1211
1.1.5  Texan1211  replied to  epistte @1.1.3    2 weeks ago
Her cataclysmic statement is a bit hyperbolic

A "BIT"????????

LMFAO!!!!!

 
 
 
XDm9mm
1.1.6  XDm9mm  replied to  epistte @1.1.1    2 weeks ago
When did she or anyone else say that?

Is this sufficient?

“Millennials and people, you know, Gen Z and all these folks that will come after us are looking up and we’re like, The world is going to end in 12 years if we don’t address climate change and your biggest issue is how are we gonna pay for it?” the freshman congresswoman said. “This is the war—this is our World War II.” Source:  https://www.newsweek.com/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-climate-change-world-will-end-12-years-un-report-1300873

 
 
 
epistte
1.1.7  epistte  replied to  XDm9mm @1.1.6    2 weeks ago

Did you read my reply in #1.1.3?

 
 
 
bbl-1
2  bbl-1    2 weeks ago

Hopefully, nothing is wrong with America.

But, if Judeo Christian values are in need of debate--------perhaps there------is the problem.

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
2.1  Trout Giggles  replied to  bbl-1 @2    one week ago

Why the hell are we discussing Judeo Christian values in America? We are supposed to be a secular society. Are only Jews and Christians important in this country?

 
 
 
Gordy327
2.1.1  Gordy327  replied to  Trout Giggles @2.1    one week ago

There are those that actually think this is a Christian country or that it was founded on Judeo-Christian vales, whatever that's supposed to be. If that's not bad enough, some actually think we do not have a separation of church and state either. Go figure.

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
3  Buzz of the Orient    2 weeks ago

Three quarters of a century ago we didn't need to lock the doors of our homes, now we must.  Back then a child could safely play outside alone from morning until evening, now he/she cannot.  Could those changes be because of the present-day dismissal of Judeo-Christian values?

 
 
 
bbl-1
3.1  bbl-1  replied to  Buzz of the Orient @3    2 weeks ago

no

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
3.1.1  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  bbl-1 @3.1    2 weeks ago

Do you have an opinion as to why things are so different today?

 
 
 
epistte
3.1.2  epistte  replied to  Buzz of the Orient @3.1.1    2 weeks ago

52% of the prison population are Christians and 0.1 % are atheists,  so I don't see the crime problem being the lack of religious values.

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/are-prisoners-less-likely-to-be-atheists/

The crime rate is actually down over the past 30 years,  The media sensationalizes crime for ratings.

On average, for the last 30 years violent crime has been declining. In 1986, the violent crime rate was 620 violent crimes per 100,000 people. In 1991, the rate increased to 758, which was the highest it has been since 1960.  "For 15 to 20 years both the violent and nonviolent crime rates as measured by the FBI’s Uniform Crime Report (UCR) have been dropping like a rock. It is now at the level of the early 1950s. It is very low," said Alan Lizotte, a professor in the School of Criminal Justice at the University at Albany, in email correspondence with PolitiFact.   The murder rate in 2014 was 4.4 murders per 100,000 people and in 2016 it was 5.3. Because the numbers are relatively small, a change in the rate is reflected as a seemingly larger percentage.

To be clear, you can have an uptick in crime from 2015 to 2016, and yet the numbers in 2016 are still lower than what they were a decade ago," said Kenneth Leon, professor at the George Washington University. "Sessions has a structural incentive to emphasize law-and-order-related rhetoric and make statements that suggest there is a crime wave,  or that the U.S. is ‘less safe.’ He is selectively curating the data to fit his needs."

Others see the increase as a worrying sign that could be the start of a new trend. Richard Rosenfeld, a professor at the University of Missouri St. Louis, shared a National Institute of Justice study he participated on that examined the recent rise in homicide in the United States. "If not wholly unprecedented, the recent homicide increase in the United States was relatively large, especially in several of the nation’s big cities," said the report. The report expressed concern at the sudden rise and said that it would take five years, if the rates continue to increase at high rates, for the homicide rates to reach the levels of the 1990s.

https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2017/dec/04/jeff-sessions/violent-crime-some-still-well-historical-highs/

 
 
 
bbl-1
3.1.3  bbl-1  replied to  Buzz of the Orient @3.1.1    2 weeks ago

Wealth concentration.  Over population.  Social media propaganda.  Reduction of job security.  'The creep' of tribalism into our society.  To name a few things.

It is complicated.  Now, there are states that are trying to pass legislation to criminalize pregnancy termination.  A lot of hate and fear out there----and people in power that just want to punish.

It is complicated.  No answers will satisfy. 

 
 
 
bbl-1
3.1.4  bbl-1  replied to  epistte @3.1.2    2 weeks ago

Perhaps it is not a lack of religious values, but rather a perversion of them.  You know, like the Jeffress, Dobson, Wiles and Falwell cliques?

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
3.1.5  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  bbl-1 @3.1.3    2 weeks ago
"No answers will satisfy"

I think your first paragraph is a pretty good answer, bbl-1, whether or not it will satisfy. No need to get specific about abortion.

 
 
 
Greg Jones
3.1.6  Greg Jones  replied to  bbl-1 @3.1.3    2 weeks ago

[deleted]

 
 
 
epistte
3.1.7  epistte  replied to  bbl-1 @3.1.4    2 weeks ago
Perhaps it is not a lack of religious values, but rather a perversion of them.  You know, like the Jeffress, Dobson, Wiles and Falwell cliques?

Whatever gave you that wild idea? 

This could be very very embarrassing........jrSmiley_86_smiley_image.gif

https://www.queerty.com/jerry-falwell-jr-s-former-pool-boy-says-doesnt-know-anything-x-rated-photos-20190509

 
 
 
bbl-1
3.1.8  bbl-1  replied to  Buzz of the Orient @3.1.5    2 weeks ago

The specificity of 'pregnancy termination'--abortion--is an issue.  Especially when some states are moving to criminal punishments on the level of 1st degree murder.  There is much more to this discussion than the fetus---which---in the grand scheme of things, is irrelevant.  Instead, conception in its own merit is an excuse for punishment.  It is past time to look at this issue for what it is and what it is not.  An open discussion must begin.

 
 
 
epistte
3.1.9  epistte  replied to  bbl-1 @3.1.8    2 weeks ago

The federal courts seem quick to set these theocratic abortion laws aside. Kentucky got slapped yesterday as an obvious violation of the Roe' decision. 

https://www.latimes.com/nation/nationnow/la-na-kentucky-abortion-law-20190510-story.html

 
 
 
bbl-1
3.1.10  bbl-1  replied to  epistte @3.1.9    2 weeks ago

True.  Except the courts are being stacked.  Trump has already seated 102 ( at last count ) judges on the bench. 

Remember this.  In 1935-37 the Nazi government fired/retired/arrested/murdered over 3500 judges--replacing them with their----followers.  This is how they did it.  This is how they made the government and constitution pliant to their agendas.  They controlled the courts and the interpretations of the law.  

 
 
 
Texan1211
3.1.11  Texan1211  replied to  bbl-1 @3.1.10    2 weeks ago
Except the courts are being stacked. Trump has already seated 102 ( at last count ) judges on the bench.

Is that not part of his JOB--to appoint judges?

 
 
 
epistte
3.1.12  epistte  replied to  Texan1211 @3.1.11    2 weeks ago
Is that not part of his JOB--to appoint judges?

Why did the GOP block Obama from filling those same judicial vacancies, all the way to the Supreme Court, or does this idea only apply to Republicans? 

 
 
 
bbl-1
3.1.13  bbl-1  replied to  Texan1211 @3.1.11    2 weeks ago

His job is to serve all Americans equally.  Instead he is installing theocrats and autocrats.  All jokes aside, what will Gorsuch and Kavanaugh do for you?

 
 
 
Texan1211
3.1.15  Texan1211  replied to  bbl-1 @3.1.13    2 weeks ago
His job is to serve all Americans equally. Instead he is installing theocrats and autocrats. All jokes aside, what will Gorsuch and Kavanaugh do for you?

Please list the theocrats and autocrats he has "installed", and why you think they fit that description based on their judicial records.

I expect all SCOTUS members to do the same thing--rule in accordance with the law and the Constitution. Are they supposed to do more?

Maybe a better question would be--what do you expect Gorsuch and Kavanaugh to do to you?

 
 
 
bbl-1
3.1.16  bbl-1  replied to  Texan1211 @3.1.15    2 weeks ago

Obviously you know nothing about them.  Nothing. 

 
 
 
Texan1211
3.1.17  Texan1211  replied to  bbl-1 @3.1.16    2 weeks ago
Obviously you know nothing about them. Nothing.

Perhaps that is why I asked?

Do you know? 

You made the claim, so excuse me for thinking you might actually know and be able to back your claim up.

My mistake--one I won't ever make with you again.

Next time, how's about you just tell me to %&^$ off and then we can just ignore each other?

Since you won;t answer anyways, seems like the logical thing to do.

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
3.1.18  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  bbl-1 @3.1.13    2 weeks ago

Ask not what your judges can do for you, but rather ask what you can do to smear your judges.

 
 
 
Gordy327
3.2  Gordy327  replied to  Buzz of the Orient @3    2 weeks ago
Could those changes be because of the present-day dismissal of Judeo-Christian values?

The country wasn't all peaches and cream when there was supposedly more adherence to the so called Judeo-Christian values.

 
 
 
Texan1211
3.2.1  Texan1211  replied to  Gordy327 @3.2    2 weeks ago

A little unresponsive in light of what he actually asked.

 
 
 
Gordy327
3.2.2  Gordy327  replied to  Texan1211 @3.2.1    2 weeks ago
A little unresponsive in light of what he actually asked.

Not at all. Someone who wants to tout the lack "Judeo-Christian values" as a reason for todays problems only needs to look at history to see that there have always been problems regardless of how such "values" were adhered to or not.

 
 
 
Texan1211
3.2.3  Texan1211  replied to  Gordy327 @3.2.2    2 weeks ago

He didn't tout anything. He asked a question.

 
 
 
Gordy327
3.2.4  Gordy327  replied to  Texan1211 @3.2.3    2 weeks ago
He didn't tout anything. He asked a question.

The question implies that todays problems are related to J-C values, or the lack of them. So my statement stands. 

 
 
 
Texan1211
3.2.5  Texan1211  replied to  Gordy327 @3.2.4    2 weeks ago

Interesting take on this:

Could those changes be because of the present-day dismissal of Judeo-Christian values?

 
 
 
epistte
3.2.6  epistte  replied to  Texan1211 @3.2.5    2 weeks ago
Could those changes be because of the present-day dismissal of Judeo-Christian values?

Such as the evangelicals support of Donald Trump who apparently views violating the 10 Commandments as a to-do list?  Trump is the least Christian person ever to be POTUS and yet they support him when instead they should be taking part in a 24-hour protest in front of the White House if they truly followed the teachings of Jesus Christ.

Nixon was moral than Trump and even Jefferson, who was a closeted atheist, was more moral. Jimmy Carter actually was a Christian and the religious right hate him.

 
 
 
Gordy327
3.2.7  Gordy327  replied to  Texan1211 @3.2.5    2 weeks ago

Speculation aside, there are problems today just as there were problems in the past. Judeo-Christian values, whatever those are, doesnt seem to have made much difference, regardless of how closely it's adhered to. 

 
 
 
Texan1211
3.2.8  Texan1211  replied to  epistte @3.2.6    2 weeks ago
Such as the evangelicals support of Donald Trump who apparently views violating the 10 Commandments as a to-do list? Trump is the least Christian person ever to be POTUS and yet they support him when instead they should be taking part in a 24-hour protest in front of the White House if they truly followed the teachings of Jesus Christ.

I wondered how long before one question would become another "Hate Trump-fest".

Should have known it wouldn't take long!

 
 
 
epistte
3.2.9  epistte  replied to  Texan1211 @3.2.8    2 weeks ago
I wondered how long before one question would become another "Hate Trump-fest". Should have known it wouldn't take long!

Do you not see that the divisiveness of Donald Trump, the TEAparty and the GOP that condone this behavior has created many problems or is it everyone else's problem who oppose them, and they have no role in being reasonable people trying to get along with others in a rational, intelligent and adult manner?

 
 
 
Texan1211
3.2.10  Texan1211  replied to  epistte @3.2.9    2 weeks ago

How extremely naïve to think for one second that Trump is responsible for this.

You dare to bring up devisiveness? You mean like the screaming at the sky parties for whiners and the "Not my President" bullshit that started even before Trump took office?

Give me a fucking break!

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
3.2.11  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  Gordy327 @3.2.4    2 weeks ago

It implies nothing except give an opportunity to members who revel in slamming others.

 
 
 
Gordy327
3.2.12  Gordy327  replied to  Buzz of the Orient @3.2.11    2 weeks ago

My mistake then.

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
3.2.14  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  Gordy327 @3.2.12    2 weeks ago

"I pardon you."  (Quotation from Schindler's List)

 
 
 
JohnRussell
3.2.15  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  Texan1211 @3.2.10    one week ago
You dare to bring up devisiveness? You mean like the screaming at the sky parties for whiners and the "Not my President" bullshit that started even before Trump took office?

Trump is a con man, a crook, a pathological liar, a malignant narcissist, a misogynist, and a daily buffoon. He is no more qualified to be president of the United States than a person randomly selected from a phone book would be, and probably less so. 

He will never be approved of as president by a majority of this country. Never. 

 
 
Loading...
Loading...

Who is online

Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו
Tessylo
It Is ME
Dismayed Patriot
cjcold
The Magic Eight Ball
Sean Treacy
Gordy327
Paula Bartholomew
Dulay



36 visitors