Community >> View Post
Post By
Sumidor

Member Since: Sat Feb 25, 2017
Posts: 115
In Reply To
bd2999

Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 14,516
Subj: Re: Pence Stands With Traitorous Trump!
Posted: Mon Aug 21, 2017 at 10:27:04 pm EDT (Viewed 143 times)
Reply Subj: Re: Pence Stands With Traitorous Trump!
Posted: Mon Aug 21, 2017 at 12:34:06 pm EDT (Viewed 137 times)



    Quote:

      Quote:

        Quote:
        He's one of the fake Christians who want to install Sharia Law in the United States, establishing an "official" religion here.

        Quote:

          Quote:
          I wonder how people will react when it becomes illegal to worship God in THEIR way, if that ever comes to pass...

      Quote:

        Quote:
        Rather than name calling ("anti-gay racist moron", "responsible for aids", "evil"), is there any *policy* you would like to discuss?

        Quote:

          Quote:
          Let's start with this....What do you have to demonstrate that Pence wants to install an official religion, and make all other religions illegal?



    Quote:
    This later point is something of a straw man argument. It would require something akin to finding a letter where that is writen out. I have seen others make that claim as the only way to be sure that somebody is racist. If that is our standard than few would be guilty of much of anything.


It's not a straw man argument at all. I was directly questioning Gernot's statement. He said that Pence wants to establish an official religion, and that Pence will make it illegal for people to worship God in their way. I asked him him for evidence to support his claim.

Had Gernot stated that Mike Pence allows his religion to guide his governing polices too much, then that would have been a fair opinion to share. But he didn't say that. And if he had provided examples as you have done, then he and I might have had a discussion, but he didn't do that.

I challenged him on his blunt falsehood. In no way did I make a straw man argument.


    Quote:
    Having lived in Indiana for some time it was always clear that Pence is a very religious man and very much a religious conservative.



    Quote:
    I am not sure he wants Christianity to be a state religion per se but he wants his view of Christianity to be what guides policy.



    Quote:
    In 2002 he went to the House floor and asked that science textbooks promote creationism but casting doubt on Evolution.


I know next to nothing about Mike Pence. If this is true, then I disagree with him regarding teaching creationism in public schools.


    Quote:
    RFRA. A law that was not really needed but was pretty vague in wording to allow people to potentially say hateful things at gay people etc. This was a major issue in Indiana. They put a patch on it but it was a minor fix at best. It had no purpose other than to make sure that the right to dehumanize another person was ok. For whatever reason, dislike of homosexuality has become the core Christian value in some part of the country.


A law allowing people to say hateful things? Similar to the first amendment? I don't see why it would be needed, as it seems redundant, but I agree with the peoples' right to *say* anything they please.


    Quote:
    In the ongoing HIV/AIDs epidemic in the state he had to be dragged along to open needle exchanges. When he did do it, it was underfunded and staffed. The State Health secretary was pretty mad at him. As it likely made it worse. His reasons for this were shared by many pasturs and the like that these people did it to themselves and basically brought it on themselves. He did not say that, but he was doing everything that those folks were recommending until backlash was high enough.


The *policy* of not using taxpayer money to fund criminal activity may be something you disagree with. Not forcing people who stay clean of drugs to pay for needles of drug addicts may be something you disagree with. That the needle program might make drug use look like less of a problem when the government is helping people get supplies may be a point of view that you disagree with. But calling someone evil for having this opinion is not what I thought this board was about.

When we differ with someone on policy we should discuss the demerits of the opposing view, and the merits of ours.

For example...a husband who shoots drugs might contract aids and then infect his innocent wife who is not aware of his drug habit. That is, I think a powerful argument in favor of the needle program. If Pence has a different point of view, maybe it means he disagrees about the weights of what good vs. harm the needle program has on society. It doesn't make him evil.



    Quote:
    In the past he has blocked federal funding to help combat HIV unless statements about gay sex were not included. The big bug a boo among some religious conservatives. Ignoring that this disease can be passed on with any sex.


I don't understand what statements regarding gay sex could not be included. So I can't comment further.


    Quote:
    He has been against homosexuals in the military

Many politicians have on both side of the aisle. It doesn't make someone evil. And it doesn't prevent someone from practicing religion their way.


    Quote:
    He has been against condoms because they were a poor defense against STDs and is a massive supporter of abstinence only education.


Again, a policy difference. By saying he's against condoms, I'm assuming you mean he's against making tax payers pay for condoms for other people. You don't mean he wants to make condoms illegal. How government spends taxpayer money is something intelligent people can have different opinions about. It doesn't mean one side is "responsible for aids". Vilifying people who disagree with you is not necessary when you are able to coherently, and logically express your own opinion and provide support for how you arrived at that opinion.


    Quote:

    So, while I am unaware that he has specifically said that Christianity should be the state religion. It is pretty clear that he puts his faith above the personal rights of any group that gets in his way.


That's not clear. It's clear he has a number of policy differences to what you would prefer, and maybe even to what I would prefer. It in no way means he wants to establish an official religion. It in no way means people can't worship their religion however they please. And it doesn't make him evil.


    Quote:
    ā€œIā€™m a Christian, a conservative and a Republican, in that order,ā€



    Quote:
    There is nothing illegal or wrong with being guided by faith. Many are and it helps guide their views. However, they also tend to be the most rigid holders to their views because in their minds it came from God.



    Quote:
    And that alone is concerning enough or should be. Anybody thinking they have a mandate to basically tell everybody they should live the life by the morality of a specific faith is a problem.


I don't believe it's the government's job to enforce morality.


    Quote:
    I mean there are many in religious right circles that would be just fine running the US under a version of Christian law. Yet fewer freak out about that than the falw Shiara law scares.



    Quote:


I'm not sure what Christian law means, but that's fine, it's not the point of my original post in this thread. The point is how a discussion should be conducted on this board. I'm fairly new here, but I don't believe we should vilify people, call them names, or spread falsehoods. I do believe we should discuss differences in opinion with civility.