Is Christianity compatible with Democracy?

[Doug1029]

With its stated goal of converting the world to Christianity, to the exclusion of other religious points of view, Christianity opposes the most-fundamental of democratic principles: the free exchange of ideas. One can see this almost daily in attempts to censor the local library, to impose religion (ID) on science, to drive out atheists (Guymon, Oklahoma), to display Christian symbols on government property while excluding others, and so on. That Christians in America have so far failed to extinguish opposing thought, is not due to a lack of effort. This leads to the question: can democracy exist in a country that is predominantly Christian?

Edited February 11, 2009 by Doug1029

[Repoman]

This leads to the question: can democracy exist in a country that is predominantly Christian?

I would say "yes" because the USA is a democracy and it is predominantly Christian.

[momentarylapseofreason]

I would say "yes" because the USA is a democracy and it is predominantly Christian.

I would say yes also, as long as Church & State remain seperated

[Doug1029]

I would say yes also, as long as Church & State remain seperated

And that is the problem: Christianity's goal is to suppress all opposition, making church and state the same thing.

Doug

[momentarylapseofreason]

And that is the problem: Christianity's goal is to suppress all opposition, making church and state the same thing.

Doug

I agree to a certain extent, but not all of them though

[momentarylapseofreason]

I understand the concern though.

Some are very sneaky or claim they don't want this, but in reality they do (thinking they must fulfill god's will).

How can you reason against that ? Scary

[TheDreamer]

Yes and no.

No, it can't adopt the laws because there are already laws in place set forth by God.

and

Yes, it can affect and change the laws of the country through the people who can change such laws.

It all depends on whether or not you have the will to do good or evil.

[Irish]

Religion of any kind is not compatible with politics of any kind in much the same way as sports are not compatible with politics or religion. The fundamental goals of each are diametrically opposed to each other having completely different goals and final objectives. Those fundamentalist hockey fans up here would have Calgary Flames flags on every street corner if they had there way

[momentarylapseofreason]

Yes and no.

No, it can't adopt the laws because there are already laws in place set forth by God.

and

Yes, it can affect and change the laws of the country through the people who can change such laws.

It all depends on whether or not you have the will to do good or evil.

What laws were set forth by god ?

[mako]

Dang Irish, as you approach my sagely age you never cease to amaze me with your wisdom (undoubtably gleamed from long association with me...LOL)

[Darklight]

Salaam (Peace)

I think there can be democratic elements and processes in a Christian (Muslim or Jewish) state. I don't think it would always end up like medieval Europe, but I do think that a dash of Secularism protects our societies from Religious Zealots.

I don't think many American Christians want to stomp out all non-Christians, I do think that most Americans want to stomp out all non-Democratic Government. To me it seems that the mind-set today is 'Democracy is the way to go, and any who disagree need to be labeled as "enemy" and eliminated'.

The Government of Israel, under Prophet Moses/Musa (AS) - and others after him - would be considered a Theocracy these days. What was it actually like - don't know, but I don't think that a religiously based government has to be intolerant and exclusive. Usually will be, but doesn't have to be.

Edited February 12, 2009 by Darklight

[MaggieDruydess]

Christianity and Democracy get along just fine. Both are dictatorships in disguise and based on un-truths.

They are like ugly brothers. >.<

[Darklight]

Christianity and Democracy get along just fine. Both are dictatorships in disguise and based on un-truths.

They are like ugly brothers. >.<

Salaam (Peace)

WOW!

So, what kind of governmental structure do you support or recommend?

[MaggieDruydess]

Salaam (Peace)

WOW!

So, what kind of governmental structure do you support or recommend?

I don't. Powerful people are easily corruptable and groups of powerful corrupt people are hard to over throw. I think it is sad that in this 'advanced' society, day and age that men (mankind) cannot be resposible for themselves and live moral and honorable lives with out 'higher powers' (whether they be government or Gods)

Just my opinion.

[Darklight]

I don't. Powerful people are easily corruptable and groups of powerful corrupt people are hard to over throw. I think it is sad that in this 'advanced' society, day and age that men (mankind) cannot be resposible for themselves and live moral and honorable lives with out 'higher powers' (whether they be government or Gods)

Just my opinion.

Salaam (Peace)

I do understand what your saying, I happen to believe that we are all born with a degree of spirituality, but there has to be some form of management. Ideally, government is supposed to be the collective manifestation of the people's will. Power of the People - not "Higher Power". Spending our money on schools, hospitals, roads, and various other facilities and programs, for scientific research, medicine, defense purposes.

The justice system for example. I believe there are many problems with it, but people do break laws, without structure - society would be disorganized. The whole universe adheres to laws which support its structure. Laws which govern the sub-atomic particles that make all that we see. Surely you acknowledge that we need some kind of structure or just fall into chaos.

[MaggieDruydess]

Salaam (Peace)

I do understand what your saying, I happen to believe that we are all born with a degree of spirituality, but there has to be some form of management. Ideally, government is supposed to be the collective manifestation of the people's will. Power of the People - not "Higher Power". Spending our money on schools, hospitals, roads, and various other facilities and programs, for scientific research, medicine, defense purposes.

The justice system for example. I believe there are many problems with it, but people do break laws, without structure - society would be disorganized. The whole universe adheres to laws which support its structure. Laws which govern the sub-atomic particles that make all that we see. Surely you acknowledge that we need some kind of structure or just fall into chaos.

Chaos is a structure, one that maintains a balance. :-)

The justice system does not work. People break laws because they are weak and evil.

The laws of men are a feeble attempt to control that which was never meant to be controled.

*edited because I am being beseiged by typo demons tonight.

Edited February 12, 2009 by MaggieDruydess

[Skim Milky]

With its stated goal of converting the world to Christianity, to the exclusion of other religious points of view, Christianity opposes the most-fundamental of democratic principles: the free exchange of ideas. One can see this almost daily in attempts to censor the local library, to impose religion (ID) on science, to drive out atheists (Guymon, Oklahoma), to display Christian symbols on government property while excluding others, and so on. That Christians in America have so far failed to extinguish opposing thought, is not due to a lack of effort. This leads to the question: can democracy exist in a country that is predominantly Christian?

Well your whole OP lacks validity, because you presume that all christians believe the same thing and have the same goals, which is obviously not the case. You should probably figure out exactly what your attacking before you start swinging.

[Grandpa Greenman]

I agree no religion is compatible with government. All one has to do is look at theocracies modern and past. Government are not for promoting a religion. Only in secular states is religion free. In theocracies there is only one religion and if your religion happens to be the wrong one then to bad for you, your going to be baned from practicing it.

I would much rather live in a secular republic and be free to practice or not practice the religion on my own choosing.

[Darklight]

I agree no religion is compatible with government. All one has to do is look at theocracies modern and past. Government are not for promoting a religion. Only in secular states is religion free. In theocracies there is only one religion and if your religion happens to be the wrong one then to bad for you, your going to be baned from practicing it.

I would much rather live in a secular republic and be free to practice or not practice the religion on my own choosing.

Salaam (Peace)

I agree that there can be religious freedom under a Secular government, but not always, the USSR was secular, but religion was not tolerated. Muslim Imams were eliminated and the Quran banned, but in other Secular places there is religious freedom. Under the Muslim government of Spain (Al Andalus) there was freedom of religion, a great deal of it in fact.

I don't view the USA as a Secular government, but there is religious freedom in this Religiously Tolerant Christian Nation.

[Mrs V]

What laws were set forth by god ?

well every holy book has a set of laws that the believers are meant to live by - granted they have not been passed down by "god" per se, but many believers think they have - and there is where the contradiction comes in. Christians have 3 different versions of the 10 commandments in the old testament, though few of those commandments are strictly followed today, so Christians do pick and choose which biblical laws they follow and what they dont. (I can write another post stating what they are if someone really wants to know).

The problem is not that the religious laws clash with secular laws. In my mind the problem comes when the religious want to use their religious laws to justify *not* supporting secular changes in law. We all know that gay marriage was opposed because it was 'against gods law', womens lib movements were opposed by churche, many churches didnt support civil rights movements in the 20th century etc. problem is not Christianity and democracy per se - it is when christianity is used as a political tool that a problem arises.

[Repoman]

The Government of Israel, under Prophet Moses/Musa (AS) - and others after him - would be considered a Theocracy these days.

Let's make sure we all understand that "others after him" does not mean "all others after him". Having recognized this fact, we can draw a distinction between Israel and other modern democracies and the backwards "nations" that have allowed religious leaders to rule. "Islamic Republic" is just another word for brutal dictatorship that stifles human expression and enslaves women.

[momentarylapseofreason]

Salaam (Peace)

I agree that there can be religious freedom under a Secular government, but not always, the USSR was secular, but religion was not tolerated. Muslim Imams were eliminated and the Quran banned, but in other Secular places there is religious freedom. Under the Muslim government of Spain (Al Andalus) there was freedom of religion, a great deal of it in fact.

Mixing religion into government is extremely risky regardless. You know how one religion can change & "morph" and interpretations are changed (not always bad ).

Just look at Christianity and how it has changed, imagine the majority being Jerry Falwell types or Westboro baptist types.................oh the HORROR

[Skim Milky]

Mixing religion into government is extremely risky regardless. You know how one religion can change & "morph" and interpretations are changed (not always bad ).

Just look at Christianity and how it has changed, imagine the majority being Jerry Falwell types or Westboro baptist types.................oh the HORROR

I agree. You cant mix them, because no one in christianity even agrees on the basics, so how could you base an entire government on it?

[momentarylapseofreason]

I agree. You cant mix them, because no one in christianity even agrees on the basics, so how could you base an entire government on it?

exactly.

But i don't think religion should be forbidden either (even though i'm not really a fan of it). That's fascism and (attempted) mental rape

[Darklight]

Let's make sure we all understand that "others after him" does not mean "all others after him". Having recognized this fact, we can draw a distinction between Israel and other modern democracies and the backwards "nations" that have allowed religious leaders to rule. "Islamic Republic" is just another word for brutal dictatorship that stifles human expression and enslaves women.

Salaam (Peace)

The Theocratic Leaders of the Israeli Nation I was thinking of were the Leaders after Moses up to King Solomon.

Politicians (here and other places) can't seem to come to full agreement either, but I can't imagine a Falwell type ever being elected to a very high office.

Edited February 12, 2009 by Darklight