4dplane Posted July 27, 2004 #1 Share Posted July 27, 2004 This poll is intended for anyone whose religion requires a set of rules to be followed in order to enter the gates of heaven. If you have no written doctrine in your belief system that states you must live by a set of rules for the purpose of not going to hell. I ask you kindly to not vote on this poll. The question is, “how far would you be willing to let your government’s control your/our lives in order to help all people get into heaven.” Example of “strong control”, all phones are now tapped and scanned for conversations that may induce sinning either as you’re on the phone or at a latter date. ... Example of “some control”, tax breaks for churches which help them flourish in society which in turn should help people get into heaven. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seraphina Posted July 27, 2004 #2 Share Posted July 27, 2004 Since you asked, I won't vote... But I would be interested to hear your take on that proposal....sounds to me like you're saying "Enter the thought police" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
earthygirl04 Posted July 27, 2004 #3 Share Posted July 27, 2004 I'm not voting on this poll, but I want to say, I don't trust the government, no-matter what the reason.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Janiel Posted July 27, 2004 #4 Share Posted July 27, 2004 (edited) {oh yea the govn't is controling my belifes, they want me to not belive in god <---{so i can eventually bring down their damned religious democracy(SP?)... Edited July 27, 2004 by Janiel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spidermonkey Posted July 27, 2004 #5 Share Posted July 27, 2004 (edited) Somehow i don't think trying to get people into heaven would be one of the government's main priorities. Edited July 27, 2004 by spidermonkey Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Janiel Posted July 27, 2004 #6 Share Posted July 27, 2004 {oh yea the govn't is controling my belifes, they want me to not belive in god <---{so i can eventually bring down their damned religious democracy(SP?)... i apologise for anything Akusa there has said but i agree with her and SM why would that be a priority? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spidermonkey Posted July 27, 2004 #7 Share Posted July 27, 2004 but i agree with her and SM why would that be a priority? Well.. maybe if you had to pay tax in heaven Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Janiel Posted July 27, 2004 #8 Share Posted July 27, 2004 (edited) OF course, bush would love that i can see it now... "Come to heaven after death...its Paradise...P.S. 4% income tax, elegable for those between 5-50years of age, any older or younger...your screwed" Edited July 27, 2004 by Janiel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4dplane Posted July 27, 2004 Author #9 Share Posted July 27, 2004 (edited) earthygirl04 are you not voting on this poll because you don’t fit the criteria or because you don’t want to vote? spidermonkey, I was going to say church instead of government for the poll but in reality aren’t most governments filled with religious people that fit the criteria to vote on this poll. On top of that governments have more power over the people then the churches do (in the USA), hence the dangers of church and state. If a government official is religious is it not his/her duty to try and help the masses into heaven? And finally, this poll is open to the world not just the USA, so I am sure there are governments out there that are the church disguised as the government. Edited July 28, 2004 by 4dplane Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spidermonkey Posted July 28, 2004 #10 Share Posted July 28, 2004 You'll find it isn't economically feasable of a government to concentrate on such a thing. Some may also have social consequences, eg tapping people's phones? Gross infringement of privacy. As for a politician who actually means well... LOL! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Q-La Posted July 28, 2004 #11 Share Posted July 28, 2004 The government thinks its going to he...? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dancing_Dumplings Posted July 28, 2004 #12 Share Posted July 28, 2004 some people dont deserve to be in heaven...so if all people, including those evil people, got into heaven...then it wouldnt be heaven anymore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
babyforrest Posted July 28, 2004 #13 Share Posted July 28, 2004 I think the government should have total control over what I believe, think, and do. People should not be able to have the choice to think for themselves. This would end all murders, robberies, and other horrible crimes. The only job that police would have would be to stop all those who disagree with the government and it's beliefs. Oh yeah, one more thing. Two plus two equals five, I love Big Brother. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dancing_Dumplings Posted July 28, 2004 #14 Share Posted July 28, 2004 The only job that police would have would be to stop all those who disagree with the government and it's beliefs. but what if the police are corrupt? we all know some cops are in the states...w. racial profiling and what not...what if a cop wants to off his wife and kids? and what if the gov. bribes the cops to look the other way? or to kill those troublesome people? I think the government should have total control over what I believe, think, and do. People should not be able to have the choice to think for themselves. The only job that police would have would be to stop all those who disagree with the government and it's beliefs. ummm if the gov. controlls everything you do, say and think...then you wouldnt have people hating the gov. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
babyforrest Posted July 28, 2004 #15 Share Posted July 28, 2004 How are they going to get control and keep control unless they have police officers watching our every move? Human beings naturally have thoughts and feelings of their own. They will not give them up without a fight, normally. It may take a while, but once children start being raised in this type of society, they will learn that even if their own father is having thoughts against the government the right thing to do is to turn them into the feds, and have him taken away to be deprogrammed. When the generations of people that were allowed to have their own beliefs grow old and die, it will be much easier. Everybody say it with me now: Two plus two equals five, I love Big Brother. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4dplane Posted July 28, 2004 Author #16 Share Posted July 28, 2004 (edited) Babyforrest are you being sarcastic about wanting the government to have complete control over us? The reason I ask is because before you posted only one person had voted for max control of the populous via the government. Was that you? If not, have you voted? Good Point: but once children start being raised in this type of society, they will learn that even if their own father is having thoughts against the government the right thing to do is to turn them into the feds This is how I believe many things became the way they are in this world and I fully believe that with the lack of knowledge and care of history from our young people it becomes a very realistic possibility. Who knew that in the unabridged US constitution war could only be declared with congress agreeing to it. The last time congress declared war (agreed to it) was in World War Two. To me this shows how people’s memory and knowledge (including me) of the past are short. So if something is taken away from you that you didn’t even know you had, it doesn’t seem like you lost anything because to you, it has always been that way. Then add a little book burning and silencing of the living that know too much and boom, 1984 is born. And yes comrade 2 + 2 = 5 and I love Big Brother. Edited July 28, 2004 by 4dplane Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
babyforrest Posted July 28, 2004 #17 Share Posted July 28, 2004 Babyforrest are you being sarcastic about wanting the government to have complete control over us? Yes. I don't mean to insult anyone's intelligence incase you get what it is I am saying, but I am talking about the book 1984 by George Orwell. Where I'm from it's required reading (and it should be) in high schools. Okay Winston, repeat after me: "Two plus two equals five, I love big brother." I voted the government should have absolutely no control over what it's people believe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seraphina Posted July 28, 2004 #18 Share Posted July 28, 2004 Quite frankly….if a democratic government is in power, shouldn’t it already reflect what the people want, and believe? Not withstanding that actively interfering in the lives of its citizens, in some bizarre and fanatical crusade to “stop them sinning” is a huge kick in the crotch to the constitutional rights Americans are so fond of quoting. I agree with babyforest…sounds rather a lot like 1984 to me (which is why I mentioned the thought police earlier). Even if we’re to put aside the fact that I don’t believe in heaven to begin with, forcing us onto a strict and narrow path, i.e “all phones are now tapped and scanned for conversations that may induce sinning either as you’re on the phone or at a latter date” is such a gigantic breach of our rights as human beings, to choose what we want to choose, that I don’t think it even deserves serious consideration. Tax payer’s money could be far better spent building hospital, schools, and helping and educating people that being funneled into some brainless scheme to “get everyone into heaven”. On a personal note, my advanced higher RPR was on both 1984 and Animal Farm….I’m starting to get some rather hideous reminders about both when I hear some of the sound bites spewed out by some members of this site. If stuff like this ever actually happened, I can’t imagine it would much improve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4dplane Posted July 28, 2004 Author #19 Share Posted July 28, 2004 (edited) “all phones are now tapped and scanned for conversations that may induce sinning either as you’re on the phone or at a latter date” is such a gigantic breach of our rights as human beings, to choose what we want to choose, that I don’t think it even deserves serious consideration. I humbly disagree, it's happening right now. People have been arrested since 911 because of conversations (drugs) they had on the telephone. My proof comes from a cop that has so graciously let me sit with him and pick his brain. He told me that on many occasions he has either been witness or heard of people being arrested because of the Patriot Act not being followed strictly. Then he said to me, “but hay, they are drug dealers and gangsters, isn’t it a good thing to get them off of the streets?” Hmmm…. I then wanted to say to him but declined, “what are where does your definition of good come from?” Edited July 28, 2004 by 4dplane Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seraphina Posted July 28, 2004 #20 Share Posted July 28, 2004 At this point, I would like to point out the vast difference between tapping a person's phone because they have evidence they're a drug dealer, and want to know when they're going to arrange their next deal, then tapping the phones of the entire country to keep them away from "sin" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4dplane Posted July 28, 2004 Author #21 Share Posted July 28, 2004 (edited) Yes a difference of severity does exist between these two scenarios, but it still shows what length the government will go, to uphold the law. Point to make clear about my thoughts on this topic, to me much of the worlds laws are influence directly / indirectly from religion. Hence, if you are a serious drug user (cocaine say) you are killing your temple and probably falling into a state of depression which can bring upon more sin. Divorce, adultery, violence, theft, etc… The cost of recording all the phones in the US and filtering them for certain words should not be that hard. The hardest part is over, that part that said you have to have a warrant to tap someone’s phone. A Mac G5 is a incredible powerful computer and we the common people have our hands on it. Think then of what the government is using. Next create a simple piece of software that scans the recorded conversation and applies a point value of severity on the conversation. 10 = your bad and the appropriate officials are notified. How much would this cost -Couple Billion? Edited July 29, 2004 by 4dplane Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seraphina Posted July 28, 2004 #22 Share Posted July 28, 2004 Okay, if you're honestly proposing this, first thing's first... Define "sinning", and define a punnishment for such "sin". I, for example, consider punishing someone for blasphemy, divorce, or even adultery (beyond perhaps a kick in the backside) ridiculous. However, your definition of preventing "sin" is so utterly vague I have little or know idea what you would consider falling into this catagory. What right does religion have to lawfully impose its belief system, and its idea of "sin", on the rest of the population? Sounds like a step back to the dark ages to me. The "hard part" you describe, in other words having to have a warrent in order to tap someone's phone, is to ensure that someone's privacy is not wrongfully compromised. I call listening in on the conversations of every single person in the country an "invasion of privacy" is a massive understatement. People have a right to be able to say and think what they want in their own homes, and no government has any right to break into a person's home and spy on them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4dplane Posted July 29, 2004 Author #23 Share Posted July 29, 2004 Seraphina, I cannot define sinning for this topic that is why this poll is only open to people who have rules from god to get into heaven. The punishment for such sins could be the same as it is today, incarceration, fine or death. Then maybe because it is a totally run religious state you would have hours of pray, meditation, repentance, and public humility to pay for your sins/crimes. I don’t know for sure, you are asking me to define how this system will work and I do not have all the answers. But I’m sure someone does. For the rest of your questions I ask them if they where my own. I do not believe that a religious run state is the way to go. I am just presenting the idea and asking what others feel is right. I will sum up my ideas in a few, I am hoping for 8 more votes on the poll to make it a solid 20. So please if you have not voted and you fit the criteria please vote. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seraphina Posted July 30, 2004 #24 Share Posted July 30, 2004 Well, I am glad you’re not actually supporting the idea of a religious state….that’s a small comfort… You don’t have to look very far…Iran for example…or dark ages Europe, to see what happens when religion is placed in a position of power. The idea of what constitutes ‘blasphemy’ is obviously open to whatever religion you happen to follow, but let’s consider Christianity, as since you say “heaven”, it’s obviously the one you’re referring to… - Homosexuality would be banned. Acts of homosexuality would probably be considered a capital offence (it is, after all, the only sin in the bible describes as “detestable”), and I’m sure these universal phone tapping system would be a great help in tracking down and persecuting innocent people for this reason, much like the Nazis did. - The rights of women would likely go down the tube also. We were, after all, created in the servitude to Adam. For a very long time, women were even segregated in church into separate seating...you only have to look at any fundamentalist religion to see the role women usually play in them. - Animal rights would also quickly disappear, as the bible instructs man to use them as they see fit. So goodbye to the protection of endangered species, breeding centres, conservation sites, and sanity in general (unless I miss my guess, Bush has already passed several bills giving a kick in the crotch to the protection of animals. We’re half way there already). - As we’ve seen in the past, there would be a great many things that would be considered “blasphemy”, and a very small list of solutions to it. These include stoning, burning, torture, mutilation, and sometimes drowning or hanging. Science, as it contradicts the bible account of the world, would likely fall into the category of blasphemy, and the greatest minds in the world would be forced to either stop their research, or leave the country. Either way, the country in question would stagnate, and turn into a cesspool. - People who did not share the belief of the government in question (if you could call it that) would be left with the voice of simply pretending that they did, or also leaving the country. Religious fundamentalists are perhaps the least tolerant people on the planet, and touting yourself as an atheist in a society extreme enough to tap phones to stop you sinning, is rather like waving a flag saying “kill me”. - There is a tendency among fundamentalists to be ruthlessly expansionist. Usually, this involves killing a lot of people who don’t share your beliefs. If an extremely powerful country were to fall into a state of fundamentalism (for example, the US), then this would put the world in a very precarious situation. Armed with nuclear weapons and a new found desire to cleanse the world of sinners, we’d be looking at a time bomb to a zeal driven nuclear rampage. All things considered, the most culturally advanced nations in the world, those with the highest standards of living and the most freedoms for its citizens, do not have a fundamentalist religious government. Those countries that do have next to no personal freedoms, are stricken with poverty, and flounder years (if not centuries) behind us on a social level. In short, I don’t think it’s a very good idea Getting into heaven doesn't count for much if your government is going to turn you home into hell first. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
earthygirl04 Posted August 1, 2004 #25 Share Posted August 1, 2004 Somehow i don't think trying to get people into heaven would be one of the government's main priorities. Nope! The government is more worried about cheating civilians out of their hard earned money! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now