good Christian+true conservative=impossible?

[roosterjuicer]

Before I get into this i just want to preface that i know religion is a hot topic for everyone and things can get ugly pretty quick. lets try not to do that here, If you dont believe in God or just hate christianity lets keep that in another thread. lets try to keep this thread to the issue at hand and try to keep it civil.

here we go:

I try to read the bible every night before I go to bed, usually just a chapter a night. Something hit me like a ton of bricks a couple weeks ago and it has been driving me crazy since. I have thrown the question out to a few of my friends and most of them haven't had much to say in the way of a decent answer, additionally i have gone to some other message boards i post on from time to time but for the most part those guys are so thick that God himself could be standing in front of them saying "jesus was just some random guy, no relation" and it wouldn't change their mind about a single thing, so i figured I would turn to the one place where for the most part people are doubtful about religion to see if what i am saying makes at least some sense....

Here's my big problem. It seems to me that one of the major overall themes/messages/ideas/thing you should take away from it after reading it of the New Testament is that one of the major themes of the gospels is helping the poor, helping the sick, helping the needy, helping those who cant help themselves.

Thus it seems to me like outside of abortion and gay marriage and all that, when you get down to the core beliefs of the democrats (big government taking from the haves and giving to the have nots, free healthcare, compassion, pro illegal immigrant rights, ect...) and compare them to (what used to be) the core beliefs of republicans and conservatives in general (take care of yourself, keeping what you earn, the free market, survival of the fittest, you get what you pay for, work for your money, ect...). Jesus himself would probably vote democrat.

It becomes apparent that if the democrats became against gay marriage and abortion, Jesus would probably support the democrats if he was alive today or at the least the message from the bible at leans towards liberal ideals and away from conservative (real conservative, not neocon) free market ideals.

So here's my query: Imagine the democrats become staunch anti abortionists, and anti gay marriage.

I'm assuming most current "fundamentalist christians" would still be voting republican or some other form of conservatism. how would they reconcile this for themselves considering they would arguably be voting against the ideals of jesus as set forth in the gospels? or is it even possible?

[lightweight]

I can't understand the corellation and comparison of theological beliefs with political beliefs.

Religion is a totally separate case with the state affairs.

The US is one of the few countries if only the only that separates church and state. I understand that most people mix them, but they are separate entities.

[roosterjuicer]

well the theory is that people's religious beliefs effect how they vote. if your religion says "everyone must wear blue" you wont vote for the guy who says "nobody is allowed to wear blue"

[csl177]

Originally Posted by lightweight

I can't understand the corellation and comparison of theological beliefs with political beliefs.

Religion is a totally separate case with the state affairs.

The US is one of the few countries if only the only that separates church and state. I understand that most people mix them, but they are separate entities.

If only that were true in practice. Yes, our Constitution precludes a state religion and protects the free practice of faith without state intrusion, but a mighty large segment of our population believes the US was founded as a Christian nation. All sports events begin with a prayer, all government activities begin with an invocation, we have national holidays for religious observation too. About 10-15% of us must put up with this charade, and dare not call into question the (Constitutional) legality lest we be branded as godless scum.

Rooster, your definitions of Democrats and Republicans are sadly tainted by two generations worth of political maneuvering by both parties to curry votes. Democrats tend to be progressive on social and economic issues but have been the biggest hawks in our nation's history. Republicans tout small government but have been responsible over 100 years of larger budgets supporting a handful of industries and practices harmful to the commonwealth.

I'm not a Christian... but if Jesus of Nazareth were among us today, my guess is he'd support Democratic principals but vote independantly.

[roosterjuicer]

Originally Posted by csl177

Rooster, your definitions of Democrats and Republicans is sadly tainted by two generations worth of political maneuvering by both parties to curry votes. Democrats tend to be progressive on social and economic issues but have been the biggest hawks in our nation' history. Republicans tout small government but have been responsible over 100 years of larger budgets supporting a handful of industries and practices harmful to the commonwealth.

I'm not a Christian... but if Jesus of Nazareth were among us today, my guess is he'd support Democratic principals but vote independantly.

Agreed, Agreed, and Agreed.

i was speaking with generalizations for the sake of debate.

As to your last point, thats basically my point. the thing about it, which i find to be quite telling, is that most non denominational or other big time "bible belters" (people who think, they believe in the bible word for word and nothing else) would probably die before voting for "democratic principals" but it seems that the bible makes it very difficult not to yet still claim to follow it.

[lightweight]

Originally Posted by roosterjuicer

well the theory is that people's religious beliefs effect how they vote.

That is the practice (which can be observed worldwide). The theory says that church and state are separate.

The church has no right to impose to the state civil laws. Extreme cases of this, is some eastern countries where the head of the state is the head of the church.

Thus, for me the answer to this thread is very simple: Religion and political beliefs are irrelevant, so any permutations of them are acceptable.

[csl177]

As I suggested, if only it were true in practice. A religious view may affect a political position; very rarely does a political view affect a religious position. Glad you used small "d" democratic principals, Rooster... that was my intent.

Unfortunately, people largely tend to follow the path arranged for them and usually it means making decisions at odds with self-interest. The human species is inherently cautious, conservative, and protective of status quo conditions. Whether reacting to political or religious changes, all cultures revert to their respective inculcations.

Modern anthropologists define it as tribal behaviour, and it will likely remain a defining quality of the human condition. We simply can't (won't) evolve fast enough to save ourselves from it. The sooner the human race embraces secular inclusion as more important to our survival as a species, the better off we, the planet, and everything on it will be. Which oddly enough, is exactly what the historical Jesus preached.

[syko]

Democrats aren't giving away free health care, there putting forward a non for profit option which has less overhead and provides compitition to the HMO's. You still have to buy into the health care plan its just going to be cheaper.

[Runfromcheney]

I have always wondered about the message of the bible. I see many Christian preachers being anti-gay, etc, but I don't know how that fits in Christianity's teachings: Jesus taught that you should love everyone around you. I don't remember EVER learning (I was raised a Christian. I'm not one anymore, however) that Jesus disliked certain minority groups and/or that certain minorities are damned to hell. I mean, I don't think I can see Jesus going up to a gay man and telling him, "You're going to hell because of your sexuality, even if you can't control it! Now watch me heal this blind man, fag!" Are there any actual Christian teachings that are like this, or are all those anti-gay "Focus on the Family" preachers bigots that hide behind the bible to excuse their twisted opinions?

[cmcpokey]

Originally Posted by lightweight

I can't understand the corellation and comparison of theologiacal beliefs with political beliefs.

Religion is a totally separate case with the state affairs.

spoken like someone who has never studied political science. most all political philosophers are also religious philosophers. St Augustine, Descartes, Plato, etc. The US is different from the rest of the world in that we don't hide our religious biases, and it is a much larger part of daily American life than the rest of the West (of course this excludes me since i am an Atheist). and as someone else rightly said, religion affects the decisions and opinions of the practitioners.

now rj, there is help for your dilemma. a bunch of crazies have started a push to remove the liberal biases from the bible. Conservative Bible Project - Conservapedia

i am in agreement with you though. there is a clear disparity between the beliefs of the average Republican.

[lightweight]

Originally Posted by Runfromcheney

I don't remember EVER learning that Jesus disliked certain minority groups

In the Old Testament God states that all non believers must die, so I guess that he disliked the majority, let alone the minority

[lightweight]

Originally Posted by cmcpokey

spoken like someone who has never studied political science. most all political philosophers are also religious philosophers. St Augustine, Descartes, Plato, etc. .

Does the fact that they had this opinion, means that there is no other opinion, or that I should adopt it? BTW I am not talking about political science here. I am talking in philosophical terms (though by no means a philosopher)

I think that I have stated a fact by saying that the US constitution separates church & state.

[csl177]

Originally Posted by lightweight

I think that I have stated a fact by saying that the US constitution separates church & state.

And I think I pointed out that there are exceptions long adopted as acceptable to the majority, though they are clearly prohibited in our Constitution. I'll see your "fact" and raise you our reality.

One needn't be a political scientist or philosopher to understand the conflicted nature of American-style democracy. It's messy.

BTW, pokey, love that website! What a hoot! For more fun 'n games check out World Net Daily once in awhile... Boogedymens!

[lightweight]

Originally Posted by lightweight

That is the practice (which can be observed worldwide)

Originally Posted by csl177

And I think I pointed out that there are exceptions long adopted as acceptable to the majority, though they are clearly prohibited in our Constitution. I'll see your "fact" and raise you our reality.

I have already acknowledged that myself many posts ago.

The point I am trying to make is that there is a distinction between what should be done and what is being done. The fact that something is being done, though, doesn't mean that it is always right. In fact, popular belief is not always right. If we all vote to kill somebody, this doesn't mean we should.

BTW, I never expected to have such a conversation in a car forum. Glad to see that there are thinking people here

[cmcpokey]

Originally Posted by lightweight

Does the fact that they had this opinion, means that there is no other opinion, or that I should adopt it? BTW I am not talking about political science here. I am talking in philosophical terms (though by no means a philosopher)

i think you missed my point here. i don't say that you need to be a believer in a religion to believe in a political system. what i am saying is that political and religious philosophies grew up side by side, and that there is no way they can be definitively separated from a purely philosophical stand point.

I think that I have stated a fact by saying that the US constitution separates church & state.

while you are correct, that is not really the point at hand. what the question that rj brought up, was how can one resolve the differences between Republican ideology and Christian ideology, since they are seemingly so disparate. that in no way implies that a Republican is implicitly a Christian (although it has an extremely high likelihood), or that Christianity is a fundamental aspect of US conservative politics (although, again with the likelihood of individuals).