Secularism's Refusal To Recognize Evil

[PoliticalChic]

Evil = Zionism = those behind

911
US Marines in Lebanon 1982
Pan Am 103 - type Gaddafi Jewish into any search engine
USS Liberty
JFK

"We have a lot in common [with Israel]. I always say, if one defines the Judeo-Christian West, then Israel represents a kind of border. If Israel fails, Europe fails. And if Europe fails, Israel fails." — Heinz-Christian Strache, leader of the Austrian Freedom Party."
Gatestone Institute

Wrong. America’s well-being does not rely on Israel. We did quite well before Israel was formed.

I’m not against Israel and Zionism, but they need to be able to stand on their own. So long as they keep Muslims out of their country and keep enforcing strict immigration, they set an example for the world: ban Muslims if you want to survive.

If they fail and let themselves be overrun and destroyed by Muslims, it will serve as an example of what not to do.

All anyone had before ISRAEL was the atomic bomb, Israel is a buffer for the middle east. there are many things they do that I think are mistakes, just like there are many things that we & all other country's do that are poor choices, to err is human. like to see us keep our mistakes to a smaller number. never happy to see young men & women die fighting for a poor choice.

Sorry, but, again.....your post leaves more questions than answers.

If you could focus like a laser, and make your point(s) it would be greatly appreciated.

 

[TemplarKormac]

KKK had to pledge their allegiance to the “eternal separation of Church and State.”..

LOL!!!!


KKK =- Christian....

sorry...

Interesting, I haven't worn a white robe or burned a cross in my entire life. But you seem to think it is okay to associate me and members of my faith with one of the most racist, most vile organizations in our country's history. Then again, would it be okay for me to associate all Muslims with terrorists?

 

[LaDexter]

She's a Zionist Liar and Traitor, loaded up with defense stocks in early 2001....

 

[ErikViking]

Well, as you yourself described Islam, how can you possibly be against a secular society?!? You think stoning women of cheating husbands is a good thing?!?

Your ability to express a cogent point is......sorely limited.

What is the relationship between secular and Islam?

I thank you for your patience then.


1. Secular includes this characteristic: "asserting the right to be free from religious rule and teachings, or, in a state declared to be neutral on matters of belief, from the imposition by government of religion or religious practices upon its people (Google).

A secular society would be a society without religious laws, right? Well, Islam is a religion.

The relationship between Islam and secularism is the same as, lets say Christianity and secularism. Religious practice and belief are being kept out of government.

Better?

"A secular society would be a society without religious laws, right? Well, Islam is a religion."

Au contraire.

Islam is neither a religion, nor the description of a secular society.



1. Dr. Glazov refers to it as a 'blood cult."

2. Michael Savage contrasts it with religion:

"We believe in freedom of religion insofar as a religion teaches peace and love and the brotherhood of man. When someone uses the concept of religion to dominate other religions through force and coercion or to take over a nation, they you have to say, "My friend, that's not a religion." Michael Savage




3. Admiral Lyons says it is a political movement:

Admiral James “Ace” Lyons, Jr. (Ret.), the former commander in chief of the U.S. Pacific Fleet,".... until you recognize that Islam is a political movement masquerading as a religion, you’re never going to come to grips with it. And as far as a strategy – let me just conclude one thing, as I just had in my latest op-ed -- the Obama Administration has a strategy.”

“It’s very simple, any thinking American should be able to grasp,” said the admiral. “It’s anti-American, anti-Western, it’s pro-Islamic, it’s pro-Iranian, and pro-Muslim Brotherhood!”
Admiral Lyons on Obama’s Strategy: ‘It’s Anti-American ... Pro-Islamic, It’s Pro-Iranian, and Pro-Muslim Brotherhood!’



4. Bill Donohue makes this observation:
Christians and Jews....the more devout, the less violent. Not so with Islam.


5. Crypto-Islamist trumpets same.....the only 'religion' that Barack Hussein Obama has stood up for, shielded from criticism, defended and advanced.

.... is associated more with Islam and not with any other 'religion:
'Pederasty, child brides, honor killings, clitorectomies, stonings, wife beatings and blowing up every innocent they can find.


It is said 'we live in interesting times.'
Some still live in the 7th century.

Allright, I never said anything about Islam being a description of a a secular society, now I start to think that it is you who lacks a point in what you are saying. A secular society would not incorporate laws or govern based on the believes in Islam.

To avoid further confusion: Do you think secularism is bad (stoning women to death on religious belief may very well be the law) or good (laws are not based on religous belief)? Simple enough question.

Actually, this is the 'simple question:'

Secular includes this characteristic: "asserting the right to be free from religious rule and teachings, or, in a state declared to be neutral on matters of belief, from the imposition by government of religion or religious practices upon its people (Google).



2. 'Secular' is the direct result of the Enlightenment, and the French Revolution. Religion was no more than superstition.
Instead of morality and the Bible, society was to be guided by reason and science, with the unspoken understanding that everyone simply knew how to behave, and, in fact, agreed with what was called 'the general will.'

The corollary of this new ethos is that there is no such thing as 'evil:' reason could now explain every behavior, no matter how hideous or villainous.

"…evil became medical instead of medieval. The diagnosis was more enlightened….It is the difference between saying 'The man is a paranoid schizophrenic, driven by homicidal delusions,' and 'The man is evil.'
The difference, of course, relates to responsibility and punishment. The paranoid schizophrenic is himself a victim…."
Lance Morrow, "Evil: An Investigation," p. 177




Why does secularism refuse to recognize, or confront, evil?

What are you? A robot?

1. Secular includes this characteristic: "asserting the right to be free from religious rule and teachings, or, in a state declared to be neutral on matters of belief, from the imposition by government of religion or religious practices upon its people (Google)

2. Not free from Christianity, Buddhism, Shinto, Islam or Maya. Free from religion.

3. Your talk about “evil” is contrarivtive between religions. You think human sacrifice is evil? Mayans sure didn’t.

4. Why is your definition of “evil” evil and others not? Because you are you? And you “know” stuff through your religious worship? A secular society doesn’t define evil in law - you can’t go to jail because you are evil. So human behavior is measured by the standard of the society. We vote to enforce that standard into legislation.

5. If you can’t stand a secular society or if you find it’s absence of definition of evil unbearable: Move to a country enforcing religious law. You’ll find plenty in the Middle East. They think like you do.

 

[g5000]

Secularism's Refusal To Recognize Evil

I recognize evil from a mile away. Too bad the Tard Herd refused to do so.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Your ability to express a cogent point is......sorely limited.

What is the relationship between secular and Islam?

I thank you for your patience then.


1. Secular includes this characteristic: "asserting the right to be free from religious rule and teachings, or, in a state declared to be neutral on matters of belief, from the imposition by government of religion or religious practices upon its people (Google).

A secular society would be a society without religious laws, right? Well, Islam is a religion.

The relationship between Islam and secularism is the same as, lets say Christianity and secularism. Religious practice and belief are being kept out of government.

Better?

"A secular society would be a society without religious laws, right? Well, Islam is a religion."

Au contraire.

Islam is neither a religion, nor the description of a secular society.



1. Dr. Glazov refers to it as a 'blood cult."

2. Michael Savage contrasts it with religion:

"We believe in freedom of religion insofar as a religion teaches peace and love and the brotherhood of man. When someone uses the concept of religion to dominate other religions through force and coercion or to take over a nation, they you have to say, "My friend, that's not a religion." Michael Savage




3. Admiral Lyons says it is a political movement:

Admiral James “Ace” Lyons, Jr. (Ret.), the former commander in chief of the U.S. Pacific Fleet,".... until you recognize that Islam is a political movement masquerading as a religion, you’re never going to come to grips with it. And as far as a strategy – let me just conclude one thing, as I just had in my latest op-ed -- the Obama Administration has a strategy.”

“It’s very simple, any thinking American should be able to grasp,” said the admiral. “It’s anti-American, anti-Western, it’s pro-Islamic, it’s pro-Iranian, and pro-Muslim Brotherhood!”
Admiral Lyons on Obama’s Strategy: ‘It’s Anti-American ... Pro-Islamic, It’s Pro-Iranian, and Pro-Muslim Brotherhood!’



4. Bill Donohue makes this observation:
Christians and Jews....the more devout, the less violent. Not so with Islam.


5. Crypto-Islamist trumpets same.....the only 'religion' that Barack Hussein Obama has stood up for, shielded from criticism, defended and advanced.

.... is associated more with Islam and not with any other 'religion:
'Pederasty, child brides, honor killings, clitorectomies, stonings, wife beatings and blowing up every innocent they can find.


It is said 'we live in interesting times.'
Some still live in the 7th century.

Allright, I never said anything about Islam being a description of a a secular society, now I start to think that it is you who lacks a point in what you are saying. A secular society would not incorporate laws or govern based on the believes in Islam.

To avoid further confusion: Do you think secularism is bad (stoning women to death on religious belief may very well be the law) or good (laws are not based on religous belief)? Simple enough question.

Actually, this is the 'simple question:'

Secular includes this characteristic: "asserting the right to be free from religious rule and teachings, or, in a state declared to be neutral on matters of belief, from the imposition by government of religion or religious practices upon its people (Google).



2. 'Secular' is the direct result of the Enlightenment, and the French Revolution. Religion was no more than superstition.
Instead of morality and the Bible, society was to be guided by reason and science, with the unspoken understanding that everyone simply knew how to behave, and, in fact, agreed with what was called 'the general will.'

The corollary of this new ethos is that there is no such thing as 'evil:' reason could now explain every behavior, no matter how hideous or villainous.

"…evil became medical instead of medieval. The diagnosis was more enlightened….It is the difference between saying 'The man is a paranoid schizophrenic, driven by homicidal delusions,' and 'The man is evil.'
The difference, of course, relates to responsibility and punishment. The paranoid schizophrenic is himself a victim…."
Lance Morrow, "Evil: An Investigation," p. 177




Why does secularism refuse to recognize, or confront, evil?

What are you? A robot?

1. Secular includes this characteristic: "asserting the right to be free from religious rule and teachings, or, in a state declared to be neutral on matters of belief, from the imposition by government of religion or religious practices upon its people (Google)

2. Not free from Christianity, Buddhism, Shinto, Islam or Maya. Free from religion.

3. Your talk about “evil” is contrarivtive between religions. You think human sacrifice is evil? Mayans sure didn’t.

4. Why is your definition of “evil” evil and others not? Because you are you? And you “know” stuff through your religious worship? A secular society doesn’t define evil in law - you can’t go to jail because you are evil. So human behavior is measured by the standard of the society. We vote to enforce that standard into legislation.

5. If you can’t stand a secular society or if you find it’s absence of definition of evil unbearable: Move to a country enforcing religious law. You’ll find plenty in the Middle East. They think like you do.

Why does secularism refuse to recognize, or confront, evil?

Why are you having so much trouble answering this question?

 

[ErikViking]

I thank you for your patience then.


1. Secular includes this characteristic: "asserting the right to be free from religious rule and teachings, or, in a state declared to be neutral on matters of belief, from the imposition by government of religion or religious practices upon its people (Google).

A secular society would be a society without religious laws, right? Well, Islam is a religion.

The relationship between Islam and secularism is the same as, lets say Christianity and secularism. Religious practice and belief are being kept out of government.

Better?

"A secular society would be a society without religious laws, right? Well, Islam is a religion."

Au contraire.

Islam is neither a religion, nor the description of a secular society.



1. Dr. Glazov refers to it as a 'blood cult."

2. Michael Savage contrasts it with religion:

"We believe in freedom of religion insofar as a religion teaches peace and love and the brotherhood of man. When someone uses the concept of religion to dominate other religions through force and coercion or to take over a nation, they you have to say, "My friend, that's not a religion." Michael Savage




3. Admiral Lyons says it is a political movement:

Admiral James “Ace” Lyons, Jr. (Ret.), the former commander in chief of the U.S. Pacific Fleet,".... until you recognize that Islam is a political movement masquerading as a religion, you’re never going to come to grips with it. And as far as a strategy – let me just conclude one thing, as I just had in my latest op-ed -- the Obama Administration has a strategy.”

“It’s very simple, any thinking American should be able to grasp,” said the admiral. “It’s anti-American, anti-Western, it’s pro-Islamic, it’s pro-Iranian, and pro-Muslim Brotherhood!”
Admiral Lyons on Obama’s Strategy: ‘It’s Anti-American ... Pro-Islamic, It’s Pro-Iranian, and Pro-Muslim Brotherhood!’



4. Bill Donohue makes this observation:
Christians and Jews....the more devout, the less violent. Not so with Islam.


5. Crypto-Islamist trumpets same.....the only 'religion' that Barack Hussein Obama has stood up for, shielded from criticism, defended and advanced.

.... is associated more with Islam and not with any other 'religion:
'Pederasty, child brides, honor killings, clitorectomies, stonings, wife beatings and blowing up every innocent they can find.


It is said 'we live in interesting times.'
Some still live in the 7th century.

Allright, I never said anything about Islam being a description of a a secular society, now I start to think that it is you who lacks a point in what you are saying. A secular society would not incorporate laws or govern based on the believes in Islam.

To avoid further confusion: Do you think secularism is bad (stoning women to death on religious belief may very well be the law) or good (laws are not based on religous belief)? Simple enough question.

Actually, this is the 'simple question:'

Secular includes this characteristic: "asserting the right to be free from religious rule and teachings, or, in a state declared to be neutral on matters of belief, from the imposition by government of religion or religious practices upon its people (Google).



2. 'Secular' is the direct result of the Enlightenment, and the French Revolution. Religion was no more than superstition.
Instead of morality and the Bible, society was to be guided by reason and science, with the unspoken understanding that everyone simply knew how to behave, and, in fact, agreed with what was called 'the general will.'

The corollary of this new ethos is that there is no such thing as 'evil:' reason could now explain every behavior, no matter how hideous or villainous.

"…evil became medical instead of medieval. The diagnosis was more enlightened….It is the difference between saying 'The man is a paranoid schizophrenic, driven by homicidal delusions,' and 'The man is evil.'
The difference, of course, relates to responsibility and punishment. The paranoid schizophrenic is himself a victim…."
Lance Morrow, "Evil: An Investigation," p. 177




Why does secularism refuse to recognize, or confront, evil?

What are you? A robot?

1. Secular includes this characteristic: "asserting the right to be free from religious rule and teachings, or, in a state declared to be neutral on matters of belief, from the imposition by government of religion or religious practices upon its people (Google)

2. Not free from Christianity, Buddhism, Shinto, Islam or Maya. Free from religion.

3. Your talk about “evil” is contrarivtive between religions. You think human sacrifice is evil? Mayans sure didn’t.

4. Why is your definition of “evil” evil and others not? Because you are you? And you “know” stuff through your religious worship? A secular society doesn’t define evil in law - you can’t go to jail because you are evil. So human behavior is measured by the standard of the society. We vote to enforce that standard into legislation.

5. If you can’t stand a secular society or if you find it’s absence of definition of evil unbearable: Move to a country enforcing religious law. You’ll find plenty in the Middle East. They think like you do.

Why does secularism refuse to recognize, or confront, evil?

Why are you having so much trouble answering this question?

It isn’t a refusal. It’s a result of uniforming the moral core of a society. If enough people in a society sees something as evil a secular society will outlaw that act. It’s the sum of the society’s perception of evil. However, separated from religion.

What acts of evil are not confronted in society do you think?

 

[PoliticalChic]

"A secular society would be a society without religious laws, right? Well, Islam is a religion."

Au contraire.

Islam is neither a religion, nor the description of a secular society.



1. Dr. Glazov refers to it as a 'blood cult."

2. Michael Savage contrasts it with religion:

"We believe in freedom of religion insofar as a religion teaches peace and love and the brotherhood of man. When someone uses the concept of religion to dominate other religions through force and coercion or to take over a nation, they you have to say, "My friend, that's not a religion." Michael Savage




3. Admiral Lyons says it is a political movement:

Admiral James “Ace” Lyons, Jr. (Ret.), the former commander in chief of the U.S. Pacific Fleet,".... until you recognize that Islam is a political movement masquerading as a religion, you’re never going to come to grips with it. And as far as a strategy – let me just conclude one thing, as I just had in my latest op-ed -- the Obama Administration has a strategy.”

“It’s very simple, any thinking American should be able to grasp,” said the admiral. “It’s anti-American, anti-Western, it’s pro-Islamic, it’s pro-Iranian, and pro-Muslim Brotherhood!”
Admiral Lyons on Obama’s Strategy: ‘It’s Anti-American ... Pro-Islamic, It’s Pro-Iranian, and Pro-Muslim Brotherhood!’



4. Bill Donohue makes this observation:
Christians and Jews....the more devout, the less violent. Not so with Islam.


5. Crypto-Islamist trumpets same.....the only 'religion' that Barack Hussein Obama has stood up for, shielded from criticism, defended and advanced.

.... is associated more with Islam and not with any other 'religion:
'Pederasty, child brides, honor killings, clitorectomies, stonings, wife beatings and blowing up every innocent they can find.


It is said 'we live in interesting times.'
Some still live in the 7th century.

Allright, I never said anything about Islam being a description of a a secular society, now I start to think that it is you who lacks a point in what you are saying. A secular society would not incorporate laws or govern based on the believes in Islam.

To avoid further confusion: Do you think secularism is bad (stoning women to death on religious belief may very well be the law) or good (laws are not based on religous belief)? Simple enough question.

Actually, this is the 'simple question:'

Secular includes this characteristic: "asserting the right to be free from religious rule and teachings, or, in a state declared to be neutral on matters of belief, from the imposition by government of religion or religious practices upon its people (Google).



2. 'Secular' is the direct result of the Enlightenment, and the French Revolution. Religion was no more than superstition.
Instead of morality and the Bible, society was to be guided by reason and science, with the unspoken understanding that everyone simply knew how to behave, and, in fact, agreed with what was called 'the general will.'

The corollary of this new ethos is that there is no such thing as 'evil:' reason could now explain every behavior, no matter how hideous or villainous.

"…evil became medical instead of medieval. The diagnosis was more enlightened….It is the difference between saying 'The man is a paranoid schizophrenic, driven by homicidal delusions,' and 'The man is evil.'
The difference, of course, relates to responsibility and punishment. The paranoid schizophrenic is himself a victim…."
Lance Morrow, "Evil: An Investigation," p. 177




Why does secularism refuse to recognize, or confront, evil?

What are you? A robot?

1. Secular includes this characteristic: "asserting the right to be free from religious rule and teachings, or, in a state declared to be neutral on matters of belief, from the imposition by government of religion or religious practices upon its people (Google)

2. Not free from Christianity, Buddhism, Shinto, Islam or Maya. Free from religion.

3. Your talk about “evil” is contrarivtive between religions. You think human sacrifice is evil? Mayans sure didn’t.

4. Why is your definition of “evil” evil and others not? Because you are you? And you “know” stuff through your religious worship? A secular society doesn’t define evil in law - you can’t go to jail because you are evil. So human behavior is measured by the standard of the society. We vote to enforce that standard into legislation.

5. If you can’t stand a secular society or if you find it’s absence of definition of evil unbearable: Move to a country enforcing religious law. You’ll find plenty in the Middle East. They think like you do.

Why does secularism refuse to recognize, or confront, evil?

Why are you having so much trouble answering this question?

It isn’t a refusal. It’s a result of uniforming the moral core of a society. If enough people in a society sees something as evil a secular society will outlaw that act. It’s the sum of the society’s perception of evil. However, separated from religion.

What acts of evil are not confronted in society do you think?

Who said 'refusal.'

I'm suggesting you lack the ability to consider and answer the question.



"....If enough people in a society sees something as evil a secular society will outlaw..."

Then, why not you?

 

[PoliticalChic]

Secularism's Refusal To Recognize Evil

I recognize evil from a mile away. Too bad the Tard Herd refused to do so.

Wait.....aren't you the self-proclaimed 'bomb expert' who couldn't recognize a bomb?


Does that neon light flashing IDIOT over your head keep you awake at night?

 

[ErikViking]

Allright, I never said anything about Islam being a description of a a secular society, now I start to think that it is you who lacks a point in what you are saying. A secular society would not incorporate laws or govern based on the believes in Islam.

To avoid further confusion: Do you think secularism is bad (stoning women to death on religious belief may very well be the law) or good (laws are not based on religous belief)? Simple enough question.

Actually, this is the 'simple question:'

Secular includes this characteristic: "asserting the right to be free from religious rule and teachings, or, in a state declared to be neutral on matters of belief, from the imposition by government of religion or religious practices upon its people (Google).



2. 'Secular' is the direct result of the Enlightenment, and the French Revolution. Religion was no more than superstition.
Instead of morality and the Bible, society was to be guided by reason and science, with the unspoken understanding that everyone simply knew how to behave, and, in fact, agreed with what was called 'the general will.'

The corollary of this new ethos is that there is no such thing as 'evil:' reason could now explain every behavior, no matter how hideous or villainous.

"…evil became medical instead of medieval. The diagnosis was more enlightened….It is the difference between saying 'The man is a paranoid schizophrenic, driven by homicidal delusions,' and 'The man is evil.'
The difference, of course, relates to responsibility and punishment. The paranoid schizophrenic is himself a victim…."
Lance Morrow, "Evil: An Investigation," p. 177




Why does secularism refuse to recognize, or confront, evil?

What are you? A robot?

1. Secular includes this characteristic: "asserting the right to be free from religious rule and teachings, or, in a state declared to be neutral on matters of belief, from the imposition by government of religion or religious practices upon its people (Google)

2. Not free from Christianity, Buddhism, Shinto, Islam or Maya. Free from religion.

3. Your talk about “evil” is contrarivtive between religions. You think human sacrifice is evil? Mayans sure didn’t.

4. Why is your definition of “evil” evil and others not? Because you are you? And you “know” stuff through your religious worship? A secular society doesn’t define evil in law - you can’t go to jail because you are evil. So human behavior is measured by the standard of the society. We vote to enforce that standard into legislation.

5. If you can’t stand a secular society or if you find it’s absence of definition of evil unbearable: Move to a country enforcing religious law. You’ll find plenty in the Middle East. They think like you do.

Why does secularism refuse to recognize, or confront, evil?

Why are you having so much trouble answering this question?

It isn’t a refusal. It’s a result of uniforming the moral core of a society. If enough people in a society sees something as evil a secular society will outlaw that act. It’s the sum of the society’s perception of evil. However, separated from religion.

What acts of evil are not confronted in society do you think?

Who said 'refusal.'

I'm suggesting you lack the ability to consider and answer the question.



"....If enough people in a society sees something as evil a secular society will outlaw..."

Then, why not you?

Didn’t you just say that? “Why does secularism refuse to recognize, or confront, evil?”

You say secularism refuse to recognize evil. So answer to your first question has to be “you”.

Why not me what? I think there is evil in this world. I’m not an atheist.

Persons aren’t secular. Societies that separate religious beliefs from government are secular. Secular societies might consist of people from many religions and atheists. Their combined sense of what is “evil” will constitute the law.

In non secular societies the religion constitutes the law.

Example:

In a non secular society you must perhaps cover your head if you are a woman. The scriptures says so.

In a secular society you must perhaps cover your genitals, most people says so.

 

[Marion Morrison]

Republicans are idiots of Biblical proportions.

They fight for the elite, Jews, and Capitalists who all support legal immigrants, outsourced jobs, and Islamic refugees, the very things they claim hate.

The post 1998 GOP is not the same party. It is a 100% pure Zionist Treason party. There is nothing "conservative" about it, nor was there anything "conservative" about the six years when W was in the WH with a GOP controlled House and Senate.

They did not behave like Newt Gingrich's Congress of the 1990s. They spent and spent and spent and socialized senior drugs and dropped a trillion on public education bureaucrats....

Hey man, how much rent do you charge dem Jews that are in your head? Do you check for them under the bed at night before you go to sleep?

 

[Marion Morrison]

So basically it's o.k. to cheat on your wife, lie, do anything for money and all that?

What's the point of religion if you support Donald Trump and trample upon all moral codes and anything related?

"So basically it's o.k. to cheat on your wife, lie, do anything for money and all that?"

This thread is only peripherally about the Clintons.....but, there is the word 'evil' in the title.....

Deflect all you want, I don't care about Bill Clinton and never said I support him, I was asking about Trump.

Why?

Isn't this the OP that brought you slithering here?

Secularism's Refusal To Recognize Evil

1. Don't confuse 'secular' with 'urbane.'

To be 'urbane' is to be hip, refined, suave, fin de siècle…a cool dude.


Secular includes this characteristic: "asserting the right to be free from religious rule and teachings, or, in a state declared to be neutral on matters of belief, from the imposition by government of religion or religious practices upon its people (Google).




2. 'Secular' is the direct result of the Enlightenment, and the French Revolution. Religion was no more than superstition.

Instead of morality and the Bible, society was to be guided by reason and science, with the unspoken understanding that everyone simply knew how to behave, and, in fact, agreed with what was called 'the general will.'


The corollary of this new ethos is that there is no such thing as 'evil:' reason could now explain every behavior, no matter how hideous or villainous.


"…evil became medical instead of medieval. The diagnosis was more enlightened….It is the difference between saying 'The man is a paranoid schizophrenic, driven by homicidal delusions,' and 'The man is evil.'

The difference, of course, relates to responsibility and punishment. The paranoid schizophrenic is himself a victim…."

Lance Morrow, "Evil: An Investigation," p. 177




3. The result is how society deals with those who take the lives of innocents.


Genesis 9:6 prescribed the death penalty for murder when it said that if a man “shed the blood” of another man, by man must his blood be shed. The only law repeated in all five of the books of the old testament.


a. To add insult to injury, well-intentioned Christians will often attempt to comfort the families of murder victims by suggesting that “God works in mysterious ways” as if He were somehow responsible for allowing the murder to occur. http://www.truthortradition.com/modules.php?name=News&file=print&sid=223#null


b. "Capital punishment is to the whole society what self-defense is to the individual." "The Ethics of Life and Death," J.P. Moreland, p. 115.


c. "It is based on the assumption that normal adult beings are rational and moral beings who knew better, who could have done otherwise, but yet who chose to do evil anyway, and who therefore deserve to be punished." JPM, Op. Cit. p. 118




4. Yet a secular society supposedly based on reason and science, does everything possible to ignore reason and science when it come to recognizing evil….there is copious evidence that the death penalty saves innocent lives….


"Most commentators who oppose capital punishment assert that an execution has no deterrent effect on future crimes. Recent evidence, however, suggests that the death penalty, when carried out, has an enormous deterrent effect on the number of murders. More precisely, our recent research shows that each execution carried out is correlated with about 74 fewer murders the following year.


For any society concerned about human life, that type of evidence is something that should be taken very seriously."
Capital Punishment Works


Certainly nothing about Trump herein.

Europe's way less violent today than it used to be, so that's a bit of a faulty premises.

1. Don't confuse 'secular' with 'urbane.'
To be 'urbane' is to be hip, refined, suave, …a cool dude.

Secular includes this characteristic: "asserting the right to be free from religious rule and teachings, or, in a state declared to be neutral on matters of belief, from the imposition by government of religion or religious practices upon its people (Google).



2. 'Secular' is the direct result of the Enlightenment, and the French Revolution. Religion was no more than superstition.
Instead of morality and the Bible, society was to be guided by reason and science, with the unspoken understanding that everyone simply knew how to behave, and, in fact, agreed with what was called 'the general will.'

The corollary of this new ethos is that there is no such thing as 'evil:' reason could now explain every behavior, no matter how hideous or villainous.

"…evil became medical instead of medieval. The diagnosis was more enlightened….It is the difference between saying 'The man is a paranoid schizophrenic, driven by homicidal delusions,' and 'The man is evil.'
The difference, of course, relates to responsibility and punishment. The paranoid schizophrenic is himself a victim…."
Lance Morrow, "Evil: An Investigation," p. 177



3. The result is how society deals with those who take the lives of innocents.

Genesis 9:6 prescribed the death penalty for murder when it said that if a man “shed the blood” of another man, by man must his blood be shed. The only law repeated in all five of the books of the old testament.

a. To add insult to injury, well-intentioned Christians will often attempt to comfort the families of murder victims by suggesting that “God works in mysterious ways” as if He were somehow responsible for allowing the murder to occur. http://www.truthortradition.com/modules.php?name=News&file=print&sid=223#null

b. "Capital punishment is to the whole society what self-defense is to the individual." "The Ethics of Life and Death," J.P. Moreland, p. 115.

c. "It is based on the assumption that normal adult beings are rational and moral beings who knew better, who could have done otherwise, but yet who chose to do evil anyway, and who therefore deserve to be punished." JPM, Op. Cit. p. 118



4. Yet a secular society supposedly based on reason and science, does everything possible to ignore reason and science when it come to recognizing evil….there is copious evidence that the death penalty saves innocent lives….

"Most commentators who oppose capital punishment assert that an execution has no deterrent effect on future crimes. Recent evidence, however, suggests that the death penalty, when carried out, has an enormous deterrent effect on the number of murders. More precisely, our recent research shows that each execution carried out is correlated with about 74 fewer murders the following year.

For any society concerned about human life, that type of evidence is something that should be taken very seriously."
Capital Punishment Works

Didn’t read it all, this is just another “Islam isn’t that bad thing”, right?

You need to work on producing posts that articulate a point.
I'd have to appeal to Queequeg to help understand what the heck you mean.


See if this helps:


§ "Despite the cries that Islam is a religion of peace, Islamic terror threat is everywhere; Muslims still teach hatred of Jews and Christians and they still preach jihad and killing the enemies of Allah. How can any sane person trust that Islam is moderate and is serious about wanting peace when the Muslim world is exploding with terror?"
Nonie Darwish • December 18, 2017

Yeah, but I was just checking - a totally agree - secularism is a good thing!

Let's get you on record:

1. Secular includes this characteristic: "asserting the right to be free from religious rule and teachings, or, in a state declared to be neutral on matters of belief, from the imposition by government of religion or religious practices upon its people (Google).

2. This view is the very antithesis of the basis of America's founding.

3. It marks you as a government school grad.
Am I right?

Hey!

 

[PoliticalChic]

Actually, this is the 'simple question:'

Secular includes this characteristic: "asserting the right to be free from religious rule and teachings, or, in a state declared to be neutral on matters of belief, from the imposition by government of religion or religious practices upon its people (Google).



2. 'Secular' is the direct result of the Enlightenment, and the French Revolution. Religion was no more than superstition.
Instead of morality and the Bible, society was to be guided by reason and science, with the unspoken understanding that everyone simply knew how to behave, and, in fact, agreed with what was called 'the general will.'

The corollary of this new ethos is that there is no such thing as 'evil:' reason could now explain every behavior, no matter how hideous or villainous.

"…evil became medical instead of medieval. The diagnosis was more enlightened….It is the difference between saying 'The man is a paranoid schizophrenic, driven by homicidal delusions,' and 'The man is evil.'
The difference, of course, relates to responsibility and punishment. The paranoid schizophrenic is himself a victim…."
Lance Morrow, "Evil: An Investigation," p. 177




Why does secularism refuse to recognize, or confront, evil?

What are you? A robot?

1. Secular includes this characteristic: "asserting the right to be free from religious rule and teachings, or, in a state declared to be neutral on matters of belief, from the imposition by government of religion or religious practices upon its people (Google)

2. Not free from Christianity, Buddhism, Shinto, Islam or Maya. Free from religion.

3. Your talk about “evil” is contrarivtive between religions. You think human sacrifice is evil? Mayans sure didn’t.

4. Why is your definition of “evil” evil and others not? Because you are you? And you “know” stuff through your religious worship? A secular society doesn’t define evil in law - you can’t go to jail because you are evil. So human behavior is measured by the standard of the society. We vote to enforce that standard into legislation.

5. If you can’t stand a secular society or if you find it’s absence of definition of evil unbearable: Move to a country enforcing religious law. You’ll find plenty in the Middle East. They think like you do.

Why does secularism refuse to recognize, or confront, evil?

Why are you having so much trouble answering this question?

It isn’t a refusal. It’s a result of uniforming the moral core of a society. If enough people in a society sees something as evil a secular society will outlaw that act. It’s the sum of the society’s perception of evil. However, separated from religion.

What acts of evil are not confronted in society do you think?

Who said 'refusal.'

I'm suggesting you lack the ability to consider and answer the question.



"....If enough people in a society sees something as evil a secular society will outlaw..."

Then, why not you?

Didn’t you just say that? “Why does secularism refuse to recognize, or confront, evil?”

You say secularism refuse to recognize evil. So answer to your first question has to be “you”.

Why not me what? I think there is evil in this world. I’m not an atheist.

Persons aren’t secular. Societies that separate religious beliefs from government are secular. Secular societies might consist of people from many religions and atheists. Their combined sense of what is “evil” will constitute the law.

In non secular societies the religion constitutes the law.

Example:

In a non secular society you must perhaps cover your head if you are a woman. The scriptures says so.

In a secular society you must perhaps cover your genitals, most people says so.

"Persons aren’t secular."

Of course they are....hence, secular societies.

When a society rejects it's founding doctrines, that of the Founders, and embraces the dogma of Rousseau, Hegel, and Marx.....we have secular societies.

Secular includes this characteristic: "asserting the right to be free from religious rule and teachings, or, in a state declared to be neutral on matters of belief, from the imposition by government of religion or religious practices upon its people (Google).

 

[PoliticalChic]

Actually, this is the 'simple question:'

Secular includes this characteristic: "asserting the right to be free from religious rule and teachings, or, in a state declared to be neutral on matters of belief, from the imposition by government of religion or religious practices upon its people (Google).



2. 'Secular' is the direct result of the Enlightenment, and the French Revolution. Religion was no more than superstition.
Instead of morality and the Bible, society was to be guided by reason and science, with the unspoken understanding that everyone simply knew how to behave, and, in fact, agreed with what was called 'the general will.'

The corollary of this new ethos is that there is no such thing as 'evil:' reason could now explain every behavior, no matter how hideous or villainous.

"…evil became medical instead of medieval. The diagnosis was more enlightened….It is the difference between saying 'The man is a paranoid schizophrenic, driven by homicidal delusions,' and 'The man is evil.'
The difference, of course, relates to responsibility and punishment. The paranoid schizophrenic is himself a victim…."
Lance Morrow, "Evil: An Investigation," p. 177




Why does secularism refuse to recognize, or confront, evil?

What are you? A robot?

1. Secular includes this characteristic: "asserting the right to be free from religious rule and teachings, or, in a state declared to be neutral on matters of belief, from the imposition by government of religion or religious practices upon its people (Google)

2. Not free from Christianity, Buddhism, Shinto, Islam or Maya. Free from religion.

3. Your talk about “evil” is contrarivtive between religions. You think human sacrifice is evil? Mayans sure didn’t.

4. Why is your definition of “evil” evil and others not? Because you are you? And you “know” stuff through your religious worship? A secular society doesn’t define evil in law - you can’t go to jail because you are evil. So human behavior is measured by the standard of the society. We vote to enforce that standard into legislation.

5. If you can’t stand a secular society or if you find it’s absence of definition of evil unbearable: Move to a country enforcing religious law. You’ll find plenty in the Middle East. They think like you do.

Why does secularism refuse to recognize, or confront, evil?

Why are you having so much trouble answering this question?

It isn’t a refusal. It’s a result of uniforming the moral core of a society. If enough people in a society sees something as evil a secular society will outlaw that act. It’s the sum of the society’s perception of evil. However, separated from religion.

What acts of evil are not confronted in society do you think?

Who said 'refusal.'

I'm suggesting you lack the ability to consider and answer the question.



"....If enough people in a society sees something as evil a secular society will outlaw..."

Then, why not you?

Didn’t you just say that? “Why does secularism refuse to recognize, or confront, evil?”

You say secularism refuse to recognize evil. So answer to your first question has to be “you”.

Why not me what? I think there is evil in this world. I’m not an atheist.

Persons aren’t secular. Societies that separate religious beliefs from government are secular. Secular societies might consist of people from many religions and atheists. Their combined sense of what is “evil” will constitute the law.

In non secular societies the religion constitutes the law.

Example:

In a non secular society you must perhaps cover your head if you are a woman. The scriptures says so.

In a secular society you must perhaps cover your genitals, most people says so.

Remediation time.

1. The basis of the French Revolution was to replace religion and morality with science and reason.
Didn't work out so well....France became an abattoir.
And that revolution gave us every totalitarian doctrine extant.....and over 100 million human beings slaughtered.
That's secularism.

a. Even in the 19th century, as religious conviction waned, the warnings were there. Ivan Karamazov, in “The Brothers Karamazov,” exclaimed ‘if God does not exist, then everything is permitted.’



2. Secular/Liberal American society is based on, as Charles Murray writes in his best-seller, "Coming Apart: The State of White America, 1960-2010,...."the “ecumenical niceness”…don’t fight, share toys, take turns….and never, ever be judgmental."
Everyone is entitled to their own morality.....
Children are born out of wedlock, personal responsibility is shunned, killers are no longer put to death.


Secular societies refuse to recognize or confront evil because they refuse to accept the standards that made society possible.
Those standards are spelled out in the instruction manual: The Bible.

 

[ErikViking]

What are you? A robot?

1. Secular includes this characteristic: "asserting the right to be free from religious rule and teachings, or, in a state declared to be neutral on matters of belief, from the imposition by government of religion or religious practices upon its people (Google)

2. Not free from Christianity, Buddhism, Shinto, Islam or Maya. Free from religion.

3. Your talk about “evil” is contrarivtive between religions. You think human sacrifice is evil? Mayans sure didn’t.

4. Why is your definition of “evil” evil and others not? Because you are you? And you “know” stuff through your religious worship? A secular society doesn’t define evil in law - you can’t go to jail because you are evil. So human behavior is measured by the standard of the society. We vote to enforce that standard into legislation.

5. If you can’t stand a secular society or if you find it’s absence of definition of evil unbearable: Move to a country enforcing religious law. You’ll find plenty in the Middle East. They think like you do.

Why does secularism refuse to recognize, or confront, evil?

Why are you having so much trouble answering this question?

It isn’t a refusal. It’s a result of uniforming the moral core of a society. If enough people in a society sees something as evil a secular society will outlaw that act. It’s the sum of the society’s perception of evil. However, separated from religion.

What acts of evil are not confronted in society do you think?

Who said 'refusal.'

I'm suggesting you lack the ability to consider and answer the question.



"....If enough people in a society sees something as evil a secular society will outlaw..."

Then, why not you?

Didn’t you just say that? “Why does secularism refuse to recognize, or confront, evil?”

You say secularism refuse to recognize evil. So answer to your first question has to be “you”.

Why not me what? I think there is evil in this world. I’m not an atheist.

Persons aren’t secular. Societies that separate religious beliefs from government are secular. Secular societies might consist of people from many religions and atheists. Their combined sense of what is “evil” will constitute the law.

In non secular societies the religion constitutes the law.

Example:

In a non secular society you must perhaps cover your head if you are a woman. The scriptures says so.

In a secular society you must perhaps cover your genitals, most people says so.

Remediation time.

1. The basis of the French Revolution was to replace religion and morality with science and reason.
Didn't work out so well....France became an abattoir.
And that revolution gave us every totalitarian doctrine extant.....and over 100 million human beings slaughtered.
That's secularism.

a. Even in the 19th century, as religious conviction waned, the warnings were there. Ivan Karamazov, in “The Brothers Karamazov,” exclaimed ‘if God does not exist, then everything is permitted.’



2. Secular/Liberal American society is based on, as Charles Murray writes in his best-seller, "Coming Apart: The State of White America, 1960-2010,...."the “ecumenical niceness”…don’t fight, share toys, take turns….and never, ever be judgmental."
Everyone is entitled to their own morality.....
Children are born out of wedlock, personal responsibility is shunned, killers are no longer put to death.


Secular societies refuse to recognize or confront evil because they refuse to accept the standards that made society possible.
Those standards are spelled out in the instruction manual: The Bible.

So, there we have it:

“
Secular societies refuse to recognize or confront evil because they refuse to accept the standards that made society possible.
Those standards are spelled out in the instruction manual: The Bible
“

Secularism isn’t about separation between Christianity and state. It’s the separation between religion and state.

You live in a society where there are different “instruction manuals”. Conflicting.

Of course you don’t see it like that. Your manual is always correct because God says so. For you secularism is negative.

A Muslim might agree with you here. They have a manual too. And secularism is negative for them.

You and the Muslims, and I, all have personal definitions of what’s evil. Not necessarily the same definition.

So, “evil” in a society becomes “showing your face” and “covering your face” at the same time.

A secular society has no use of defining this evil. No priests need to be consulted on what respectively God means.

The people is asked:
“Should showing your hair be a crime”?

And the people answer by voting.

By objecting to secularism it’s evident that you are not satisfied with the right you have to express your religion. Everyone else must also live their lives by your manual.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Those standards are spelled out in the instruction manual: The Bible.

What about the standards spelled out in the instruction manual known as: The Vedas
What about the standards spelled out in the instruction manual known as: The Koran
What about the standards spelled out in the instruction manual known as: The Sutras
What about the standards spelled out in the instruction manual known as: The Mishnah
What about the standards spelled out in the instruction manual known as: The Guru Granth Sahib

 

[ErikViking]

Those standards are spelled out in the instruction manual: The Bible.

What about the standards spelled out in the instruction manual known as: The Vedas
What about the standards spelled out in the instruction manual known as: The Koran
What about the standards spelled out in the instruction manual known as: The Sutras
What about the standards spelled out in the instruction manual known as: The Mishnah
What about the standards spelled out in the instruction manual known as: The Guru Granth Sahib

Bad move. Now you are going to get a response with the definition of each religion googled up, and a link to an article for each one of them, depicting them as bad.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Why does secularism refuse to recognize, or confront, evil?

Why are you having so much trouble answering this question?

It isn’t a refusal. It’s a result of uniforming the moral core of a society. If enough people in a society sees something as evil a secular society will outlaw that act. It’s the sum of the society’s perception of evil. However, separated from religion.

What acts of evil are not confronted in society do you think?

Who said 'refusal.'

I'm suggesting you lack the ability to consider and answer the question.



"....If enough people in a society sees something as evil a secular society will outlaw..."

Then, why not you?

Didn’t you just say that? “Why does secularism refuse to recognize, or confront, evil?”

You say secularism refuse to recognize evil. So answer to your first question has to be “you”.

Why not me what? I think there is evil in this world. I’m not an atheist.

Persons aren’t secular. Societies that separate religious beliefs from government are secular. Secular societies might consist of people from many religions and atheists. Their combined sense of what is “evil” will constitute the law.

In non secular societies the religion constitutes the law.

Example:

In a non secular society you must perhaps cover your head if you are a woman. The scriptures says so.

In a secular society you must perhaps cover your genitals, most people says so.

Remediation time.

1. The basis of the French Revolution was to replace religion and morality with science and reason.
Didn't work out so well....France became an abattoir.
And that revolution gave us every totalitarian doctrine extant.....and over 100 million human beings slaughtered.
That's secularism.

a. Even in the 19th century, as religious conviction waned, the warnings were there. Ivan Karamazov, in “The Brothers Karamazov,” exclaimed ‘if God does not exist, then everything is permitted.’



2. Secular/Liberal American society is based on, as Charles Murray writes in his best-seller, "Coming Apart: The State of White America, 1960-2010,...."the “ecumenical niceness”…don’t fight, share toys, take turns….and never, ever be judgmental."
Everyone is entitled to their own morality.....
Children are born out of wedlock, personal responsibility is shunned, killers are no longer put to death.


Secular societies refuse to recognize or confront evil because they refuse to accept the standards that made society possible.
Those standards are spelled out in the instruction manual: The Bible.

So, there we have it:

“
Secular societies refuse to recognize or confront evil because they refuse to accept the standards that made society possible.
Those standards are spelled out in the instruction manual: The Bible
“

Secularism isn’t about separation between Christianity and state. It’s the separation between religion and state.

You live in a society where there are different “instruction manuals”. Conflicting.

Of course you don’t see it like that. Your manual is always correct because God says so. For you secularism is negative.

A Muslim might agree with you here. They have a manual too. And secularism is negative for them.

You and the Muslims, and I, all have personal definitions of what’s evil. Not necessarily the same definition.

So, “evil” in a society becomes “showing your face” and “covering your face” at the same time.

A secular society has no use of defining this evil. No priests need to be consulted on what respectively God means.

The people is asked:
“Should showing your hair be a crime”?

And the people answer by voting.

By objecting to secularism it’s evident that you are not satisfied with the right you have to express your religion. Everyone else must also live their lives by your manual.

"You and the Muslims, and I, all have personal definitions of what’s evil. Not necessarily the same definition."

Why bring Islam into it....we're taking about religions.


Couldn't be more clear than this:

Secular societies refuse to recognize or confront evil because they refuse to accept the standards that made society possible.

Those standards are spelled out in the instruction manual: The Bible.



"This is the great contribution of our Judeo-Christian foundation to Western civilization. The principles of justice are laid down in the Torah and the Gospels, and implemented through human actions memorialized in judicial codes.

The written laws and rules are codifications of the unwritten ones worked out over millennia as the result of human interactions and experience.

But the execution of the laws must take into account human frailty, and must acknowledge the limits of reason, and, therefore, resort to impartial statutes in order to be fair.

The Bible is the wisdom of the West. It is from the precepts of the Bible that the legal systems of the West have been developed- systems, worked out over millennia, for dealing with inequality, with injustice, with greed, reducible t that which Christians call the Golden Rule, and the Jews had propounded as “That which is hateful to you, don not do to your neighbor.”

It is these rules and laws which form a framework which allows the individual foreknowledge of that which is permitted and that which is forbidden."
David Mamet, "The Secret Knowledge."

 

[PoliticalChic]

Those standards are spelled out in the instruction manual: The Bible.

What about the standards spelled out in the instruction manual known as: The Vedas
What about the standards spelled out in the instruction manual known as: The Koran
What about the standards spelled out in the instruction manual known as: The Sutras
What about the standards spelled out in the instruction manual known as: The Mishnah
What about the standards spelled out in the instruction manual known as: The Guru Granth Sahib

Couldn't be more clear than this:

Secular societies refuse to recognize or confront evil because they refuse to accept the standards that made society possible.

Those standards are spelled out in the instruction manual: The Bible.



"This is the great contribution of our Judeo-Christian foundation to Western civilization. The principles of justice are laid down in the Torah and the Gospels, and implemented through human actions memorialized in judicial codes.

The written laws and rules are codifications of the unwritten ones worked out over millennia as the result of human interactions and experience.

But the execution of the laws must take into account human frailty, and must acknowledge the limits of reason, and, therefore, resort to impartial statutes in order to be fair.

The Bible is the wisdom of the West. It is from the precepts of the Bible that the legal systems of the West have been developed- systems, worked out over millennia, for dealing with inequality, with injustice, with greed, reducible t that which Christians call the Golden Rule, and the Jews had propounded as “That which is hateful to you, don not do to your neighbor.”

It is these rules and laws which form a framework which allows the individual foreknowledge of that which is permitted and that which is forbidden."
David Mamet, "The Secret Knowledge."

 

[PoliticalChic]

Those standards are spelled out in the instruction manual: The Bible.

What about the standards spelled out in the instruction manual known as: The Vedas
What about the standards spelled out in the instruction manual known as: The Koran
What about the standards spelled out in the instruction manual known as: The Sutras
What about the standards spelled out in the instruction manual known as: The Mishnah
What about the standards spelled out in the instruction manual known as: The Guru Granth Sahib

Bad move. Now you are going to get a response with the definition of each religion googled up, and a link to an article for each one of them, depicting them as bad.

. Alas! My brilliant insights fall like seeds... on stony ground.