Church And Politics

[vidcc]

The pope has made his point to the spanish prime minister that he wants the country to follow a catholic doctrine. Now where i agree that religion to believers is important i don't believe that it should interfere with political systems.
We often see criticism of middle eastern "clerics as leaders" from the west yet in many western countries it would be unthinkable for a non believer to be voted into office.
I respect religious beliefs and people should be free to follow those beliefs without interference from the state, but the same should go in reverse...the state should be free to govern without interference from religion.




Pope denounces Madrid's liberal sex reforms
By Robin Gedye, Foreign Affairs Writer



The Pope denounced Spain's new liberal agenda yesterday, demanding that the Madrid government respect the religious and cultural traditions of the country's Roman Catholic heritage.

He delivered the dressing-down in an audience at the Vatican with Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero, the new socialist prime minister.

 
The pope gestures as he talks with Mr Zapatero at the Vatican 
Mr Zapatero, who has pledged to legalise same-sex marriages, relax abortion laws and institute fast track divorce, was told it was the duty of Spain to "conserve moral and cultural values, as well as its Christian roots".

In their 15-minute private meeting, the Pope also said he hoped that the Spanish government would "give due attention to ethical values that are so rooted in the religious and cultural tradition of the population".

The new Spanish leader gave no sign of backing down on his package of radical reforms.

Mr Zapatero, who had travelled to Rome specifically to see the Pope, said afterwards the talks had been "cordial" and an "open relationship" would be maintained.

"We are going there with the will to listen but the Vatican must realise there is a new government and that this new government has positions," said Miguel Angel Moratinos, the Spanish foreign minister.

"Of course, we respect the Catholic Church but we are also very firm on questions that the majority of Spaniards want to see changed."

Vatican sources said the Pope made clear his displeasure with Mr Zapatero's intention to turn Spain into the first predominantly Roman Catholic country to relax laws on same-sex marriages, divorce and abortion.

Both Mr Zapatero and Mr Moratinos made clear that they would not follow the previous conservative administration's policy on adhering to the Vatican's codes on sex and marriage.

Mr Zapatero's reforms include developing embryonic stem cell research and freezing an education bill that favoured Catholic religious teaching in schools.

16 June 2004: Inquisition wasn't quite as bad as people think, says Pope


Previous story: Found: the gun that shook the world
Next story: Pupil who fell asleep told to write in own blood



source (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2004/06/22/wpope22.xml&sSheet=/portal/2004/06/22/ixportal.html)

[Biggles]

Theocracy of any flavour is a nightmare.


If individuals who happen to be politicians are motivated to be honest and good because of religious convictions this can only be good.

If individuals use their position of political power to ram their religious convictions down others throats then this can only be bad - and in the longer term, bad for whichever faith is being forced down the gullets of the unwilling populace.

[Rat Faced]

I wholeheartedly agree.

[J'Pol]

Originally posted by Rat Faced@22 June 2004 - 23:35
I wholeheartedly agree.
As do I, on the assumption that your agreement is with Big Les.

I believe we have now covered both ends of the religious spectrum.

Let the Grey People now debate the minutiae

[Smith]

not at all.

in the us and canada they are having elections and some candidated want to ban abortions based on the churches teachings.

its all fine and good that bush is a hick that believes in god, but its not like everyone does. why should women of other religions or that dont have relogions have to obey a law based on religious teachings.?

[Smith]

wow that shut everyone up quick

my bad :lol:

[Donnie Darko]

One simple word..."NO"

[Smith]

ur still forgetting the point. i know if someone bases his campaign on religion he wont win. cause half or more than half of north america dosnt even go to church. why would i vote for him if i dont believe in god, and he bases his arguments on things said by god.

[Skweeky]

But how exactly do you want to keep them apart? :huh:

Surely politics has a lot to do with ethics and for so many people that goes hand in hand with religion.

[Rat Faced]

Poll added as requested.

I was asked for 2 yes votes and 2 no votes...probably to reflect strength of feeling.



Hell NO!


If there is religious freedom as there should be, then no Religion should dictate anything to do with Governing a country.

A Government should be there to look after ALL its people, irrespective of their spiritual beliefs.

Likewise a Church is there for all its "Believers", irrespective of their politics.


They are two distictly different entities...

A Government will be influenced by its Countries Culture as a matter of course, and Religion by its very nature influences Culture:-

Let that "Indirect" influence be enough; if a Religion isnt influential enough to affect the population, it shouldnt have any influence in the Government of that population.



If you believe different to this, then you really have No Argument if you believe any country should be "civilised" when the clerics of a particular Religion are in charge and the citizens are stoned, beheaded or whatever religious belief (such as Female Circumsicion etc) is practiced in that country.

Afterall they are merely doing the same as yourself, allowing Religion into Government and politics..... they merely have differing beliefs.

@ Skweeky:

"Ethics" and "Morals" are not universal.

What is Moral to you is Immoral elsewhere and the reverse is also True.

They depend upon a Culture (including Religious Influences) to give them meaning.

This fact alone, should keep Religion and Politics seperate.


Paul

[Smith]

thx for responding so fast to my pm rat faced

[longboneslinger]

My vote: Keep'em seperate.
One question for the TheCanuck, by this quote
its all fine and good that bush is a hick that believes in god are you emplying that believing in God makes one a hick or that W is a hick that happens to believe in God?

Just wond'rin :D

BONe

[Skweeky]

Originally posted by Rat Faced@24 June 2004 - 16:39

@ Skweeky:

"Ethics" and "Morals" are not universal.

What is Moral to you is Immoral elsewhere and the reverse is also True.

They depend upon a Culture (including Religious Influences) to give them meaning.

This fact alone, should keep Religion and Politics seperate.


Paul
I never claimed they were. I just said that they always go hand in hand with politics and that a certain amount of religion will be hard to keep out of politics on the whole.

I never said I agree with the fact religion and politics should mix, I am just pointing out that religion still is important to a lot of people and it will influence the way politics work. Besides, if the majority of the population in a country decides that religion should be a matter of government, is it fair then to deny them that right?

[J'Pol]

Religion and Politics are very muched mixed in the UK. We don't have to look elsewhere for that RF.

The Queen is the Head of the State. She is also Head of the Church of England.

Bishops from the Church of England sit in the House of Lords, as a right.

To the best of my knowledge no other religious group is represented in Government.

So, if you are in the UK you are governed to a certain extent by the Church of England.

[Smith]

Originally posted by longboneslinger@25 June 2004 - 01:46
My vote: Keep'em seperate.
One question for the TheCanuck, by this quote
its all fine and good that bush is a hick that believes in god are you emplying that believing in God makes one a hick or that W is a hick that happens to believe in God?

Just wond'rin :D

BONe
no im just inplying that bush thinks because god dosnt like it, the states shouldnt like it, and that bush is a dickhead.

[Rat Faced]

Originally posted by J'Pol@25 June 2004 - 11:43
Religion and Politics are very muched mixed in the UK. We don't have to look elsewhere for that RF.

The Queen is the Head of the State. She is also Head of the Church of England.

Bishops from the Church of England sit in the House of Lords, as a right.

To the best of my knowledge no other religious group is represented in Government.

So, if you are in the UK you are governed to a certain extent by the Church of England.
I never said they werent mixed here kind sir....


I said they shouldnt mix...


I stand by what i said should be the state of affairs, and not what the facts on the ground are.

Indeed, you have pointed out one of the things i was trying to say:

Why the hell should the Church of England have a direct influence on the Laws passed through Parliament; when no other church, never mind Religion, has this?

Likewise, how can the Monarch pass a Law that goes against the Tennents of the Church of England...when she is head of that Church?

eg: Werent CofE against Sunday Opening?

How did she reconcile going against the Church Council as head of the Church to sign the Sunday Opening changes?

It makes a hypocracy of it all ;)

[vidcc]

I saw this on CNN last night but couldn't find it on the website until now.

One bishop has suggested that anyone that votes for Kerry or any like minded politician should be denied communion unless they confess and show repentence.





DENVER, Colorado (Reuters) -- A Colorado Bishop, in one of strongest stands yet taken by a U.S. Roman Catholic church leader, says communion should be denied to people who vote for candidates supporting such issues as abortion rights, gay marriage, euthanasia and stem cell research.

In a pastoral letter to the 125,000 parishioners in Colorado Springs, Colorado, Bishop Michael Sheridan also warned that politicians opposed to church teachings on such issues and those who vote for them jeopardize their salvation.

"Any Catholic politicians who advocate for abortion, for illicit stem cell research or for any form of euthanasia ipso facto place themselves outside full communion with the church and so jeopardize their salvation," the bishop wrote in a letter published this week in the diocesan monthly newspaper, the Herald.

"Any Catholics who vote for candidates who stand for abortion, illicit stem cell research or euthanasia suffer the same fateful consequences," he added.

While some Catholic church leaders have suggested denying communion to Catholic politicians who support abortion rights, none except Sheridan are believed to have suggested that communion also be denied to the voters who support them.

The issue of whether Catholic candidates will support the church's position on abortion has come to a peak this year. President George Bush, a Protestant, opposes abortion while Democrat John Kerry, a Catholic, supports a woman's right to make that choice -- although he says he is personally opposed to abortion.

"This surely is beyond what any other bishop in the United States has said," Rev. Thomas Reese, editor of America Magazine, a national Catholic publication, said.

"Clearly there is disagreement among the U.S. bishops on this question" Reese said.

Bishops have control over issues in their own diocese, Bill Ryan a spokesman for the U.S. Catholic Conference of Bishops said. "The bishop is the one who decides in his diocese what is the proper posture to take."

"A lot of bishops have been speaking about this subject," Ryan said. He declined to comment on whether the Colorado bishop's statement was the strongest to date from a church official.

A spokeswoman for the Colorado Springs diocese said most of the callers to the chancery officer support the bishop.

The question of how voters and candidates should approach the issues of abortion rights and gay marriage is not uniform.

"We have some bishops like Archbishop (Raymond) Burke in St. Louis who has said that Catholic politicians who support abortion should not go to communion and if they do he would turn them away," Reese said.

However, other bishops think the best route is to try to persuade people to change their hearts on the issue.

"Archbishops (Sean Patrick) O'Malley and (Theodore) McCarrick have all said that while they are opposed to abortion and think that not only Catholic politicians but all politicians should be against abortion they would not turn someone away if they come up (for communion)," Reese said.

Reese said one of the problems of denying communion is that it puts the abortion issue in the context of religion rather than as a human rights issue.

"I think that this kind of thing is counter-productive for the pro-life movement. It's branding abortion as a Catholic issue ... rather than a human rights issue," he said.


source (http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/05/14/abortion.reut/)

[Smith]

thqats bullshit. its all fine to say abortions bad, but the tables turn when ur in those shoes. why should a man choose if women shoulld have right to something. if they were to vote, and thats a big if the pannel voting should be women only.

[Biggles]

How would they know who voted for whom?


I think it is the kind of tack that will sail the Church and State further apart - not closer.

[vidcc]

Originally posted by Biggles@30 June 2004 - 15:53
How would they know who voted for whom?



I think it was the bit where a supporter of such policies would suffer come judgement day. So confession would be the only option. It would be a test of ones religious views i guess.
Don't confess and take communion and you will pay in the afterlife

[Biggles]

Originally posted by vidcc+1 July 2004 - 00:59--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (vidcc @ 1 July 2004 - 00:59)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Biggles@30 June 2004 - 15:53
How would they know who voted for whom?



I think it was the bit where a supporter of such policies would suffer come judgement day. So confession would be the only option. It would be a test of ones religious views i guess.
Don&#39;t confess and take communion and you will pay in the afterlife [/b][/quote]
True

However, as I understand it, that which is confessed is forgiven and cannot be used as a basis for with-holding communion. Admitedly, speaking as a Pagan, I may be incorrect, so I will bow to those with superior knowledge in such matters, or (if J&#39;Pol is available), in all matters. B)

[vidcc]

Originally posted by Biggles@1 July 2004 - 13:04

However, as I understand it, that which is confessed is forgiven and cannot be used as a basis for with-holding communion.
well that was the point...one must confess to have communion. It isn&#39;t just a cofession that gets forgiveness...one has to be remorseful.