HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Can fundamentalist religi...

Sun Jun 12, 2016, 12:31 PM

Can fundamentalist religion and liberal democracies co-exist?

I don't know.

32 replies, 1269 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 32 replies Author Time Post
Reply Can fundamentalist religion and liberal democracies co-exist? (Original post)
ForgoTheConsequence Jun 2016 OP
ShrimpPoboy Jun 2016 #1
ForgoTheConsequence Jun 2016 #2
ShrimpPoboy Jun 2016 #8
Hekate Jun 2016 #9
SusanCalvin Jun 2016 #3
gordianot Jun 2016 #4
linuxman Jun 2016 #5
Hekate Jun 2016 #6
ForgoTheConsequence Jun 2016 #7
Hekate Jun 2016 #14
ForgoTheConsequence Jun 2016 #17
Hekate Jun 2016 #24
jwirr Jun 2016 #10
Just reading posts Jun 2016 #11
ForgoTheConsequence Jun 2016 #18
Just reading posts Jun 2016 #21
Zynx Jun 2016 #12
smirkymonkey Jun 2016 #13
TimeToEvolve Jun 2016 #15
Agnosticsherbet Jun 2016 #16
ForgoTheConsequence Jun 2016 #20
Agnosticsherbet Jun 2016 #30
Joe the Revelator Jun 2016 #19
dawg Jun 2016 #22
rockfordfile Jun 2016 #23
kairos12 Jun 2016 #25
cali Jun 2016 #26
RKP5637 Jun 2016 #27
KansDem Jun 2016 #28
RKP5637 Jun 2016 #29
roamer65 Jun 2016 #31
Donald Ian Rankin Jun 2016 #32

Response to ForgoTheConsequence (Original post)

Sun Jun 12, 2016, 12:32 PM

1. Yes

As long as the fundamentals of that religion don't require violence or oppression.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ShrimpPoboy (Reply #1)

Sun Jun 12, 2016, 12:35 PM

2. Fundamentalist understandings of these religions often require violence and submission.

...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ForgoTheConsequence (Reply #2)

Sun Jun 12, 2016, 12:42 PM

8. They usually dont though.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ForgoTheConsequence (Reply #2)

Sun Jun 12, 2016, 12:43 PM

9. Be specific

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ForgoTheConsequence (Original post)

Sun Jun 12, 2016, 12:37 PM

3. If the religion's book condones anti-democratic behavior, no. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ForgoTheConsequence (Original post)

Sun Jun 12, 2016, 12:39 PM

4. Since I do not live in a liberal Democracy I do not know.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ForgoTheConsequence (Original post)

Sun Jun 12, 2016, 12:39 PM

5. Sure, right up until the former kills off all the later.

 

So no.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ForgoTheConsequence (Original post)

Sun Jun 12, 2016, 12:39 PM

6. We always got along with Holy Rollers before Ralph Reed & Co. decided to exploit them...

....for political gain.

It's a big, big country. And being liberal means we can find room for just about everybody. "No religious test" goes both ways.

The caveat is that we don't let the narrower world-views take over the government and try to remake it in their personal god's image.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ForgoTheConsequence (Original post)

Sun Jun 12, 2016, 12:41 PM

7. I'm not using liberal in the American political sense, but the philosophical sense.

If your fundamentalist interpretation of your religion requires you to convert others or murder them, they cannot co-exist.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ForgoTheConsequence (Reply #7)

Sun Jun 12, 2016, 12:49 PM

14. In this country we are supposed to jusge people on their behavior vis a vis secular law...

....not on ther personal beliefs about gods or the lack thereof. Just as secular law allows a person to accumulate guns and to believe that someone will take them all away, right up until the point their behavior changes and they try to overthrow the government. Then they discover limitations.

Secular laws are what we agree on in a democracy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hekate (Reply #14)

Sun Jun 12, 2016, 01:27 PM

17. I agree.

But fundamentalists believe their religious law supersedes secular law. If your ideology convinces you to make laws that infringe on the rights of others there is no compatibility to be found.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ForgoTheConsequence (Reply #17)

Sun Jun 12, 2016, 02:22 PM

24. That's why they don't get to establish a theocracy except in small communities like monasteries...

convents, communes, and so on. American history is littered with attempts at creating Utopia or the New Jerusalem. The Puritans came over to try it. The Quakers tried it. The Oneida community. Rajneesh. The early Mormons. The hippies, who thought they invented it.

Go for it. Just don't tell anyone they can't leave when they get sick of it, per secular law. And don't try to run my Constitutional government.

It's a big, big country.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ForgoTheConsequence (Original post)

Sun Jun 12, 2016, 12:46 PM

10. Reading this thread I see that most of the posts are thinking

of fundamentalist religion as something like Islam. Whenever I see those words I think of our own homegrown rw religions. They have really screwed up our government since the 1980s when their followers started working against government and Democrats.

I don't think that it has to be limited to just religions that are foreign and jihadist. I think our own rwers do a very good job of destroying Democracy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to Just reading posts (Reply #11)

Sun Jun 12, 2016, 01:28 PM

18. They exist outside of society for the most part.

Maybe the answer is yes, fundamentalists can exist as an insular group.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ForgoTheConsequence (Reply #18)

Sun Jun 12, 2016, 01:34 PM

21. Then yes again.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Borough_Park,_Brooklyn

Borough Park is home to one of the largest Orthodox Jewish communities outside of Israel, with one of the largest concentrations of Jews in the United States, and Orthodox traditions rivaling many insular communities.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ForgoTheConsequence (Original post)

Sun Jun 12, 2016, 12:48 PM

12. In general, no.

We see that with our own theocrats. They aren't content to let other people live their lives. Liberal democracy only functions when people are willing to accept the way others live.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ForgoTheConsequence (Original post)

Sun Jun 12, 2016, 12:48 PM

13. No.

n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ForgoTheConsequence (Original post)

Sun Jun 12, 2016, 12:56 PM

15. no

a liberal democracy is the product of our increasing enlightenment about our world and ourselves; which itself is the product of our evolution.

fundamentalist religions appeal to emotions rather than through argument and logic, which is why fundamentalist systems are often full of fervor and instability; they have completely abandoned rationality, i.e. the capacity to carry on in a rational manner.

so, no.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ForgoTheConsequence (Original post)

Sun Jun 12, 2016, 01:18 PM

16. In a free society, yes

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Agnosticsherbet (Reply #16)

Sun Jun 12, 2016, 01:29 PM

20. Free society doesn't mean you're free to oppress and murder.

...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ForgoTheConsequence (Reply #20)

Sun Jun 12, 2016, 03:26 PM

30. People can be free to hate and still be held responsible

For hateful actions.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ForgoTheConsequence (Original post)

Sun Jun 12, 2016, 01:28 PM

19. No.

 

And I say that as a guy who is on the conservative-liberal side of my religion.

There needs to be clear and firm separation.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ForgoTheConsequence (Original post)

Sun Jun 12, 2016, 01:45 PM

22. Depends on what "fundamentalist" means.

To some of you, I might be considered a fundamentalist. I'm certainly not shy about my beliefs. But I'm also no threat to liberal democracy.

But if "fundamentalist" means theocrat, then, yes, there is an existential conflict between the two.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ForgoTheConsequence (Original post)

Sun Jun 12, 2016, 01:46 PM

23. I don't think so

I don't think so because Conservative religion is always trying to destroy liberal democracies.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ForgoTheConsequence (Original post)

Sun Jun 12, 2016, 02:41 PM

25. NO.

In an organized, democratic society certain rights must be extended to all regardless of any type of orientation or background. When one group is fundamentally opposed, to the point of violence, to the recognition of rights of another then you have societal breakdown.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ForgoTheConsequence (Original post)

Sun Jun 12, 2016, 02:42 PM

26. Yes, of course.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ForgoTheConsequence (Original post)

Sun Jun 12, 2016, 02:43 PM

27. Mixing people of different cultures and faiths together has the potential to be problematic. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ForgoTheConsequence (Original post)

Sun Jun 12, 2016, 02:47 PM

28. No

Consider these three definitions--

religion--the belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, especially a personal God or gods.

myth--a traditional story, especially one concerning the early history of a people or explaining some natural or social phenomenon, and typically involving supernatural beings or events.

superstition--excessively credulous belief in and reverence for supernatural beings.


Democracy depends on logic and reason and a well-informed public.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KansDem (Reply #28)

Sun Jun 12, 2016, 03:01 PM

29. Yep! Well said! n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ForgoTheConsequence (Original post)

Sun Jun 12, 2016, 03:33 PM

31. No.

Because their ultimate goal is a religious theocracy, which is inheritantly anti-democratic.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ForgoTheConsequence (Original post)

Sun Jun 12, 2016, 04:01 PM

32. Absolutely, provided that the latter is dominant. N.T.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread