British General Election 2017 Results Discussion

[TheDarkGreninja]

If by polygamy you mean relationships among more than 2 people, I'd say that monogamy used to be important in regulating western society in the past (with the man and the woman having different roles, the former was in control and went to work, and the latter was relegated to taking care of children and the house).
However, that's no longer needed. I'm myself in favor of rights to people in consensual polyamorous relationships

God Dammit, you ruined my argument.

Anyways, there are a lot of things that are considered illegal that, to me at least, lack rationality altogether.
Also, I'd say it's incorrect to suggest that religion hasn't played a part at all in shaping morals.

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------

In France the main Left-wing party is the Socialist party, and at the left of that are the Communists.

Yes but both views are still separate.

 

[G0R3Z]

God Dammit, you ruined my argument.

Anyways, there are a lot of things that are considered illegal that, to me at least, lack rationality altogether.
Also, I'd say it's incorrect to suggest that religion hasn't played a part at all in shaping morals.

Religion certainly does have a part in how we view morals. Morals for the most part are a personal thing. What one person sees as moral may be slightly different for someone else. But we still hold the views of religions in high regard, even in a country like the UK. I think it's kind of ridiculous to still hold religion in high regard.

 

[bi388]

In France the main Left-wing party is the Socialist party, and at the left of that are the Communists.

Exactly, communists are further left than socialists. Also socialism in France is very different from other nations. As someone who has lived in France, my experience is politicians there often run on far more extreme ideologies than what they actually support, then jump to the center when elected. The French socialist presidents have never been what other nations would consider socialist. Maybe democratic socialist like bernie.

 

[TheDarkGreninja]

Religion certainly does have a part in how we view morals. Morals for the most part are a personal thing. What one person sees as moral may be slightly different for someone else. But we still hold the views of religions in high regard, even in a country like the UK. I think it's kind of ridiculous to still hold religion in high regard.

What exactly do you mean by "high regard"?

 

[sarkwalvein]

Then whats the point of even having an official religion? It still rubs me as propaganda and brainwashing, but I guess im probably lacking first hand experience.

To represent what the majority of the people's beliefs are.

I don't think it is a good practice to have an official religion, I think it marginalizes whoever that is not from the official religion group.

On this I would give as an example Argentina, today still has traces of it as in its constitution it declares "freedom of religion" but also "the state will economically support the Roman Catholic cult".

Anyway, up to 1994 it also forced that in order to be President you had to be a Roman Catholic.
In the 90s we had a President that was muslim, but he had to convert to Roman Catholic in order to be able to become President, and one of the first things he did was move on to modify the constitution and remove this requirement, today you can be President no matter your belief.

I believe a country is of its people, no matter their religion, and there shouldn't be constraints put upon them to be part of a certain cult in order to participate in the political future of said country, but well...

PS: And regarding that specific president, don't put words in my mouth, that was as shitty as most other presidents, if there was anything he was known for is as a joker (not sure if because he himself was a joke, or because of his jokes), but at least I am more than ok with that part of the constitution that was modified.

 

[Lacius]

I'm not saying it does. But many of the morals we have today are based on the morals of Christianity/Judaism/Islam etc.

That's like saying the letters of the alphabet we use today are based on the letters of the alphabet used in the Bible. Religion likes to claim that it has a monopoly on morality, but morality does not actually come from religion.

1. The Code of Hammurabi and its moral proclamations predate religious texts and their proclamations of morality.
2. If morality comes from religious proclamations, then it's impossible to assess whether or not those religious proclamations are moral. In other words, if I have one religious text that says murder is wrong, and I have another religious text that says murder is good, then I can't know which one is correct if morality comes from religious proclamations. We all use our capacity for reason to figure out what is conducive to well being, our evolved biological predispositions to what we would consider to be moral behavior, etc. to determine what's moral.
3. The fact that people selectively pick the moral proclamations they like and disregard the ones they don't like demonstrates that morality does not come from religious texts.

TL;DR: Just because a religious text makes a claim about morality doesn't mean that's where morality comes from.

Because this is all off-topic, I'm ending my participation in this topic here. PM me or tag me in an on-topic thread if you want me to continue to participate.

 

[TheDarkGreninja]

That's like saying the letters of the alphabet we use today are based on the letters of the alphabet used in the Bible. Religion likes to claim that it has a monopoly on morality, but morality does not actually come from religion.

1. The Code of Hammurabi and its moral proclamations predate religious texts and their proclamations of morality.
2. If morality comes from religious proclamations, then it's impossible to assess whether or not those religious proclamations are moral. In other words, if I have one religious text that says murder is wrong, and I have another religious text that says murder is good, then I can't know which one is correct if morality comes from religious proclamations. We all use our capacity for reason to figure out what is conducive to well being, our evolved biological predispositions to what we would consider to be moral behavior, etc. to determine what's moral.
3. The fact that people selectively pick the moral proclamations they like and disregard the ones they don't like demonstrates that morality does not come from religious texts.

TL;DR: Just because a religious text makes a claim about morality doesn't mean that's where morality comes from.

Because this is all off-topic, I'm ending my participation in this topic here. PM me or tag me in an on-topic thread if you want me to continue to participate.

Here's an explanation of what I think:

So evolutionary biology then? Those who do not want to fight survive and those who do die, therefore meaning the morals of those who did not want to fight are passed on to the next generation.
What then would be the reason for making polyamy illegal?

 

[Gyron_Oldvic]

IMO if you are at the left of the left-wing party that's it. For me far-left = communist. I know Americans&co have a different df. of communism, but I'm not talking about USSR communism, far from that.

You should go work for the Daily Mail. You wouldn't even need an interview if you showed them your post.

 

[G0R3Z]

What exactly do you mean by "high regard"?

Exactly what I said; High regard. People, even those who aren't particularly religious, still review religious texts like the bible as though they're not just several thousand year old pieces of fiction. Those books, among all others, are treated as special. Their morals aren't intelligent or wise. The first several commandments for example: "You shall not have any other gods but me" and "You shall not make for yourself any false idol and bow down to it, or worship it". Wow, I wonder what their god thinks of all of those Jesus statues that people worship, or that old guy in the vatican with all of his wealth.

 

[bi388]

Exactly what I said; High regard. People, even those who aren't particularly religious, still review religious texts like the bible as though they're not just several thousand year old pieces of fiction. Those books, among all others, are treated as special. Their morals aren't intelligent or wise. The first several commandments for example: "You shall not have any other gods but me" and "You shall not make for yourself any false idol and bow down to it, or worship it". Wow, I wonder what their god thinks of all of those Jesus statues that people worship, or that old guy in the vatican with all of his wealth.

In christianity Jesus literally is god, they are two entities of the same being. And im pretty sure the Pope aint rich.

 

[G0R3Z]

In christianity Jesus literally is god, they are two entities of the same being. And im pretty sure the Pope aint rich.

Sure, you keep thinking that the Vatican isn't insanely wealthy.

 

[bi388]

Sure, you keep thinking that the Vatican isn't insanely wealthy.

I didnt say the Vatican, I said the pope. When you said "that old guy" I assumed you were referring to a person, not a nation.

 

[sarkwalvein]

Sure, you keep thinking that the Vatican isn't insanely wealthy.

Well, the Vatican has always been insanely rich, that is for sure.
But the current Pope is, was, has always been, anything but wealthy.
He is a Franciscan for god's sake.

 

[RevPokemon]

He is a Franciscan for god's sake.

Society of Jesus

 

[StarTrekVoyager]

You should go work for the Daily Mail. You wouldn't even need an interview if you showed them your post.

I didn't understand that.

 

[sarkwalvein]

Society of Jesus

Yes, he also is a Jesuit, but the name he chose was in honor of Francis of Assisi, and well... if you have heard him even before he was Pope back in Argentina, you will notice what are the allegiances.

 

[RevPokemon]

Anyway, I probably would have voted LibDem

 

[TotalInsanity4]

Since when is the British election a religious discussion??

 

[RevPokemon]

Since when is the British election a religious discussion??

Because any topic that is political turns to Islam over time

 

[Gyron_Oldvic]

I didn't understand that.

I was just joking around with you (hence the wink smiley) about what you consider communism (I know the far left is interpreted differently in France, but we're talking about the British election), and calling Jeremy Corbyn a communist shitbag. The Daily Mail laps up that kind of rhetoric. They have a tendency to create sensationalist nonsensical headlines. Notice how they needlessly print 'COMMUNIST PARTY' completely in upper case.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4439480/Polls-underestimating-Tory-support.html