Depends on what they are. Some people have convictions against free speech, minority rights etc.
No
Not if they are authoritarian with respect to matters of religion in general.
Unlikely
Biblical Christianity plays too great a role in US politics.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Religion and Politics?
- Thread starter Salty Booger
- Start date
No, nor should it, it took the UK a thousand years to get (most) religion out of politics.
I would feel less confident in the politician.
Yes
Just the opposite in my view
Yes
PureX
Veteran Member
We shouldn't have to. And we wouldn't have to if she respected the position she's aspiring to.
Last edited:
It doesn't matter. Donald Trump is fine.
Though I heard there was a poll... evangelicals cared less about the morality of a candidate than everyone... that's messed up.
Samantha Rinne
Resident Genderfluid Writer/Artist
Unfortunately, religious conviction is too easily made into a checklist.
"Oooh Biden goes to church, he must be a Catholic."
But it's what you stand behind that matters. Not what other people tell you about that person's faith.
Aupmanyav
Be your own guru
Does the religious beliefs of a political candidate matter?: Yes they do, at least in India.
Would you feel better knowing that a politician has some religious conviction?: Either the person should have the same religion as I have or should be known as a true secularists and not a fake one.
Would you feel better knowing that a politician has no religious conviction?: No. I would still like to know how he will treat my religion.
Does a politician's religious convictions equate to greater individual morality?: No. That will be too much to expect from a politician. I would certainly like the person to be honest with regard to money.
Do you believe religion plays a major role in American politics currently? Religion always plays a major role in any election, but elections in Western world are not limited to that.
gurudavid
New Member
gurudavid
New Member
Good morning.
Morality, ethics, truth, honesty; all matter within our societies. Our Laws are based on the existence of these things. However; my experience is that more and more of our societies are less and less moral, ethical, truthful and honest.
I think that this applies to all sections of society from the top down to the bottom.
I have learned that to many, including politicians, that words are things of little or no value. The real way to measure many is through their real actions and not those claimed or misrepresented.
In many socieites now, the Narrative is king and those in charge of spreading the Narrative can control the messages.
Religion becomes important in politics when it is used as part of the narrative. In American politics there are many contradictory narratives and religious claims can help them to stand out and give them more credibility.
It is a challenge living a life with real morality, ethics, truth and honesty. It is something that you often pay a price for.
Politician like to cheat and make false claims. It is only through their actions over time that the real truth is revealed.
At the end of the day and at the end of the life; there is no avoiding the true consequences of a false life and the harming of others. Excuses don't matter when Taint is applied to our Life Force.
Enjoy your day.
Morality, ethics, truth, honesty; all matter within our societies. Our Laws are based on the existence of these things. However; my experience is that more and more of our societies are less and less moral, ethical, truthful and honest.
I think that this applies to all sections of society from the top down to the bottom.
I have learned that to many, including politicians, that words are things of little or no value. The real way to measure many is through their real actions and not those claimed or misrepresented.
In many socieites now, the Narrative is king and those in charge of spreading the Narrative can control the messages.
Religion becomes important in politics when it is used as part of the narrative. In American politics there are many contradictory narratives and religious claims can help them to stand out and give them more credibility.
It is a challenge living a life with real morality, ethics, truth and honesty. It is something that you often pay a price for.
Politician like to cheat and make false claims. It is only through their actions over time that the real truth is revealed.
At the end of the day and at the end of the life; there is no avoiding the true consequences of a false life and the harming of others. Excuses don't matter when Taint is applied to our Life Force.
Enjoy your day.
I'd say no in most cases. It depends on their religious beliefs and how much they let that influence their politics. Some people take it too far.
No
No
No
It shouldn't, but it's treated like gold for some reason.
Native
Free Natural Philosopher & Comparative Mythologist
1) For religious individuals, yes.
2) Depends on which conviction.
3) Same as in 2)
4) Not necessarily. Political parties tends to exclude the moral concerns for other but themselves.
Personally I would prefer politicians (and priests) to have a religious feeling and respect for NATURE in general instead of all kinds og dogma´s and have a social, national and global sense for all humans.
Samantha Rinne
Resident Genderfluid Writer/Artist
I think everyone here is missing the point.
Much of what others see about a politician as moral is just a glamour. We can't really know anything about these people.
Much of what others see about a politician as moral is just a glamour. We can't really know anything about these people.
Salty Booger
Royal Crown Cola (RC)
True. It's not like they are your neighbor.
Erebus
Well-Known Member
Yes but it can be difficult to judge whether or not those beliefs are sincere and the extent to which those beliefs will impact their behaviour. If for example a politician is firmly against gay marriage on religious grounds, I would be less inclined to trust that they will treat people fairly.
Not necessarily. See above.
Not necessarily. There are plenty of reasons why a politician might cause harm that have nothing to do with religion. For example, a politician might be dismissive of issues like mental illness.
No. My view of morality isn't centred on a person's religion.
Yes. Far more than it should.
I'll just make a quick note that I've been pretty negative towards politicians in my answers here, largely focusing on the harm a person's beliefs could cause rather than the potential good. This is primarily due to my view that politics all too often comes down to choosing the lesser evil.
Its extremely difficult to extract information from a Court nominee, and she was particularly good at it. What is obvious is that her Catholic faith has informed her personal life. In the Democratic effort to find a clue in the paper trail one senator discovered a review she had published that referred to homosexuality as a 'preference'. To me that's a 'tell'.
Its not a given that religion is always the first factor to be considered when making a judgment. Scalia was certainly a 'good' Catholic, but he voted in favor of the death penalty, was open critical of John Paul's 'new' catechism.
Last edited:
wellwisher
Well-Known Member
Religion provides its members with known long standing moral guardrails. While atheism and secularism, which believes in relative morality, does not always have known guardrails, or it has guardrails that can be easily manipulated by self serving politicians and social fads. Fake news works better on the anti-religious since their guardrails are not set in long term stone, but can move with the whims of supply side politics and clever opinions.
If you look at the Supreme Court of the USA, which is supposed to be about law and above politics, it is populated mostly with people with religious convictions; mostly Catholic. It is not full of atheists, since the atheist foundation of relative morality is not based on long standing historical antecedents such as in the Constitution and fixed law.
Politicians, on the other hand, are like used car salesmen with two faces. This is better represented by atheists who have more moral flexibility, such as the ends justifies the means. A religious politician, by having fixed guard rails, makes them more vulnerable to misrepresentation, than someone with relative guardrails who can change with the tide or lie; ends justifies the means.
Presidential candidate Biden was raised Catholic, but his political style is more connected to atheism. He can be two faced about what he stands for. He will tell moderates one thing and extremists another. Trump who is less religious on paper but has strong fixed moral guardrails is the same all the time. One knows where he stands, since this does not change. This fixed nature make him an easier target to those who disagree with his policies and who follow popularity fads.
If you look at censorship and the dual standards of social media, this is connected to atheism and not religion. Religion is about freedom of speech. Biden's corruption and the media censorship is OK in the world of relative morality. If this was Trump his fixed values would making it harder to avoid being judged by them. It is harder to judge a two faced person with relative morality since there is no constants.
If you look at the Supreme Court of the USA, which is supposed to be about law and above politics, it is populated mostly with people with religious convictions; mostly Catholic. It is not full of atheists, since the atheist foundation of relative morality is not based on long standing historical antecedents such as in the Constitution and fixed law.
Politicians, on the other hand, are like used car salesmen with two faces. This is better represented by atheists who have more moral flexibility, such as the ends justifies the means. A religious politician, by having fixed guard rails, makes them more vulnerable to misrepresentation, than someone with relative guardrails who can change with the tide or lie; ends justifies the means.
Presidential candidate Biden was raised Catholic, but his political style is more connected to atheism. He can be two faced about what he stands for. He will tell moderates one thing and extremists another. Trump who is less religious on paper but has strong fixed moral guardrails is the same all the time. One knows where he stands, since this does not change. This fixed nature make him an easier target to those who disagree with his policies and who follow popularity fads.
If you look at censorship and the dual standards of social media, this is connected to atheism and not religion. Religion is about freedom of speech. Biden's corruption and the media censorship is OK in the world of relative morality. If this was Trump his fixed values would making it harder to avoid being judged by them. It is harder to judge a two faced person with relative morality since there is no constants.
PureX
Veteran Member
One of the first questions we need to ask, and to make sure the candidate understands why we're asking (and why we expect an honest answer), is whether or not they can do the job that they're bring tasked with even if it conflicts with their personal philosophical or theological ideology. If they cannot, then they ought not be seeking the job in the first place.
Long but interesting read by Ronald Dworkin on the moral reading of the Constitution.
The Moral Reading of the Constitution
He claims to be anti abortion, ever wonder how many he paid for?
TagliatelliMonster
Veteran Member
Yes. Beliefs inform actions. If the candidate for example is a fundamentalist christian, then chances are rather big that his policies are going to be rather anti-gay, for example.
No.
No. What people do not believe doesn't matter. What matters is what they DO believe.
So it would only make me feel "better" in the sense of knowing that at least that means the candidate isn't religiously homophobic or bigotted or anything of the sort.
But he could still be a complete a-hole or have dictatorial aspirations or what-have-you.
For example, I'm pretty convinced that Trump is an atheist. But I wouldn't support him for office. Being an atheist doesn't automatically make you a good person or fit for presidency or anything else.
Because, again, what matters is not what you do not believe... what matters is what you DO believe.
No.
Yes. Far to major.