Theists: Would you like to live in a Theocracy?

[Halcyon]

I didn't know whether to put this under religious debates or political, it seemed more political to me but if a people disagree then a mod can move it without complaint from me.

In case anyone is unaware, a theocracy is a form of government where religious officials and government officials are one and the same i.e. the priests rule the land instead of elected representatives, religious ethics determine state laws and God is seen as the final authority (not the people as in a democracy).

So, to our theist members, would you or would you not like to live in under a theocracy (assuming of course that the religion in power is your own)?

 

[angellous_evangellous]

I would be a soldier in the fight against it.

 

[doppelganger]

i.e. the priests rule the land instead of elected representatives, religious ethics determine state laws and God is seen as the final authority (not the people as in a democracy).

The people could vote for which priests they want in charge. Then it would still be a democracy. So, for example, let's say you live in a hypothetical country where a requirement for the highest offices is that one be "Christian" (not expressly by law but by public perception in the democratic system itself). That would still be a "democracy" and could also be a "theocracy" at the same time. And then the enactment of law and policy predicated upon particular religious belief could even be regarded as an extension of the "will of the people" (just not all of the people).

 

[doppelganger]

I would be a soldier in the fight against it.

I'm pretty sure that's a picture of a guy who's already a soldier in the fight for it.

 

[3.14]

no since that would give other religions a better reason to declare war on a whole country instead of just the temples and citys

 

[angellous_evangellous]

I'm pretty sure that's a picture of a guy who's already a soldier in the fight for it.

Ah, he's an actor. He's anybody's b****.

 

[doppelganger]

Ah, he's an actor.

That's a spurious claim . . .

 

[angellous_evangellous]

That's a spurious claim . . .

Well, not on the level of someone like Vin Diesel. :biglaugh:

 

[Elessar]

Of course not. I'm a small minority. Small minorities tend to be oppressed or suppressed in theocracies.

 

[Worshipper]

As for whether I'd like to live in a hierocracy (what you call a theocracy in the OP), I kind of think I wouldn't.

I'm currently living in a hierocracy — in fact, an Iranian friend of mine living here says he's amazed at how the system of control here and the system he knew back home are fundamentally identical. So I feel pretty able to discuss whether I would like living in a hierocracy.

At times, I find it very comfortable and delightful to live this way. I like the publicness (state-ness, as it were) of religious devotion. I like the ease with which we can discuss our faith openly within our community. I think it provides a general feeling of community that's very pleasant and can be almost heavenly.

At other times, though, it can get very frustrating. For example, if one leader decides he has a particular interpretation of God's word that puts you into the sinner category, you're out. There's little recourse for appealing the decision, since the leadership tends to unite among themselves rather than to turn on one another — a maverick leader has to go pretty far to get a reprimand. Also, at least in my current hierocracy, there's a constant surveillance of what we do to determine that we're keeping God's commandments. That gets annoying — not because I want to violate God's law, but because I don't always share their interpretation of God's law.

That's really what it comes down to with a hierocracy. You find pretty quickly that your faith community is somewhat diverse, and that people whose personal take on the common religion doesn't match up with the leaders' take on it can find their faithfulness attacked. That leads to facing religious and secular punishment from people within your own faith because you were living your own faith. That's tough.

So despite the clear advantages to living in a hierocracy, I would tend to want to avoid it.

A theocracy though would be awesome! I'd take Christ as my political leader any day!

 

[Halcyon]

Thanks for that Worshipper, very interesting. Although it sounds really rather scary, it sort of reminds me in a way of the book "1984".

 

[blackout]

If a theocracy were based around "my religion"...
everyone would be empowered as priest/preistess
goddess/god... and ruler of their own destiny.

Not sure who that could be bad for?

 

[Zephyr]

As for whether I'd like to live in a hierocracy (what you call a theocracy in the OP), I kind of think I wouldn't.

I'm currently living in a hierocracy — in fact, an Iranian friend of mine living here says he's amazed at how the system of control here and the system he knew back home are fundamentally identical. So I feel pretty able to discuss whether I would like living in a hierocracy.

At times, I find it very comfortable and delightful to live this way. I like the publicness (state-ness, as it were) of religious devotion. I like the ease with which we can discuss our faith openly within our community. I think it provides a general feeling of community that's very pleasant and can be almost heavenly.

At other times, though, it can get very frustrating. For example, if one leader decides he has a particular interpretation of God's word that puts you into the sinner category, you're out. There's little recourse for appealing the decision, since the leadership tends to unite among themselves rather than to turn on one another — a maverick leader has to go pretty far to get a reprimand. Also, at least in my current hierocracy, there's a constant surveillance of what we do to determine that we're keeping God's commandments. That gets annoying — not because I want to violate God's law, but because I don't always share their interpretation of God's law.

That's really what it comes down to with a hierocracy. You find pretty quickly that your faith community is somewhat diverse, and that people whose personal take on the common religion doesn't match up with the leaders' take on it can find their faithfulness attacked. That leads to facing religious and secular punishment from people within your own faith because you were living your own faith. That's tough.

So despite the clear advantages to living in a hierocracy, I would tend to want to avoid it.

A theocracy though would be awesome! I'd take Christ as my political leader any day!

What this guy said. I think it'd be absolutely FANTASTIC! to live in a community of Heathens, but I don't like the idea of having leadership based on it for the same reasons outlined in Worshipper's post.

A secular rule of Heathens would be sweet, but get enough of us together under a religious rule and we'd simply explode from the inevitable arguments.

 

[BucephalusBB]

If a theocracy were based around "my religion"...
everyone would be empowered as priest/preistess
goddess/god... and ruler of their own destiny.

Not sure who that could be bad for?

What about everybody with opposite rules?

 

[Congomutumbo]

Absolutely not. Ever. The government should remain secular and church and state should never become one. There's already too many people trying to make the states fit their religious beliefs when this is a multi-cultural society where our basic freedoms should be respected.

 

[Quagmire]

Only if I got to be High Priest.

 

[deseretgov]

I would not support a theocracy. But I do support a theodemocracy.

 

[Mister Emu]

It depends on how it was implemented...

 

[DallasApple]

I honestly believe with our founding fathers..

Seperation of church and state..(cause we all go to a different church and want to live in the same state together)...

So lets just all use our common sense..I think we all want the same thing..

Love

Dallas

 

[No*s]

Would I like to live in a theocracy? Given that "our most holy, pious, and God-fearing emperors" are generally the ones killing saints, not really. I like my nice, secular government I have.