What would life be like in a modern day Christian theocracy?

Probably because many other Christians were slave owners. Christianity has a beautiful side and an ugly side... I see both sides.

But still none of this answers how America would be today if it were founded as a Christian theocracy?

 

I would be surprised if a Christian theocracy were so free. I would envision a battle between fundamentalists and moderates and I am not sure which side would win. In a moderate Christian theocracy life may be tolerable for non Christians like me, but under a fundamentalist Christian theocracy I would fear for me safety.

 

At the expense of gays being subservience to Christians. Its all fine and good so long as its your rights being protected... and there in lies my problem with any theocracy... those who are not part of the religion are often crushed beneath it.

To highlight pederasty while ignoring heterosexual pedophiles is just plain bias. Human sexuality is amoral and morality only comes into play when the individual commits a harmful act like the molestation of a child which both heterosexuals and homosexuals do. Both heterosexuals and homosexuals contract STD's including HIV and Aid.

 

Absurd.

Episode 3: Food: There's lots of it

 

Except no theocrat is EVER a "moderate". They eventually become more and more extreme, to garner more and more power for themselves. History is replete with it....Lenin gave rise to Stalin. The banana republic fascists became more and more violent to maintain their power.

There is no such thing as a "moderate" theocracy.

 

There IS lots now.....if there's no abortion or birth control and women do nothing but breed as Christians say they should pretty soon LIKE OTHER THIRD WORLD COUNTRIES there will be no food for the hordes!!!

 

I am surprised that no Christians are sharing their vision of how wonderful a Christian theocracy would be. I would think that those who do not like secular law would be ecstatic to live in a nation governed by Biblical law where a Christian Supreme Court would interpret the Bible and not the Constitution.

 

Probably because they themselves know the horror that it would be....even onto themselves.

While the "pro-lifers" might love living in a US with a "Womb Gestapo" keeping tabs on every fertile woman and her menstrual cycle.....they wouldn't much like it when the "Devil's Rum" Temperance folks ban alcohol or even being able to look at a "Sports Illustrated" Swimsuit Issue.

 

Besides blue laws and laws against cohabitation, I doubt it would be much different. The roots of America are religious diversity, albeit mainly Christian. Most Christians don't agree on much.

 

Total bull, based, again, on anti-religious prejudice, rather than reality. For an example of a Christian theocratic democracy, look at Ireland. It's fertility rate is 2.02, not even replacement level (2.1).

 

Nice of you to make it plain that your understanding of the Christian mindset lies purely in the realm of bigoted fantasies.

 

You are a bigot spewing ugly stereotypes. Haven't other groups oppressed women?

Let's look at the facts.

Anti-Woman? Five Reasons the Catholic Church Is the Most Pro-Woman Institution in Existence

Mary Slessor

The upper class in Britain was often irreligious: think of opinion leaders like Gibbon, Laplace, Comte, Feuerbach, Thomas Henry Huxley, Swinburne, etc. This was the golden age of atheism.

Tired propaganda.

 

And that is why a Christian theocracy U.S. would really be little different than our own country. Each faction of Chrisitianity has slightly different rules and outlook. Catholics wouldn't stand for prohibition of alcohol, for example. About the only thing I can figure out is that we would still have blue laws.

 

Then it isn't a christian country as portrayed in the OP.

 

Of course the real danger is the imposition of an atheocracy - the rule of the PC thought police.

Watch What You Say, The New Liberal Power Elite Won’t Tolerate Dissent

 

Can't answer so goes off topic....

 

More nonsense.

The abortion industry lies to women and targets women for mass murder.

Review - Unnatural Selection, by Mara Hvistendahl

Please note the complicity of liberal Western elites in this crime.

 

Well, first, you didn't provide any links to those claims so I'm going to take them with a grain of salt.

Secondly, I have a very strong distrust of Christian sources because when it comes to things like this they are very dishonest.


Thirdly, those sources are not primary sources, those secondary and tertiary sources. I look at primary sources, and one primary source is Hitler's Mein kampf. YO should read that book first.

I really don't like quote wars. Quotes are always taken out of context.

When you've read Mein Kampf get back to me. If you're interested.

When you provide sources that are completely objective and unbiased, if I see that i am wrong I will correct myself. On the explicit points that Hitler was not a Christian and Stalin was a Gregorian Orthodox Christian who converted to atheism.

But I will still not change my mind on how Christians will act. Christianity has done a lot of harm throughout history, destroyed entire cultures, and imprisoned others. In the modern day many Christians discriminate against other kinds of people who aren't Christians, and there's plenty of evidence to show that.

And you know, even if I am wrong and Stalin converted to atheism, I am still not using Stalin to demonize a huge group of people around the world. Because it was never about his religious beliefs, it was about a lust for power and he killed or imprisoned ANYBODY who disagreed with him.

For some reason, victims see with tunnel vision, and only see themselves, not anybody.

Hitler was the same way. But Hitler wrote a book while he was in prison to lay out his beliefs and what he would do. I don't understand why people dismiss this work.

Sometimes I wonder if people even know about it.

Finally, I have problems with curtains of secondary and tertiary works.My biggest objection to them is this, no matter if they are pro, or con, or neutral, they all take only bits and pieces in order to support they make. I want to see the full context of the piece they take out, because often time when you include the full context you'll see that the meaning of the quote changes in most cases.

So i want to see the full context before I make a conclusion.

 

So you're saying that women would be as free as they are now...under a fundamentalist Christian theocracy????

 

Do you want abortion banned in the United States? Yes or No?

If it were banned, would you want the ban enforced? Yes or No?

If you want it enforced, would you endorse hiring addtiional law enforcement officers to accomplish that? Yes or No?


(If you can't answer any of my questions....is it because you know you'd prove my point or contradict yourself? Yes or No?)

 

Uh Lenin and Stalin were atheists. lol Didn't you know that?

 

Yes! Protect all those vulnerable unborn babies and their mothers.

 

Again, the rich and powerful under a Christian theocracy....as in many dictatorships, would "skirt" the laws they imposed on others.

We see it now, even without such a theocracy. Scott DesJarlais, a Republican Congressman, obtained abortions for his wife....while running as a "pro-life Republican". Rush Limbaugh wanted "junkies thrown in jail"....until he himself became addicted to Oxycotin. Televangelists live in multi-million dollar mansions....while decrying a "culture of opulence and materialism". The Drug War Right....get drunk.

But I have faith in America....we've gotten close with theocracy. Starting with the Puritans...see the Salem Witch Trials and Roger Williams exile. Through the oppression of the Mormons by the Protestants in the 19th Century. Prohibition and the Billy Sunday/Aimee Semple McPherson/Scopes Monkey Trial 1920s. The Father Coughlin 1950s. And of course the Jerry Falwell/Pat Robertson 1980s.

We've always beaten them back. As Gandhi said "Whenever I despair, I remember that the way of truth and love has always won. There may be tyrants and murderers, and for a time, they may seem invincible, but in the end, they always fail. Think of it....always."

- - - Updated - - -

Would you want such a law enforced...or just "on the books" and ignored?

If enforced...would you support hiring additional law enforcement to enforce it?

 

And went to the seminary, for a while, but the point is taken, he certainly was no Christian by the time he started robbing banks to finance the Revolution

But would the Fundamentalists be in control? One thing not realized, (and I am sure some Christians here will dispute it but I have heard it in a college course I took) is that the US was among the most irreligious nations in the world at the time of its Founding. Evangelicism only took hold here some decades later in the first of several "Great Awakenings". On a worldwide stage, the idea of NOT having a State Church was among the most radical things proposed by the Founding Fathers as most governments argued that a State Church was necessary for orderly government. Do you think the idea of no State Church would have flown if the FF and the populace were mainly devout and chiliastic believers?

The fact of the matter is that most of the FF were Deists, and, if they had decided they needed a State Church it would probably be a Deist one. Fundamentalism, when it arose, would be seen as a threat to basic Deist tenets, and treated as such.

We are forgetting that Christianity has Unitarian/Universalists as well as Southern Baptists.

Nor any really moderate government of any type for that matter. Again I must reinforce R123, one religion would check another

We don't have lots of real Dominionists here. Pity, they can be interesting, if occasionally insufferable.

My opinion exactly, but stated better. Present conservative opinion notwithstanding most liberal values ARE Christian values, so a theocracy might very well be more liberal than we are.

 

You're an anarchist?

I disagree, I think moderate governments exist. A pendulum swing occurs, but it seems to even out. Slavery eventually gave rise to aboltitionism. The excesses of laissez-faire in the 1880s/1890s gave rise to Teddy Roosevelt and Progressivism. Ditto the Great Depression and "Harding/Coolidge" conservatism. Ditto 1950s reactionaryism and the 60s. Jim Crow to Civil Rights.

We've gotten "close" a few times....but we always bounce away from it. Or fight our way away from it. Even the Falwell/Robertson "Moral Majority" enjoyed its hey-day....but is now faded....so much so that the Republican Party is now abandoning its opposition to gay marriage, for one example.