• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Describe your politics, a/theism, and interrelations between the two topics here

rcronk

Muse
Joined
Nov 3, 2006
Messages
728
I recently started a poll here at JREF about politics and god-related non/beliefs and based on the posts in that thread, people felt the categories were too limited and didn’t represent their positions. I therefore am starting a new thread that will allow people to express their positions exactly.

I'd like you to somewhat briefly express your political leanings and then express your god-related non/beliefs. Then if you have found within yourself a correlation or influence between these two areas, express that connection or influence or express that there is none.

I'll start. Remember, this isn't a debate thread; it's a place for people to express their positions on these topics so we can all understand each other better. I want to learn more about how these two areas affect each other (or not) and I need to look outside myself for this learning. Thanks in advance for participating and helping us to understand each other better. I've been here for a while and have seen and been involved in arguments for and against many of my beliefs described below and I thank the people of this forum for helping me to see things from a different perspective. I have grown as a person through our discourse which is why I want more discourse.

----

Politics: I'm a (social and fiscal) conservative free market capitalist (maybe leaning a little libertarian). I believe government should provide for national defense, basic infrastructure (roads, police, fire protection, etc.), and protect people's freedoms (speech, assembly, property ownership, etc.) from being infringed upon by other people or by the government itself. I believe people should have the right to succeed or fail based on their choices rather than having a government bail them out. This allows people to learn to be self sufficient and learn what works and what doesn't. It also allows people to be motivated toward the most efficient use of their time and efforts. I think that forced wealth redistribution is not only immoral, but it disincentivizes behavior that works by motivating the "giver" to be more selfish and resentful and the receiver doesn't feel as much motivation to work hard if they can since it’s just a free check from the government. If it were their neighbor who was voluntarily, out of love and concern for them, helping them out when they were down (and I've seen a lot of this from both sides and it works very well), they would return the favor by working hard to become independent and less of a burden upon this person who has voluntarily sacrificed for them.

a/theism: Theist Christian. I'm a Mormon. I believe we are all children of God who came to earth out of necessity as part of our eternal progression. I believe that an important part of this plan is to have doubts about God so that I will do what I want to do instead of what God wants me to do – like children behaving when their parents are around, but doing what they want to do when the parents are not around. I think God lets us fail and succeed and thereby we can learn what works (good, right, etc.) and what doesn't (wrong, evil, etc.). I was raised Mormon, then became a weak atheist/agnostic (if that's the right term) for about 6 years and after some life changing events, I investigated and visited many religious groups before returning to Mormonism.

Correlations: I think my beliefs about God affect the way I look at politics. I tend to trust in God, church, charities, and family and therefore I don't feel as much of a need to depend upon the government for my needs. I have noticed that when I do things for my kids, they become weak in that area, but when I teach them to do things for themselves, they become strong and stand on their own, which is one of my main goals of child-rearing. I think this way of thinking matches how I think God deals with me and how it works in my family, and how I think it should work with government. I also believe in free will and that free will was given to me by God. I believe that the more power and choice I give to government, the less free will and choice I have.
 
Last edited:
No religious leanings and politically I am a pragmatist so I consider policies based on the stated goals of those policies i.e. decide if they are good or bad or neutral based on what the stated goals are and whether I believe the results are likely to be as planned.
 
Last edited:
I'd like you to somewhat briefly express your political leanings and then express your god-related non/beliefs. Then if you have found within yourself a correlation or influence between these two areas, express that connection or influence or express that there is none.
Politics. I vote.

Religion. I go to church.

I don't mix the two.

What's your angle here? Why do you demand that politics and religion be mixed? Do you hate the Constitution?
I'll start. Remember, this isn't a debate thread; it's a place for people to express their positions on these topics so we can all understand each other better.
I bought Playboy for the articles when I was a teenager.

DR
 
Last edited:
No religious leanings and politically I am a pragmatist so I consider policies based on the stated goals of those policies i.e. decide if they are good or bad or neutral based on what the stated goals are and whether I believe the results are likely to be as planned.

Thanks for your post. Does "no religious leanings" mean "atheist" or "agnostic" or what? Do you look at historical outcomes of similar policies to compare outcomes to stated goals? I only mention that because I've seen a lot of stated goals turn out 180 degrees from the outcomes.

Politics. I vote.

Religion. I go to church.

I don't mix the two.

What's you angle here? Why do you demand that politics and religion be mixed? Do you hate the Constitution?

Thanks for your post. I'm not demanding a correlation and I'm not talking as much about religion as beliefs in god or not. If you see no correlation in your life between politics and a/theism, that's fine. I see a correlation in my life and I'm wondering what other people see in theirs, that's all. And, no, I don't hate the U.S. Constitution - I like it a lot actually. It states that congress shall make no law establishing or denying the free exercise of religion. It doesn't say anything about people's beliefs not being able to affect how they vote.
 
Last edited:
Thanks for your post. Does "no religious leanings" mean "atheist" or "agnostic" or what? Do you look at historical outcomes of similar policies to compare outcomes to stated goals? I only mention that because I've seen a lot of stated goals turn out 180 degrees from the outcomes.

...snip...

Hopefully I won't sound snide but "no religious leanings" means exactly what it says! I.e. I subscribe to no religious belief. (ETA) Which means that there can be no correlation between my religious beliefs and my views on policies.


And yes I will look at the past if it's applicable to a particular policy I am interested in.
 
Last edited:
I am a complete nonbeliever, a total Atheist.

I am also Libertarian leaning (e.g. small government, limited taxation, personal liberty) Government should work for the people, hold individual rights and liberties paramount, stay out of our homes, bedrooms and relationships and should not create behemoth programs that give people womb to tomb protection from every ailment, calamity or circumstance. Fixing every woe and need of the citizens is not government's priority or purpose in a free society. The pursuit of happiness, no matter what form it takes, as long as it does not interfere with another person's liberty, is not government's province or purview.
 
Hopefully I won't sound snide but "no religious leanings" means exactly what it says! I.e. I subscribe to no religious belief. And yes I will look at the past if it's applicable to a particular policy I am interested in.

So that would be atheism, right? Do you believe God exists? I'm just trying to understand where you're coming from, that's all. This thread isn't only for theists - I actually would like more responses from atheists than theists anyway.

ETA: I tweaked a thing or two in the OP to make it more clear that I'm not looking for religious leanings, but for non/belief regarding God.
 
Last edited:
I am a complete nonbeliever, a total Atheist.

I am also Libertarian leaning (e.g. small government, limited taxation, personal liberty) Government should work for the people, hold individual rights and liberties paramount, stay out of our homes, bedrooms and relationships and should not create behemoth programs that give people womb to tomb protection from every ailment, calamity or circumstance. Fixing every woe and need of the citizens is not government's priority or purpose in a free society. The pursuit of happiness, no matter what form it takes, as long as it does not interfere with another person's liberty, is not government's province or purview.

You've listed a few things I also believe in with regard to politics but that I forgot to list. Thank you.
 
So that would be atheism, right? Do you believe God exists? I'm just trying to understand where you're coming from, that's all. This thread isn't only for theists - I actually would like more responses from atheists than theists anyway.

ETA: I tweaked a thing or two in the OP to make it more clear that I'm not looking for religious leanings, but for non/belief regarding God.

Well I perhaps believe in one less god than you do so does that make me an atheist for your definition? (Despite you presumably also being an atheist about many of the thousands of different gods people say or have said they believe in?)
 
Well I perhaps believe in one less god than you do so does that make me an atheist for your definition? (Despite you presumably also being an atheist about many of the thousands of different gods people say or have said they believe in?)

Got it. I now understand your position. That was harder than it needed to be. Having similar word definitions is important for effective communication.

To prevent future misunderstanding, please know that my understanding of the word "atheist" matches the common usage of the English term as found in the following dictionaries. If your internal definition doesn't match these, please be more explicit to avoid confusion:

Merriam Webster: "one who believes that there is no deity." Random House: "a person who denies or disbelieves the existence of a supreme being or beings." American Heritage: "One who disbelieves or denies the existence of God or gods." Online Etymology dictionary: "atheist 1571, from Fr. athéiste (16c.), from Gk. atheos "to deny the gods, godless," from a- "without" + theos "a god""
 
Got it. I now understand your position. That was harder than it needed to be. Having similar word definitions is important for effective communication.

To prevent future misunderstanding, please know that my understanding of the word "atheist" matches the common usage of the English term as found in the following dictionaries. If your internal definition doesn't match these, please be more explicit to avoid confusion:

Merriam Webster: "one who believes that there is no deity." Random House: "a person who denies or disbelieves the existence of a supreme being or beings." American Heritage: "One who disbelieves or denies the existence of God or gods." Online Etymology dictionary: "atheist 1571, from Fr. athéiste (16c.), from Gk. atheos "to deny the gods, godless," from a- "without" + theos "a god""


Ah well then I'm not an atheist as I don't believe there is no "deity".
 
Ah well then I'm not an atheist as I don't believe there is no "deity".

You just "don't have belief in a deity" rather than "believing that there is no diety", right? I've always been confused by this stance since that sounds more like just not knowing or caring whether there is a god, which I thought had more to do with agnosticism (definitions below) than atheism.

In any case, I think I get where you're coming from. Thanks.

Random House: "a person who holds that the existence of the ultimate cause, as God, and the essential nature of things are unknown and unknowable, or that human knowledge is limited to experience." American Heritage: "One who believes that it is impossible to know whether there is a God." or "One who is skeptical about the existence of God but does not profess true atheism." Word history from American Heritage: "Word History: An agnostic does not deny the existence of God and heaven but holds that one cannot know for certain whether or not they exist. The term agnostic was fittingly coined by the 19th-century British scientist Thomas H. Huxley, who believed that only material phenomena were objects of exact knowledge. He made up the word from the prefix a-, meaning "without, not," as in amoral, and the noun Gnostic. Gnostic is related to the Greek word gnosis, "knowledge," which was used by early Christian writers to mean "higher, esoteric knowledge of spiritual things"; hence, Gnostic referred to those with such knowledge. In coining the term agnostic, Huxley was considering as "Gnostics" a group of his fellow intellectuals—"ists," as he called them—who had eagerly embraced various doctrines or theories that explained the world to their satisfaction. Because he was a "man without a rag of a label to cover himself with," Huxley coined the term agnostic for himself, its first published use being in 1870."
 
You just "don't have belief in a deity" rather than "believing that there is no diety", right? I've always been confused by this stance since that sounds more like just not knowing or caring whether there is a god, which I thought had more to do with agnosticism (definitions below) than atheism.

In any case, I think I get where you're coming from. Thanks.

...snip...

Nope not an agnostic, but I'm glad to see you using the term correctly (well in IMO of course) - many people here keep thinking it is about a position in regards the existence or not of a god rather than a position regarding the knowledge of a god (or not).
 
Nope not an agnostic, but I'm glad to see you using the term correctly (well in IMO of course) - many people here keep thinking it is about a position in regards the existence or not of a god rather than a position regarding the knowledge of a god (or not).

Hmm. Well, I'm glad I'm getting the definitions right. I think this is relevant to this thread since hopefully a large part of this thread can be about understanding each other better.

So, just to be completely clear, since you don't seem to match either "atheist" or "agnostic" by the common usage definitions, could you be explicit and direct about your position? Would the statement "you don't have a belief in any deity" be correct? If so, and that's neither atheist nor agnostic, then is there a word for that?
 
rcronk, just out of interest, do you believe native americans were actually..er.. white people? Because I would have thought that would have a profound impact on your politics. Politics is after all, supposed to be based on reason.

But as you ask, I am an Atheist, and my lack of faith somewhat influences my political views (A strong belief in society), so I do have admiration for those who keep their religion away from the political arena.

P.S, I think Darat is probably a bit like Michael Shermer, who describes himself as a non-theist.
 
Last edited:
Paultard and Deist:cool:

Paultard = supporter of Ron Paul?
Which deity do you believe in?

By the way, by deist, do you mean:

"There are two prominent views of God’s creation of the cosmos. First, Deism is the belief that God set up the universe, set it in motion, and left it at that. God is an observer, so to speak, Who does not take an active role in the universe He created. The other view is Theism. Theism is the belief that God set up the cosmos as He did in Deism, but maintains an active role in it. God actively intervenes in the lives that He created, in ways that He deems necessary."
 
rcronk, just out of interest, do you believe native americans were actually..er.. white people? Because I would have thought that would have a profound impact on your politics. Politics is after all, supposed to be based on reason.

But as you ask, I am an Atheist, and my lack of faith somewhat influences my political views (A strong belief in society), so I do have admiration for those who keep their religion away from the political arena.

I don't have a belief with regard to the ancestry of the Native American people. I suppose you're referring to the introduction to the Book of Mormon written in 1981 and changed in the past year or so? There were many Native American ancestors that came from Asia, etc. as well as the few from the middle east who were discussed in the Book of Mormon. If you're really interested in this topic, you can search for DNA at www.fairlds.org.

Atheist = you don't believe in any deity? Thanks for your direct and simple post with regard to your politics and positions. I appreciate it.
 
Hmm. Well, I'm glad I'm getting the definitions right. I think this is relevant to this thread since hopefully a large part of this thread can be about understanding each other better.

So, just to be completely clear, since you don't seem to match either "atheist" or "agnostic" by the common usage definitions, could you be explicit and direct about your position? Would the statement "you don't have a belief in any deity" be correct? If so, and that's neither atheist nor agnostic, then is there a word for that?

What would be more correct for my position is something along the lines of "There is either no evidence for any of the gods I've heard people define or there is evidence that directly contradicts the definition."

The reason I've been labouring this a bit is that I think your approach of wanting to define people's lack of beliefs by a simple label is the wrong approach if you really want to explore how peoples' lack of belief in something relates to their political stance.
 
Politics: I'm a (social and fiscal) conservative free market capitalist (maybe leaning a little libertarian). I believe government should provide for national defense, basic infrastructure (roads, police, fire protection, etc.), and protect people's freedoms (speech, assembly, property ownership, etc.) from being infringed upon by other people or by the government itself. I believe people should have the right to succeed or fail based on their choices rather than having a government bail them out. This allows people to learn to be self sufficient and learn what works and what doesn't. It also allows people to be motivated toward the most efficient use of their time and efforts. I think that forced wealth redistribution is not only immoral, but it disincentivizes behavior that works by motivating the "giver" to be more selfish and resentful and the receiver doesn't feel as much motivation to work hard if they can since it’s just a free check from the government. If it were their neighbor who was voluntarily, out of love and concern for them, helping them out when they were down (and I've seen a lot of this from both sides and it works very well), they would return the favor by working hard to become independent and less of a burden upon this person who has voluntarily sacrificed for them.


I'm on board with your politics although I want to make it clear that personal freedom is the highest ideal so I support complete legalization of drugs, porn etc.

As for as religion goes I'm an anti-theist (and an atheist which makes sense but isn't necessarily implied).
 

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom