Protestantism

» pink101 - Hope For Us Yet

In response to Hope For Us Yet posted by BrianTubbs:

.
Well, don't stray too far away from here.
.
I'll be boning up on that very question as I read Starr's Freedom's Power.
.

-- posted by pink101

» redback - Hope For Us Yet

In response to Hope For Us Yet posted by BrianTubbs:

Sometimes decisions precede the impotent opinion. So, we are faced with BS decisions. We don't like 'em but they're objective fact be it in health care or education etc. 'Getting it right first time, all the time' was a social policy mantra we had a few decades back that also didn't work.

"And I fail to see how liberal postmodernists, atheists, or agnostics can compellingly seize any objective high ground in these arguments"

I have trouble seeing how anyone knows what the objective high ground is, let alone is able to or prepared to pay extra taxes to achieve it. I'm also cynical of anyone claiming the more subjective, moral high ground.

The results of our 2006 Census are in. Left me to ponder how much WE drive things ourselves or is it like Pink suggests, significantly up to influences outside our control. How different is the USA to this Aussie snapshot?:

For the first time in 100 years, single people are in the majority. Childless couples increasing with only 45% of couples with kids, single-parents at nearly 16%. 40% of our people were born overseas. Nearly 19% of us have no religious affiliation, Catholics and Pentecostals are increasing while Protestants reducing. No: 2 religion is Buddhism followed by Islam followed by the fastest growing Hinduism.

-- posted by redback

» Migisi - Hope For Us Yet

In response to Hope For Us Yet posted by redback:

.
Fascinating snapshot, Red. I'll see what I can dig up on the US census breakdown.
.
Do you have any ideas why Buddhism, Islam, and Hinduism are gaining in popularity?

-- posted by Migisi

» Brian Tubbs - High Ground

In response to Hope For Us Yet posted by redback:

I have trouble seeing how anyone knows what the objective high ground is...

I certainly agree with that, especially when it comes to a complicated issue like this. The point I was making is that once a person, in his or her overall worldview, relegates all of religion and all of morality to the realm of SUBJECTIVITY, then such a person surrenders any claim to pass morally binding or compelling judgments on another person, group, or society. It just ends up with a "He said-She said" back-and-forth.

This is why most organizations that are worth their salt AGREE on some binding, overrarching moral principles that they expect their members to abide by. These moral principles become the BASIS for assessing what things are right, what things are wrong and what things are true and what are false.

I believe that the American Founding Fathers gave the American people those principles on July 4, 1776 with the Declaration of Independence - and we in the USA should stick to them!

I think Australia and all other nations should also agree on certain moral precepts -- and the people in those nations should be challenged to uphold them and abide by them.

This is what we call a MORAL COMPASS. And it would sure be helpful if our society had a consistent, solid, steady, working moral compass as it sorts through this critial issue of health care.

» redback - High Ground

In response to High Ground posted by BrianTubbs:

I reckon you raise some good points, Brian...and I seem slightly irreverent when I respond to them. I'm an Aussie!

I suspect (a suspicion in wet cement) Australia comes from a different mindset that is possibly as deeply rooted. We don't revere our Founding Fathers, don't get excited about our independence from the UK nor do we have a Bill of Rights.
But we do take care of business despite these 'shortcomings'. Means we may have less things to argue about, perhaps than the USA? That may even keep us better focused, more open to consensus??? Do we really need legislation to give each other a fair go here or do principles of common law suffice.

I really don't have compelling answers but I'm interested in what dynamic Migisi uncovers about your country.

Yep...to some extent we need to understand our past to understand our future...but the end-game is surely about deciding what to do in the future, isn't it. Not trying to reach unanimous agreement on the what/why of the past. Agree to disagree...move on...may be our unspoken mantra. I think the technical term is "laid back".

"...such a person surrenders any claim to pass morally binding or compelling judgments on another person, group, or society. It just ends up with a "He said-She said" back-and-forth."

Which must get frustrating for those playing that game, don't you think? Because either side of that divide is a mine field. And the middle ground seems at best lazy or wrong depending on one's ruling philosophy. I'm old enough and learned enough to understand the historical dilemna that brought us to this possible impasse.

While philosophers ponder these things, the farmer lays his crops, the storeman stocks the warehouse, many of us stay on struggle street.

I'm thinking if we all wait to get the desired MORAL COMPASS ( you are shouting??) the decisions we'd make in the interim is to leave many too-hard decisions in abeyance for too long. Or we clumsily tinker at the edges until someone else bears the responsibility for the decision.

Maybe what passes for a good leader nowadays is one who preaches to the converted believing it gives him enough mandate to drag the rest kicking and screaming...or sleeping...along with him.

-- posted by redback

» redback - Hope For Us Yet

In response to Hope For Us Yet posted by Migisi:

Twas hard to snapshot independently as some stats were confusing. Here's the newspaper report I relied on for the changes in religions:
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/sto...

The rate of change probably relates to our migration policies and acceptance of Buddhist refugees. Buddhists now = 2% for context + the Dalai visited in 2007 and was received by the Prime Minister. Muslim papers report us shunning marriage and God so what sort of 'moral high ground' reaction expected? Plus, we now include a test for future migrants so who knows how it will all now trend.

Apparently, 64% identified as Christian. The USA's Christian population in 2001 was nearly 80% and falling???

These are all national figures. I guess like your Bible Belt, there's an uneven spread, greater concentrations from city to city. (Unrelated but single mums nationally are about 16% but it's 25% locally)

-- posted by redback

» Migisi - High Ground

In response to High Ground posted by redback:

.
A very good post, Jeff.
.
but the end-game is surely about deciding what to do in the future, isn't it. Not trying to reach unanimous agreement on the what/why of the past.
.
Precisely. Some spend so much time and effort on the latter, they forget the former - and nothing ever gets resolved.

-- posted by Migisi

» Migisi - Hope For Us Yet

In response to Hope For Us Yet posted by redback:
.
Twas hard to snapshot independently as some stats were confusing.
.
And way too much info to sort. I found the US Census Bureau's "The 2007 Statistical Abstract" here: http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/p...
Excel spreadsheets by topic. Yikes. Sorry it's way more than a snapshot. I'm looking for a profile summary.
.
http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0110379.h... might be more useful.
.
From your news article: "For every 100 women in Australia, there are 97 men."
.
Interesting the the male/female ratio is the same here. In 2005, the number of males per 100 females was 97.1. I wonder who the point 1 man was.
.
This explains all the immigration talk and proposed 'amnesty' legislation for illegals...
.
Minorities Now a Third of the US Population
http://www.bet.com/News/MinoritiesAreATh...
.
100.7 million ethnic or racial minorities ... 2.4 million more than just ~last year~. Hispanics are the largest and fastest growing, Asians the second. It would follow that Catholicism would be growing here, given the dramatic and ever-increasing Hispanic population.

-- posted by Migisi

» pink101 - Movie, Sicko, Opens Today

.
Michael Moore's movie, Sicko, opens today.
.
Is it opening anywhere near you?
.
It's not playing here in Kalamazoo.
.
Is it available as a DVD?
.
Does anyone know?
.

-- posted by pink101

» Brian Tubbs - Time in the Past

In response to High Ground posted by Migisi:

Migisi and Jeff, I am much more in sympathy with what you say than you might think. However, many people are so quick to focus on the present and the future that they completely ignore the past. The mindset being: "What's the point of learning about history? Those people are dead and gone. Their time is done. It's our time now." I think that is a DANGEROUS philosophy, and that is why it SEEMS I spend so much time in the past - because it takes time to combat that dangerous philosophy.

The past is valuable for a number of reasons - not the least of which is that we can LEARN LESSONS from it. And hopefully avoid repeating some of our mistakes.

In the case of health care, for example, what lessons can we learn from the past to help us with the future? AND...

What values and principles is our society committed to (from its heritage) that we can use to GUIDE our decision-making? For example, anyone familiar with the Hippocratic Oath? For centuries, THAT was one of the preeminent moral compasses of the health care field. Not so anymore, I'm afraid.