• Please remember: Pray for Ukraine in the Prayer forum; Share news in the Christian News section; Discuss religious implications in FFA: Religious Topics; Discuss political implications in Politics (and if you don't have access, PM me) Thank you! + Fr. George, Forum Administrator

Manhattan Declaration

BrotherAidan

OC.Net Guru
Joined
Mar 4, 2004
Messages
1,568
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
pennsylvania
Has anyone read the Manhattan Declaration?
http://www.manhattandeclaration.org/the-declaration
If you have, do you plan to (or have you done so already) sign it?
 

Rastaman

Protokentarchos
Site Supporter
Joined
Dec 20, 2005
Messages
3,535
Reaction score
0
Points
36
Age
34
Location
Alberta, Canada
Faith
Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction
Moscow Patriarchate
http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,24483.0.html
 

BrotherAidan

OC.Net Guru
Joined
Mar 4, 2004
Messages
1,568
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
pennsylvania
However, when I clicked the link I got a message stating the topic is either missing or off limits to me.
Does that mean it is in the free-for-all area that you have to contact the Moderators to get there?
 

Friul

Protokentarchos
Site Supporter
Joined
Dec 10, 2006
Messages
4,492
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
35
Location
Earth, Solar System, Local Interstellar Cloud, Loc
Website
www.iheu.org
BrotherAidan said:
However, when I clicked the link I got a message stating the topic is either missing or off limits to me.
Does that mean it is in the free-for-all area that you have to contact the Moderators to get there?
Yup, it is in Politics.  You'll have to PM Fr. Chris about that.
 

augustin717

Taxiarches
Joined
Mar 15, 2006
Messages
7,110
Reaction score
191
Points
63
Faith
Higher Criticism
Jurisdiction
Dutch
What is this strange belief in "signing declarations"?
Is this a sacramental or magical action? So it seems, in certain circles.
Our faith is easily found by those interested, in the creeds and the liturgical tradition, so I see no point in this declaration. It is just politicking .
 

PeterTheAleut

Hypatos
Site Supporter
Joined
Mar 8, 2006
Messages
37,280
Reaction score
2
Points
0
Age
51
Location
Portland, Oregon
Faith
Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction
Orthodox Church in America
augustin717 said:
What is this strange belief in "signing declarations"?
Is this a sacramental or magical action? So it seems, in certain circles.
Our faith is easily found by those interested, in the creeds and the liturgical tradition, so I see no point in this declaration. It is just politicking .
Have you read the Declaration for yourself?
 

augustin717

Taxiarches
Joined
Mar 15, 2006
Messages
7,110
Reaction score
191
Points
63
Faith
Higher Criticism
Jurisdiction
Dutch
Glanced at it. I don't have enough patience for this literary genre.
 

PeterTheAleut

Hypatos
Site Supporter
Joined
Mar 8, 2006
Messages
37,280
Reaction score
2
Points
0
Age
51
Location
Portland, Oregon
Faith
Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction
Orthodox Church in America
augustin717 said:
Glanced at it. I don't have enough patience for this literary genre.
Then I don't think you're qualified to judge the document as politicking.
 

BrotherAidan

OC.Net Guru
Joined
Mar 4, 2004
Messages
1,568
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
pennsylvania
ytterbiumanalyst said:
PeterTheAleut said:
augustin717 said:
Glanced at it. I don't have enough patience for this literary genre.
Then I don't think you're qualified to judge the document as politicking.
I have read the document, and I do believe it's politicking.
Perhaps it is but in the US we have the right to petition the government for a redress of grievances. One way you do that is to make a declaration of those grievances and get a bunch of people to sign it to let the government know it's going in the wrong direction.

If one disagrees with one of the three main points then don't sign it. Some conscientious objectors in the Reformed Protestant community have already declined bcause they feel they cannot sign a joint statement with Catholic and Orthodox that implies a common understanding of the gospel. So there would be another reason not to sign.

But I can say this with assurance, no one else in the general culture is going to stand up for religious liberty when  Christian religious charities are forced to do things against their principles or hire workers outside of their faith communities; or when Christian doctors and nurses are coerced to do things against their consciences; or when priests are charged with hate crimes for teaching Christian morality.

If groups are continually issuing such documents they loose their force. But at timely moments such documents can create a rallying and serve notice to the powers that be that we will not be pushed around.

Elected officials at bottom line love their careers over their ideology and even if they would love to tighten the tourniquet on religious groups, especially Christian ones, and squeeze them till they can barely function or go out of existence, if they see enough people who can vote and influence other voters, they will back off and not be so aggressive in trying to undermine religious liberty.

Sorry if this is straying into politics. Please move it if necessary.*

But I am very concerned about encroachments on religious libery in the US through back door methods such as hate crime legislation, same sex marriages (forcing clergy to perform them against conscience - eventually it will happen; a law suit will be filed, a discrimination charge will be made), or the myriad ways the govt. could control health related charities if health care becomes nationalized, etc. I think this concern is perhaps THE clarion call of the Manhattan Declaration.

* or, perhaps edit this post and start a new thread with it regarding religious liberty. There should be a way to discuss this civily on the main board without devolving into bare knuckle partisan political argument.

 

bogdan

OC.Net Guru
Joined
Sep 9, 2009
Messages
1,614
Reaction score
1
Points
0
Location
USA
My thinking is that we should put our full effort into practicing all the things that the Church has always done and what Christ told us to do, instead of mucking around in politics and trying to fight for the Church's civil rights.

If we are free and legally protected to teach everything Christ wants us to teach, great. Use it to our advantage. But if it all disappears and the government outlaws every moral the Church teaches, then we keep doing it anyway. As someone once said, "If it serves the Lord to follow the law, follow it; if it doesn't, don't."

If you skip ahead to the end of the Book, the good guys win. The Church is ineradicable. So, I think we need to focus on doing what we have to, and not worry about shaping the secular world to fit our needs. Just disregard the secular world completely and get on with it.
 

PeterTheAleut

Hypatos
Site Supporter
Joined
Mar 8, 2006
Messages
37,280
Reaction score
2
Points
0
Age
51
Location
Portland, Oregon
Faith
Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction
Orthodox Church in America
ytterbiumanalyst said:
PeterTheAleut said:
augustin717 said:
Glanced at it. I don't have enough patience for this literary genre.
Then I don't think you're qualified to judge the document as politicking.
I have read the document, and I do believe it's politicking.
And since you've read the document, I would deem you qualified to make this judgment (though I still disagree with the judgment you've made on this, but that's beside the point ;)).
 

PeterTheAleut

Hypatos
Site Supporter
Joined
Mar 8, 2006
Messages
37,280
Reaction score
2
Points
0
Age
51
Location
Portland, Oregon
Faith
Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction
Orthodox Church in America
bogdan said:
If you skip ahead to the end of the Book, the good guys win. The Church is ineradicable. So, I think we need to focus on doing what we have to, and not worry about shaping the secular world to fit our needs. Just disregard the secular world completely and get on with it.
Having read the document for myself, I don't see it as an attempt to shape the secular world to shape our needs--I explain this in greater detail on the Politics board, so I'm not going to rehash my thoughts here--rather, I see the Declaration as an attempt to tell the secular world that we will not allow them to shape our moral code to fit their wants.
 

ytterbiumanalyst

Merarches
Joined
Jun 3, 2007
Messages
8,785
Reaction score
1
Points
0
Age
37
Location
Springfield, MO
PeterTheAleut said:
bogdan said:
If you skip ahead to the end of the Book, the good guys win. The Church is ineradicable. So, I think we need to focus on doing what we have to, and not worry about shaping the secular world to fit our needs. Just disregard the secular world completely and get on with it.
Having read the document for myself, I don't see it as an attempt to shape the secular world to shape our needs--I explain this in greater detail on the Politics board, so I'm not going to rehash my thoughts here--rather, I see the Declaration as an attempt to tell the secular world that we will not allow them to shape our moral code to fit their wants.
Only on matters of sex. The Manhattan Declaration does not even mention any other forms of morality.
 

Second Chance

Merarches
Site Supporter
Joined
Mar 13, 2009
Messages
8,025
Reaction score
5
Points
36
Age
77
Location
South Carolina
Faith
Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction
Diocese of the South (OCA)
ytterbiumanalyst said:
PeterTheAleut said:
bogdan said:
If you skip ahead to the end of the Book, the good guys win. The Church is ineradicable. So, I think we need to focus on doing what we have to, and not worry about shaping the secular world to fit our needs. Just disregard the secular world completely and get on with it.
Having read the document for myself, I don't see it as an attempt to shape the secular world to shape our needs--I explain this in greater detail on the Politics board, so I'm not going to rehash my thoughts here--rather, I see the Declaration as an attempt to tell the secular world that we will not allow them to shape our moral code to fit their wants.
Only on matters of sex. The Manhattan Declaration does not even mention any other forms of morality.
Abortion is a matter of sex?
 

Salpy

Hoplitarches
Joined
Jan 15, 2005
Messages
14,501
Reaction score
18
Points
38
It also addresses freedom of conscience: that a person should not lose their job because of their religious convictions, or be forced to do something that would violate those convictions.  That's also a form of morality that is not a matter of sex.
 

ytterbiumanalyst

Merarches
Joined
Jun 3, 2007
Messages
8,785
Reaction score
1
Points
0
Age
37
Location
Springfield, MO
Second Chance said:
ytterbiumanalyst said:
PeterTheAleut said:
bogdan said:
If you skip ahead to the end of the Book, the good guys win. The Church is ineradicable. So, I think we need to focus on doing what we have to, and not worry about shaping the secular world to fit our needs. Just disregard the secular world completely and get on with it.
Having read the document for myself, I don't see it as an attempt to shape the secular world to shape our needs--I explain this in greater detail on the Politics board, so I'm not going to rehash my thoughts here--rather, I see the Declaration as an attempt to tell the secular world that we will not allow them to shape our moral code to fit their wants.
Only on matters of sex. The Manhattan Declaration does not even mention any other forms of morality.
Abortion is a matter of sex?
Yep. Think about it really hard for a few minutes. You'll figure it out.
 

ytterbiumanalyst

Merarches
Joined
Jun 3, 2007
Messages
8,785
Reaction score
1
Points
0
Age
37
Location
Springfield, MO
Salpy said:
It also addresses freedom of conscience: that a person should not lose their job because of their religious convictions, or be forced to do something that would violate those convictions.  That's also a form of morality that is not a matter of sex.
It is already illegal to fire someone for their religious convictions. That's not an issue. But it is legal to fire someone for not doing their job, or for harassing other co-workers. The real issue of late has been medical professionals refusing to perform medically necessary abortions or religious employees harassing gay employees. And yes, those are issues of sex. If Christians would just get out of everyone else's pants, we wouldn't have these problems. And though they may have the right to petition the government to be able to investigate what everyone else does with their naughty bits, the government cannot and should not grant them that permission.
 

BrotherAidan

OC.Net Guru
Joined
Mar 4, 2004
Messages
1,568
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
pennsylvania
ytterbiumanalyst said:
Second Chance said:
ytterbiumanalyst said:
PeterTheAleut said:
bogdan said:
If you skip ahead to the end of the Book, the good guys win. The Church is ineradicable. So, I think we need to focus on doing what we have to, and not worry about shaping the secular world to fit our needs. Just disregard the secular world completely and get on with it.
Having read the document for myself, I don't see it as an attempt to shape the secular world to shape our needs--I explain this in greater detail on the Politics board, so I'm not going to rehash my thoughts here--rather, I see the Declaration as an attempt to tell the secular world that we will not allow them to shape our moral code to fit their wants.
Only on matters of sex. The Manhattan Declaration does not even mention any other forms of morality.
Abortion is a matter of sex?
Yep. Think about it really hard for a few minutes. You'll figure it out.
Pregnancy would be a matter of sex; but it does not necessarily follow that abortion is. There could be sex without abortions.

Besides, life issues beyond abortion such as euthanasia have nothing to do with sex; the institution of marriage certainly includes sex but is about so much more than that; and freedom of conscience and religious liberty have virtually nothing to do with sex.
 

BrotherAidan

OC.Net Guru
Joined
Mar 4, 2004
Messages
1,568
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
pennsylvania
ytterbiumanalyst said:
Salpy said:
It also addresses freedom of conscience: that a person should not lose their job because of their religious convictions, or be forced to do something that would violate those convictions.  That's also a form of morality that is not a matter of sex.
It is already illegal to fire someone for their religious convictions. That's not an issue. But it is legal to fire someone for not doing their job, or for harassing other co-workers. The real issue of late has been medical professionals refusing to perform medically necessary abortions or religious employees harassing gay employees. And yes, those are issues of sex. If Christians would just get out of everyone else's pants, we wouldn't have these problems. And though they may have the right to petition the government to be able to investigate what everyone else does with their naughty bits, the government cannot and should not grant them that permission.
It is not just religious folks harassing gays at work; it is about churches being forced to hire, say the church secretary or choir director without reference to that person's religion or sexual orientation or activity. A church may not want to hire a muslim or secular humanist secretary; it may not want a gay choir director; it may not want a youth minister that sleeps around and would like to have protections to hire and fire free from threat of discrimination suits.

And there are plenty of medical professionals who will perform an abortion for virtually any reason and it is always wrong to force anyone to perform a procedure that conflicts with their morality, No medical professional should be coerced in this way, ever.
 

ytterbiumanalyst

Merarches
Joined
Jun 3, 2007
Messages
8,785
Reaction score
1
Points
0
Age
37
Location
Springfield, MO
BrotherAidan said:
ytterbiumanalyst said:
Second Chance said:
Abortion is a matter of sex?
Yep. Think about it really hard for a few minutes. You'll figure it out.
Pregnancy would be a matter of sex; but it does not necessarily follow that abortion is. There could be sex without abortions.
I think I lost a couple IQ points just reading that. One cannot have an abortion without first having had sex. Therefore, abortion is a sexual issue. Is this concept really so hard to understand?

Besides, life issues beyond abortion such as euthanasia have nothing to do with sex; the institution of marriage certainly includes sex but is about so much more than that; and freedom of conscience and religious liberty have virtually nothing to do with sex.
We all know that "sanctity of human life" is conservative code for "supportive of a federal ban on abortions." If you want to talk about life issues beyond abortion, why not mention capital punishment? Poverty relief? Universal education? Universal health care? Banning of practices such as strip mining that harm the life of our planet and its inhabitants? Where are these life issues? No, the writers of this declaration are too caught up in the politics of sex to think about any of these issues.
 

Papist

Toumarches
Joined
Aug 24, 2006
Messages
13,772
Reaction score
0
Points
36
Age
41
Location
Albuquerque, New Mexico
ytterbiumanalyst said:
BrotherAidan said:
ytterbiumanalyst said:
Second Chance said:
Abortion is a matter of sex?
Yep. Think about it really hard for a few minutes. You'll figure it out.
Pregnancy would be a matter of sex; but it does not necessarily follow that abortion is. There could be sex without abortions.
I think I lost a couple IQ points just reading that. One cannot have an abortion without first having had sex. Therefore, abortion is a sexual issue. Is this concept really so hard to understand?

Besides, life issues beyond abortion such as euthanasia have nothing to do with sex; the institution of marriage certainly includes sex but is about so much more than that; and freedom of conscience and religious liberty have virtually nothing to do with sex.
We all know that "sanctity of human life" is conservative code for "supportive of a federal ban on abortions." If you want to talk about life issues beyond abortion, why not mention capital punishment? Poverty relief? Universal education? Universal health care? Banning of practices such as strip mining that harm the life of our planet and its inhabitants? Where are these life issues? No, the writers of this declaration are too caught up in the politics of sex to think about any of these issues.
you are kidding right? You compare the mass murder of the unborn with strip mining? Insane!



Fixed quote tags...  -PtA
 

ytterbiumanalyst

Merarches
Joined
Jun 3, 2007
Messages
8,785
Reaction score
1
Points
0
Age
37
Location
Springfield, MO
BrotherAidan said:
ytterbiumanalyst said:
Salpy said:
It also addresses freedom of conscience: that a person should not lose their job because of their religious convictions, or be forced to do something that would violate those convictions.  That's also a form of morality that is not a matter of sex.
It is already illegal to fire someone for their religious convictions. That's not an issue. But it is legal to fire someone for not doing their job, or for harassing other co-workers. The real issue of late has been medical professionals refusing to perform medically necessary abortions or religious employees harassing gay employees. And yes, those are issues of sex. If Christians would just get out of everyone else's pants, we wouldn't have these problems. And though they may have the right to petition the government to be able to investigate what everyone else does with their naughty bits, the government cannot and should not grant them that permission.
It is not just religious folks harassing gays at work; it is about churches being forced to hire, say the church secretary or choir director without reference to that person's religion or sexual orientation or activity. A church may not want to hire a muslim or secular humanist secretary; it may not want a gay choir director; it may not want a youth minister that sleeps around and would like to have protections to hire and fire free from threat of discrimination suits.
We're not talking about the hiring practices of religious institutions; they're already allowed to discriminate in all the ways you mentioned. We're talking about ordinary people who harass their gay co-workers for telling stories about their partners.

BrotherAidan said:
And there are plenty of medical professionals who will perform an abortion for virtually any reason and it is always wrong to force anyone to perform a procedure that conflicts with their morality, No medical professional should be coerced in this way, ever.
Again, we're not talking about "virtually any reason." We're talking about a medically necessary procedure. No medical professional has the option not to provide a medically necessary procedure, ever.
 

PeterTheAleut

Hypatos
Site Supporter
Joined
Mar 8, 2006
Messages
37,280
Reaction score
2
Points
0
Age
51
Location
Portland, Oregon
Faith
Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction
Orthodox Church in America
BrotherAidan said:
However, when I clicked the link I got a message stating the topic is either missing or off limits to me.
Does that mean it is in the free-for-all area that you have to contact the Moderators to get there?
Do you want access to the Private Forum?  I'm about to move this thread to Politics in order to connect it with discussion we've already had there, but I want to make sure you can still follow this discussion if you want to.
 

tuesdayschild

OC.Net Guru
Joined
Mar 22, 2007
Messages
1,000
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Just curious: What criteria would cause a thread to be placed in the "Politics" forum?
 

BrotherAidan

OC.Net Guru
Joined
Mar 4, 2004
Messages
1,568
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
pennsylvania
bogdan said:
My thinking is that we should put our full effort into practicing all the things that the Church has always done and what Christ told us to do, instead of mucking around in politics and trying to fight for the Church's civil rights.

If we are free and legally protected to teach everything Christ wants us to teach, great. Use it to our advantage. But if it all disappears and the government outlaws every moral the Church teaches, then we keep doing it anyway. As someone once said, "If it serves the Lord to follow the law, follow it; if it doesn't, don't."

If you skip ahead to the end of the Book, the good guys win. The Church is ineradicable. So, I think we need to focus on doing what we have to, and not worry about shaping the secular world to fit our needs. Just disregard the secular world completely and get on with it.
We are exhorted by the Bible and the Church to be good citizens. Part of being a good citizen in a free society is to continually monitor that society and do your part in some small way (or large way if given the opportunity/responsibility) to ensure the continuation of that society's liberty, if not for oneself, then for one's friends and neighbors and fellow parishoners and especially for one's children and grandchildren.


As for your other point, I have indeed read the end of the book. I know the good guys win in the end. But that end might still be a long, long way off. Should Russian Christians during the Soviet era, such as Solzenitzen, have shut up because the good guys win in the end?

People in our free society can have an impact without the huge cost Solzenitzen paid. The Manhattan Statement is a small, painless way (for the time being anyway) for its signers to be good citizens and do something about the erosion of freedom of conscience, the cultural understanding of the institution of marriage and life issues . It is not, in my opiion, mucking around in politics. The Church is called to worship and to serve God, as you rightly point out, but we are not one trick ponies. We can render to God the things of God and to Caesar the things of Caesar. Which in our case in USA would be to be good citizens, monitor our govt. and call it out when it is not living up to our ideals and historic liberties, while at the same time worshipping God and serving and loving Him fully.
 

PeterTheAleut

Hypatos
Site Supporter
Joined
Mar 8, 2006
Messages
37,280
Reaction score
2
Points
0
Age
51
Location
Portland, Oregon
Faith
Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction
Orthodox Church in America
tuesdayschild said:
Just curious: What criteria would cause a thread to be placed in the "Politics" forum?
If it discusses politics, since discussion of politics is not permitted on any of the public boards.
 

BrotherAidan

OC.Net Guru
Joined
Mar 4, 2004
Messages
1,568
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
pennsylvania
ytterbiumanalyst said:
BrotherAidan said:
ytterbiumanalyst said:
Second Chance said:
Abortion is a matter of sex?
Yep. Think about it really hard for a few minutes. You'll figure it out.
Pregnancy would be a matter of sex; but it does not necessarily follow that abortion is. There could be sex without abortions.
I think I lost a couple IQ points just reading that. One cannot have an abortion without first having had sex. Therefore, abortion is a sexual issue. Is this concept really so hard to understand?
Don't be a smart alec and talk insultingly about IQ points. Abortion does not logically follow as a necessity from sex. Couples can have sex without getting pregnant. Pregnant women can have babies and keep them or place them for adoption. It is in THAT sense abortion is not a matter of sex.

You are being very reductionist in reducing the Manhattan Declaration's many point to only being about sex.
 

ytterbiumanalyst

Merarches
Joined
Jun 3, 2007
Messages
8,785
Reaction score
1
Points
0
Age
37
Location
Springfield, MO
Right, the many points of the declaration: abortion, gay marriage, the legal right to refuse to do our jobs when it involves abortion, and the legal right to harass gay people. And I'm the one reducing a multiplicity of moral issues. ::)
 

PeterTheAleut

Hypatos
Site Supporter
Joined
Mar 8, 2006
Messages
37,280
Reaction score
2
Points
0
Age
51
Location
Portland, Oregon
Faith
Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction
Orthodox Church in America
ytterbiumanalyst said:
Right, the many points of the declaration: abortion, gay marriage, the legal right to refuse to do our jobs when it involves abortion, and the legal right to harass gay people. And I'm the one reducing a multiplicity of moral issues. ::)
You may not be the only one offering overly simplistic reductions of the issues addressed by the Manhattan Declaration, but by reducing almost everything in the Declaration to matters of sex, you are certainly engaging in gross reductionism.
 

tuesdayschild

OC.Net Guru
Joined
Mar 22, 2007
Messages
1,000
Reaction score
0
Points
0
PeterTheAleut said:
tuesdayschild said:
Just curious: What criteria would cause a thread to be placed in the "Politics" forum?
If it discusses politics, since discussion of politics is not permitted on any of the public boards.
Is there a definition of "politics" that you use to make this determination?
 

PeterTheAleut

Hypatos
Site Supporter
Joined
Mar 8, 2006
Messages
37,280
Reaction score
2
Points
0
Age
51
Location
Portland, Oregon
Faith
Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction
Orthodox Church in America
PeterTheAleut said:
tuesdayschild said:
Just curious: What criteria would cause a thread to be placed in the "Politics" forum?
If it discusses politics, since discussion of politics is not permitted on any of the public boards.
Personally, the main reason I want to move this to Politics is not so much for this thread's political content, since most of the discussion here merely treads the border between appropriate and inappropriate.  I want to move this thread because we've already hashed out this issue in Politics and I would hate to see so many important points of the discussion get lost or see posters waste valuable time in unnecessary cross-posting due to the divide between the private and public boards.  I just think it better to unite the parallel threads.
 

ytterbiumanalyst

Merarches
Joined
Jun 3, 2007
Messages
8,785
Reaction score
1
Points
0
Age
37
Location
Springfield, MO
PeterTheAleut said:
ytterbiumanalyst said:
Right, the many points of the declaration: abortion, gay marriage, the legal right to refuse to do our jobs when it involves abortion, and the legal right to harass gay people. And I'm the one reducing a multiplicity of moral issues. ::)
You may not be the only one offering overly simplistic reductions of the issues addressed by the Manhattan Declaration, but by reducing almost everything in the Declaration to matters of sex, you are certainly engaging in gross reductionism.
Perhaps, having grown up in an Evangelical home, I have a hard time seeing this declaration as anything else.
 

PeterTheAleut

Hypatos
Site Supporter
Joined
Mar 8, 2006
Messages
37,280
Reaction score
2
Points
0
Age
51
Location
Portland, Oregon
Faith
Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction
Orthodox Church in America
tuesdayschild said:
PeterTheAleut said:
tuesdayschild said:
Just curious: What criteria would cause a thread to be placed in the "Politics" forum?
If it discusses politics, since discussion of politics is not permitted on any of the public boards.
Is there a definition of "politics" that you use to make this determination?
Discussion of such things as legislation, judicial or executive decisions, government policy, campaigns for political office, international conflicts, etc.  I'll admit that many of the decisions are a bit subjective, which is where we trust to a moderator's discernment.
 

BrotherAidan

OC.Net Guru
Joined
Mar 4, 2004
Messages
1,568
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
pennsylvania
ytterbiumanalyst said:
Do we all really all know what is code for this or that?

You are being too cynical. The Declaration refers to some of the very things you mentioned. Furthermore, many in the pro-life movement have adopted a seamless garment ethic that opposes capital punishment.

Here are some things the Declaration actually states:
"A culture of death inevitably cheapens life in all its stages and conditions by promoting the belief that lives that are imperfect, immature or inconvenient are discardable."
"Our concern is not confined to our own nation. Around the globe, we are witnessing cases of genocide and “ethnic cleansing,” the failure to assist those who are suffering as innocent victims of war, the neglect and abuse of children, the exploitation of vulnerable laborers, the sexual trafficking of girls and young women, the abandonment of the aged, racial oppression and discrimination, the persecution of believers of all faiths, and the failure to take steps necessary to halt the spread of preventable diseases like AIDS."
"There is no more eloquent defense of the rights and duties of religious conscience than the one offered by Martin Luther King, Jr., in his Letter from a Birmingham Jail. Writing from an explicitly Christian perspective, and citing Christian writers such as Augustine and Aquinas, King taught that just laws elevate and ennoble human beings because they are rooted in the moral law whose ultimate source is God Himself. Unjust laws degrade human beings."

Finally, take a look at the signers. Yes there are some long-time culture wars warriors but the vast majority are people who have concentrated their labors in The Church or various Christian ministries, not politics. Some of the signers, such as Ron Sider, have urged a progressive leaning social agenda for decades. Not all are political conservatives.

Perhaps you should not be so knee-jerk against this and take the signers at face value as people of good will making a statement about issues that deeply concern them.
 

Vlad

Elder
Joined
Sep 18, 2008
Messages
471
Reaction score
0
Points
0
ytterbiumanalyst said:
PeterTheAleut said:
augustin717 said:
Glanced at it. I don't have enough patience for this literary genre.
Then I don't think you're qualified to judge the document as politicking.
I have read the document, and I do believe it's politicking.
Often times the only way to get things done in politics is by politicking. ;)
 

Vlad

Elder
Joined
Sep 18, 2008
Messages
471
Reaction score
0
Points
0
BrotherAidan said:
Has anyone read the Manhattan Declaration?
http://www.manhattandeclaration.org/the-declaration
If you have, do you plan to (or have you done so already) sign it?
Yes to both questions.
 

BrotherAidan

OC.Net Guru
Joined
Mar 4, 2004
Messages
1,568
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
pennsylvania
ytterbiumanalyst said:
BrotherAidan said:
And there are plenty of medical professionals who will perform an abortion for virtually any reason and it is always wrong to force anyone to perform a procedure that conflicts with their morality, No medical professional should be coerced in this way, ever.
Again, we're not talking about "virtually any reason." We're talking about a medically necessary procedure. No medical professional has the option not to provide a medically necessary procedure, ever.
Hate crime legislation will eventually be used to prosecute churches and religious groups for their hiring practices. It has happened elsewhere, it will happen here.

You are completely wrong about medical professionals. No person in ANY profession should be required to anything against their conscience and government should uphold their freedom of conscience.
 
Top