Separation of Church and State...too much, too little, or just right? (7 Viewers)

[Kwayera]

Dude you're really a sick person if you value material possessions and personal wealth over and above the welfare and livlihood of others.

Over half the world's population lives on under $2 US a day, get some compassion and do your bit to make the world a better place for everyone.

When was the last time you donated your life savings to a family in Africa?

Don't be such a hypocrite.

 

[Graney]

And I absolutely agree with you. But it should be stolen as you say for public benefit? Since education "steals" money from the system for public benefit?

So it comes down to whether Churches, actually religious beliefs are benefitical to society? And i think they are and you think they dont.

It's pretty hard to justify taking other people's money to use on something that is not strictly essential to saving someone's life i.e. food, shelter, fuel, healthcare.

If people's money wasn't taken away from them to be spent on churches by the government, they would spend it on things that they themselves perceived would offer the greatest benefit to their lives, which is obviously going to more efficient than the government trying to organize the same thing.

If they choose to spend it on funding churches great! But if they think other things will do more to increase their happiness, you have to ask, how essential was that church to their lives?

 

[Name_Taken]

fuck your values.

Capitalism is my god.
freedom is my values.

fucking respect that

People > money.

 

[SylviaB]

Dude you're really a sick person if you value material possessions and personal wealth over and above the welfare and livlihood of others.

I donate to charity on my own fucking terms thank you very much

government taking people's money at gunpoint to "help others" is immoral and ineffective

Over half the world's population lives on under $2 US a day, get some compassion and do your bit to make the world a better place for everyone.

Guess fucking what, left wing politics that aim to take care of everyne by controlling everyone's wealth have destroyed wealth and caused poverty

so fuck you

 

[BlackDragon]

Well the people who have no belief systems have a sports club that is goverment funded.

If it is not recognised belief system, then it is not a beleif system. Jedisim should not be recognised, no? That arguement argues that the goverment cannnot make "good" decisions and dosent really deal with the issue. We can make this judgement of which belief system is offical and legist, fair via committes and etc. Thats no reason to stop funding of all religious insitutions all together.

But then again, this is a democracy. Public opinion justifies everything. Sweet liberty has costs.

Exactly, it is not attached to a belief system. Therefore a secular state is able to consider funding it. People who do not believe in god still may have belief organisations that they wish to be funded, but these shouldn't be because belief systems ARE ALL EQUAL in principle and therefore none should get special preference. Things like education and social services are fine. Any form of research is fine. Universities are fine. These things do not entail beliefs. They are either helping people with things they need to survive or a service that helps people learn. They can decide their beliefs by themselves without funding.

 

[Anonymous-]

Dude you're really a sick person if you value material possessions and personal wealth over and above the welfare and livlihood of others.

Over half the world's population lives on under $2 US a day, get some compassion and do your bit to make the world a better place for everyone.

You are stupid arn't you? biggest straw man here. When the fuck did he say he did not care for others? did he? He didnt. stop putting shit in his mouth ok? He can make his contributions through voluntary exchange not by government taking his money and claiming to donate it.

 

[Name_Taken]

You are stupid arn't you? biggest straw man here. When the fuck did he say he did not care for others? did he? He didnt. stop putting shit in his mouth ok? He can make his contributions through voluntary exchange not by government taking his money and claiming to donate it.

If you're really so willing to give money away for the benefit of others, why are you so against taxation, because thats all it is.

 

[BlackDragon]

If you're really so willing to give money away for the benefit of others, why are you so against taxation, because thats all it is.

He is against it because it is not voluntary. He does not get to choose where his money goes.

 

[SylviaB]

fuck you're a retarded cunt

 

[Name_Taken]

He is against it because it is not voluntary. He does not get to choose where his money goes.

If I give money to an organisation like the Salvo's I don't have a say in where that money goes within the organisation, or who they give it to.

Taxation goes everywhere. Its not like you should be able to choose to support only roads, only hospitals or only defence, money is needed in all of these areas and more and is distributed appropriately.

 

[Name_Taken]

fuck you're a retarded cunt

You're being a selfish prick.

 

[Anonymous-]

if i give money to an organisation like the salvo's i don't have a say in where that money goes within the organisation, or who they give it to.

Taxation goes everywhere. Its not like you should be able to choose to support only roads, only hospitals or only defence, money is needed in all of these areas and more and is distributed appropriately.

how the fuck does this person have 2 reputation boxes? Who the fuck is repping you. Who?

 

[Name_Taken]

how the fuck does this person have 2 reputation boxes? Who the fuck is repping you. Who?

Going to respond or what?

 

[SylviaB]

If I give money to an organisation like the Salvo's I don't have a say in where that money goes within the organisation, or who they give it to.

I'm still choosing whether or not I give money to them in the first place

 

[Graney]

If I give money to an organisation like the Salvo's I don't have a say in where that money goes within the organisation, or who they give it to.

But you have the freedom to choose whether to give money to the salvation army at all.

The government will send you to jail and forcefully extract the money if you try to avoid paying them.

 

[Anonymous-]

Going to respond or what?

i got to wake up for work and help fund to 300K bogan cunts who are unemployed who benefit from the money stolen from me every day.

so no, im not going to repeat myself and respond to your bullshit.

 

[Anonymous-]

 

[Name_Taken]

But you have the freedom to choose whether to give money to the salvation army at all.

The government will send you to jail and forcefully extract the money if you try to avoid paying them.

Yea but the government is obliged to do that. Society cannot function without taxation to some degree. Sure some people are in favour of less, others of more, but a level of it is required for society to be sustainable.

And all this charity talk I think is largely BS. If you're not willing to chip in for your fellow Australian's hospital bill, then you're not going to donate money if you don't have to.

Sure welfare dependancy is a real problem, but it isn't one thats going to be solved by axing welfare altogether, nor is it by giving out more welfare.

 

[Graney]

Yea but the government is obliged to do that. Society cannot function without taxation to some degree. Sure some people are in favour of less, others of more, but a level of it is required for society to be sustainable.

But can a society be sustainable without taxpayer funding of religion? Would people actually physically get ill and die? Would there be rioting and looting in the streets?

How tenuous is people's religious faith, and the persuasiveness of religious argument if it requires taxpayer funding to continue it's influence on society?

 

[SylviaB]

And all this charity talk I think is largely BS. If you're not willing to chip in for your fellow Australian's hospital bill, then you're not going to donate money if you don't have to.

because I'd rather help out people actually in need