Another thing I've come across recently that I found quite interesting . Enjoy.


Separation of church and state? Uh, no, that was a product of Christian political thought going back to Christ's pronouncement to "render to Caesar what is Caesar's, and to God what is God's."

Civil liberties, including the freedoms of speech, thought, association, religion, and private property, and the guarantees of due process, criminal trial by jury, and against unlawful search and seizure? Again, no -- that was largely a product of 17th-century Puritan Calvinism.

Constitutional, representative government? No, again. That, too, was a product of Christian political thought which is traceable all the way back to the Jerusalem council recorded in the Christian scriptures.

Okay, so is there any fruit from liberalism? Sure. The Christian Whig liberals Adam Smith who directly opposed British mercantilism which gave "Court favourites" a kind of monopoly over certain commercial ventures, and Edmund Burke who opposed the French Revolution and supported the American Revolution as I summarized in an earlier post. Then there were the 19th-century Reformers who successfully sought extension of the vote franchise in 1832 and 1867 and (democratically) "responsible government" in Canada. Also in Canada, it was Christian liberals who successfully sought the vote for women and achieved equal status for women in "matters of privilege" meaning they could serve as magistrates and in the Canadian Senate. It was the Christian liberal Martin Luther King, Jr. who successfully sought an end of "Jim Crow," segregation, and to realize the guarantees of civil rights for black Americans.

Anything else? Yes -- the weakening of marriage with easy divorce and permissive sexual mores, a general loss of the conception of the sanctity of human life and its devaluing, and the coarsening of culture grounded in freedom of "expression" (versus "speech" as discourse). And, ironically for a school of thought whose moniker, "liberal," denotes freedom: the loss of freedom of thought, opinion, and speech (as discourse) on the university campus and in the public square, generally; the consolidation of various public institutions under State control (in Canada, hospitals, schools, universities, some charities, et al.); and the pursuit of extreme agenda through the Courts and the abandonment of democratic process for the making of substantive, social laws.

Okay -- interesting enough. But why bring it up? Here's my point: when liberalism lost its Christian conscience, it went terribly awry. Or, put another way, when liberalism lost its informing classical, Christian world view, it ceased to be about human flourishing. That was true in the French Revolution and no less true of the Weimar Republic and the U.S. and Canada post-WWII. Liberalism's informing ethos -- freedom -- requires a restraining framework, or it degenerates to the point where it becomes an instrument of the diabolical.

Interesting... very interesting. You live in Canada right? Your talking about the Amrican Constitution right? Have you ever thought of moving to the USA? Not that I'm saying we are better... Canada is very beautiful. And less crowded than the USA, except for my state SOUTH DAKOTA NAh I like it here. Its the land of contant varieties or somthing like that. But not to stray off of topic lol, Alot of people here threatened to move to Canada if Bush was elected and I have several things to say to those people

1. You didn't MOVE!!!!!!!!!!!! You know everyone wants you toooo.
2. If you were going to move to Canada Legally it would take a long time to process your papers and apply for citicenship. Just like it would in America legally.
3. You still haven't moved I mean ARRRRRG not that I want to *caugh*Pollute*caugh* EXCUSE ME sore throat you know. I wouldn't want to help your country out that much with the incredibly caring,loving,uplifting,hardworking, sensible people. I mean if these people left where would america be?

Sorry to use this thread to slander people. And I am Kinda joking hahahahhhahahahahah. So the next person who posts ignore this and look at ^

I wouldn't move to the US if I didn't have to. It wouldn't be too hard for me to though, since my wife is an American citizen.... but, I still don't think I would want to....

life is nicer up here, in spite of the liberal government that is currently in power =/

*begins to clap*
Very nice

Too bad no body wants to disagree.... or is that a good thing?

oh, I'm sure there are people that might try to disagree...

I'm sure Nasus could come up with something... he almost always does...

but.... for the most part.... it's not likely

A very good arguement about the seperation of church and state. Nasus could definantly come up with somthing.

I've heard it said that the liberalism and the democrat party used to be somthing different... somthing to believe in... But I'm not old enough to know anything about that so I'll think they're hosers! JK

You can tell if somthing is false by looking at its fruit. This is clearly a biblical principle. You reap what you sow and can tell if a prohet is false by looking at his/her fruit.

[n] the consequence of some effort or action; "he lived long enough to see the fruit of his policies"

You don't try to disagree, ya just do. And I'm not debating any more because instead of trying to understand the others' point of view, all you guys do is run that different person into the ground with criticism.

Zylo, thats true. Back around the civil war era, the Republicans were liberal and the Democrats were conservative. Thats why I classify myself as liberal instead of Democrat.

And thats why I say I'm a Contitution party member. So I can claim I'm impartial while I spew my conservative arguements. Belials probably right in saying we flame too much, but sometimes things can get personal really fast like when Jin said "I used to believe in the bible, But then I got some common sense" But you also have to remember that this is the debate thread. (ON a side note I think that Belial is a "Masterdebater") And since this is the debate thread we do more than listen and learn others beliefs. WE DEBATE THEM. I thinks its pretty stimulating and opens your mind to others beliefs.

Originally posted by Zylo

---

(ON a side note I think that Belial is a "Masterdebater") And since this is the debate thread we do more than listen and learn others beliefs. WE DEBATE THEM. I thinks its pretty stimulating and opens your mind to others beliefs.

---

sorry, but I think I'm the furthest one on this board for being a "master debater." And I think I just don't like to debate, because it's a bit like arguing, and I can't stand arguing... >.<

well, I'm gonna say it if no one else will...

stay out of the debate forum then...

stating an opinion is all well and good.... but if you don't want to actually debate.... then stop posting here.... especially if it makes you upset or uncomfortable

Originally posted by NasusTheGreat

---

Zylo, thats true. Back around the civil war era, the Republicans were liberal and the Democrats were conservative. Thats why I classify myself as liberal instead of Democrat.

---

Its not that black and white. Some ideas were flip-floped (granted) like social issues and equality. But if my memory holds me, economic issues were not.

LOL I was making a funny. Masterbator? Sorry

I think its Alright if Belial posts on the debate and discussions, because we need different points of view.

Originally posted by John

---

Originally posted by NasusTheGreat

---

Zylo, thats true. Back around the civil war era, the Republicans were liberal and the Democrats were conservative. Thats why I classify myself as liberal instead of Democrat.

---

Its not that black and white. Some ideas were flip-floped (granted) like social issues and equality. But if my memory holds me, economic issues were not.

---

John Nasus is right. I forget exactly when it was reversed, but the Democrats were Conservative and the Republicans were Liberal.

Its not THAT black and white. s***, did you listen to what i said? Both parties were closer to the center on todays standards.

HMMM back in the day they had different parties too. I think they were a little bit backwords but they didn't have drastically reversed positions.