Christian Nationalism; The Right-wing Addiction

[*TheLeonardLeap*]

(07-10-2022, 05:27 PM)BigPapaKain Wrote: Use your beliefs to right policy, but have an actual reason for it other than 'ThE bIbLe SaYs'. When science flies in the face of faith, science wins because it has a basis that isn't feelings.

(07-10-2022, 06:36 PM)Lucidus Wrote: Science is demonstrably real and verifiable in the real world.

God is not demonstrably real and not verifiable in the real world.

One is a method of determining the most accurate explanations.

One is a concept that can't be accessed for any explanations.

That aside; how can we see eye to eye on any stance in which the assertions are justified by a foundation that can't be proven right or wrong? It's utterly useless until there's a way to prove a God is real and has ever said anything. Otherwise, it's the equivalent of people stating as fact what aliens have said, think or instructed, when there is no absolutely no evidence to support the claims.

Not even religious, and I fully believe two consenting adults should be able to marry each other without any other kind of qualifiers needed.
- - - - - - - -

That said, this whole "you need science to back up your feelings/beliefs/decisions" hardline you're trying to take here is just absolutely faulty. If science was required for laws, we'd end up with genetically matched marriages partners, conceiving bans for people with extreme family histories of cancer and the like. Just sink into a terrible swamp of eugenics... the laws would be made so we'd be bred like farm animals rather than things like love, passion, connections... all things that aren't really scientific.


We believe people should marry for love. Why? Not science.
We believe that children even if they're born with special needs are precious and deserve a chance at life. Why? Not science.
We believe that marriage is between only 2 people. Why? Not science.

We believe in a right to privacy, no illegal search and seizure. There's no science to that, that's just because we don't want to be bugged. That's not science.


Governing solely by the "it must be backed by science" mantra would lead to an eradication of all languages but one. After all preserving culture isn't science, and it's inefficient to have more than one language exist. Heck, for that matter we should start invading and occupying all third world countries. They aren't using their resources or managing their land to it's peak, so we should do it for them.

We feed the poor because of compassion, not science.

We keep having rescue efforts, disaster relief, and rebuilding in disaster prone areas because of compassion, not science. Logic would dictate that it'd be better to just have forced relocation and ban habitation in areas likely to be destroyed by floods/fires/earthquakes/tornadoes.

All hyperbole, obviously, but my point remains that if you want a government governed, led, and inspired by science and ONLY science, you're going to have a dystopic hellscape.