Why you should care that Americans still believe in God:

[BluffTHIS!]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

I think Left minded folks, especially the ACLU, who even oppose the Gov't even acknowledging the existence of religion are the ones guilty of needlessly stressing on this issue. You will see in full force as Christmas approaches and heaven forbid some city puts up a Nativity scene.

[/ QUOTE ]

There is so much wrong with this statement I dont even know where to start. The government creating holidays for religious reasons and other similar things shows that the government can easily acknowledge religion without a peep from the ACLU. Putting up a nativity display is not acknowledging religion, it is using the tax dollars of Jews, Muslims, Athiests, etc to promote a specific religious position of Christians.

[/ QUOTE ]

There is a difference between freedom of religion and freedom from religion. As long as minority religious and non-religious practice is protected, there is nothing in the constitution that requires absolutely no recognition of majority religious beliefs such as holidays. Non-religion isn't the baseline whether you would like it to be or not. Even the primarily Deist founding fathers didn't believe that.

[bearly]

i file no briefs for the republican party, but where did you come up w/ this stuff? i've been to your site and you look pretty young. why not take a month off from piling up money and read about the history of american politics since, say, 1914. and, by the way, you are old enough to remember that bill clinton clasped that same bible (carried on the side the cameras were showing) and had is lip slightly quivering when ever he had a photo-op leaving church...................b

[BluffTHIS!]

You are a philosophical and logical donk for talking about how religious belief is bad because it might make someone a republican when there are so many other issues that influence that. 10 years of democratic control of congress and subsequent higher taxes impinging on your young livin large poker lifestyle and you'll be voting straight ticket republican and won't care why others do as well. When I was your age I was in the military although I didn't have the honor of serving in combat, and there are young men your age fighting and dying for their country right now (maybe we shouldn't be in Iraq but we surely should in Afghanistan). You need to stop being so self-absorbed and quit trying to impress people with these types of posts and try to learn what the world is really about and what is important.

[ZeeJustin]

[ QUOTE ]
You need to stop being so self-absorbed and quit trying to impress people with these types of posts and try to learn what the world is really about and what is important.

[/ QUOTE ]

I have a thirst for knowledge and I feel that I have learned a lot from this forum. What exactly is the problem?

[BluffTHIS!]

[ QUOTE ]
I have a thirst for knowledge and I feel that I have learned a lot from this forum. What exactly is the problem?

[/ QUOTE ]

It is great to want to learn more. But from what I understand of you, you have opted not to go to college and play poker instead. No problem, and I probably would have done the same at your age if poker existed online then. But these forums although a great way to learn about poker and also some other things, do not necessarily contain a represnentative sampling of american society and the beliefs and interests that motivate lots of americans.

You don't need to go to college to learn, because a library card and some cash can get you all the books you need to learn the same stuff in a lot of fields. You need to read some philosophy and history, both american and foreign, to understand our political system. And read multiple newspapers/magazines. Then you would understand that religious affiliation is not a simple predictor of party voting. Read some good biographies of the founding fathers and history of the early republic. There were as many differing political views then as now and motivated by the same wide range of beliefs and self-interests then as now. But this requires regular reading of current news and opinions (easily available free online) and a committment to read books regularly. This helps one have a good background knowledge of things so that one can articulate better thought out views, even if they are ones others wouldn't agree with.

Just as with poker where fish chase low percentage draws on the hopes of winning big, and others play so tight they never gamble at all when they should, so everday citizens have belief systems, some logical and some not. There are lots of people who either give greater weight to logic and values on the one hand, or to to vague altruistic notions that are held no matter what the price may be if implemented if it is even possible to do so. There are people who place more importance on personal responsibiliity and law and order, and others who place more on individual liberty no matter what the consequences.

And while religious views certainly influence all those things each way, there are people in both parties who have the same religious beliefs but arrive at different political choices because of those other things. And becoming more widely read and getting a longer experience in life will help one understand that better.

[bearly]

i was going to reply and/or expand upon our give-and-take of yesterday. i thought it would be fair to first read some more of your thrusts and parrys to get an idea of what you are about. i think 'bluff' nailed it down pretty well--firm but fair. i gave you some good replies and what happened--(what is your problem?). now here "what exactly is the problem" you are proving bluffs (and implicitly, my)remarks w/ your reactions. just from what i know about you--assuming it is true---i would love to have a one-on-one w/ you about hold'em. and , believe me, i would be doing most of the listening , because i would want to savor every word you said. to be in the company of someone who has actually 'done it' would be better for my poker future (somewhat bleak) than any book. on this forum you are dealing w/many people (and i will include myself) who have actually 'done it'. i have been in the position where i had to get in there w/ some of the finest minds in these fields (logic, philosophy, linguistics) and get my nose busted again and again. that's just the way it is. just like when you make the quantum leap in poker--as you are doing. so bluff's remark: less over-confident posturing, more well thought-out (and simply worded) questions, more listening, and less defensiveness (what is your problem?) would get you going , and you could take advantage of the tremendous resources on this sub-forum. starting w/ sir david and going from there---a lot of brain power here.......................good luck, and find the energy to keep trying.........b

[ZeeJustin]

Bearly,

I've learned a lot from these discussions, and I don't know why people assume the opposite is true. But just about every comment regarding me personally has been derogatory and wrong. There's no need for personal comments in discussions like these.

[Rockatansky]

[ QUOTE ]
Bearly,

I've learned a lot from these discussions, and I don't know why people assume the opposite is true. But just about every comment regarding me personally has been derogatory and wrong. There's no need for personal comments in discussions like these.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree that the personal attacks are unnecessary, but I think folks got riled up because you couched a religious question in very political terms. However, I think the topic you brought up is very important and worthy of discussion. The simple fact is, America has an ostensibly secular government, yet an overwhelming majority of Americans profess to believe in some sort of supreme being. I hate to be a pessimist, but I feel like the two sides' respective positions are essentially irreconcilable.

[spaminator101]

I dont come to this forum often anymore, but your wrong here. Comments such as the ones you have received come from what you say. if there wasn't something unsound in your reasoning, then no one would have a problem with what u say. I remember when i first came here i was just like u. Then sexdrugsmoney taught me that you have to consider the beleifs and oppions of others before you say something. For example: I'm a Christian and i beleive that when you remove the very basis our country is founded on, then our nation would fall apart. but heres where your argument comes in. A nation divided against itself cannot stand. With a decreasing number of Christians and moral people all together combined with an increase in crime and sex and immorality our nation could fall apart. Government is all ready divided and our races are divided and families are divided. Heck, even churches are divided. at somepoint we have to change something.


You see, there is the proper place for each argument. a proper place for yours and a proper place for mine. What you have to do is evaluate and explain both arguments and the reasoning behind them and then explain why you beleive yours is better.

[ZeeJustin]

[ QUOTE ]
10 years of democratic control of congress and subsequent higher taxes impinging on your young livin large poker lifestyle and you'll be voting straight ticket republican and won't care why others do as well.

[/ QUOTE ]

Decipher this one if you can. My dad's side of my family is wealthy. They would all be economically better off if they voted republican, but they vote democrat. Some of them are fairly religious (Jewish), and some of them are not. They are all philanthropists, and give back a lot.

My mom's side of my family is working class. They all share the same strong Christian faith and vote republican. Economically they would all be better off if they voted democrat.

My only point is that you don't know where I'm coming from. If you think my personal finances will be the sole factor in determining my political affiliation, you are wrong.

My OP was not intended to start a political battle. I simply wanted to start a discussion on how huge an effect the believers have on society. This effect IMO is often extremely negative.