Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Can a good conservative be an atheist ? (vanity for intresting discussion: wife)

Posted on 04/29/2010 8:58:35 PM PDT by se_ohio_young_conservative

Let me say first of all that I am a Christian with a strong faith in God. I grew up going to church with my grandpa. I accepted Jesus Christ into my life at a young age.

My wife was raised in a strict christian home. But I think that worked against her in some ways. I think certain people in her family turned her off on religion at points along the way. She is now an atheist. She is a great mom to our 16 month old twins. She is an awesome wife. I love her so much and I will never let it destroy our marriage. So I have been very open and tolerant of her views while praying for her like crazy at the same time.

She has been mostly apolitical and I guess she has been more intrested in recent months watching Fox News with me and listening to the radio. She is very much against abortion. She knows that Obama is a disaster for this country.

It came up in another thread. We have been watching Glenn Beck. and my wife likes him at times. But he really loses her when he goes off into a deep religious discussion. Here I am trying to get her to see and understand things that are going on, and religion comes up, and she sort of tunes out and changes the subject.

That got me thinking. I know this country was founded by men of faith. I know many of us conservatives are religious. But can't a person be a conservative, pro life and atheist ? and still love their country just as much as I do ? ... How many out there are like my wife ?

I tend to think so for sure. But at the same time. I don't want to remove our religious traditions either. They are very important. Our country needs them now more than ever. But I think people like my wife are important to our cause as well. Men and women in their 20s, not religious, but conservative on many issues and they don't even label or know they are conservative. So I guess the problem is.. We can't slip into a politically correct echo chamber, but at the same time we must carefully equate our christian traditions with religious freedom for all. Our rights come from God. and that includes the right not to be religious of course.

what do you say ?


TOPICS: Society
KEYWORDS: scientism
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 121-140141-160161-180181-188 last
To: NYCslicker

>>> I’m under no obligation to prove my conservative credentials.

Again, I didn’t ask you to prove anything.

My original point was that the term “conservative” is extremely vague in comparison to “atheist”.

My definition of conservatism is no doubt quite different than yours for obvious reasons. I’m sure it would be difficult to find perfectly consistent definitions among Christians who attend the same church. I honestly don’t know what atheists generally consider conservatism to be... Why are you so afraid to divulge your views on what conservative means??? All you seem to be focused on is the dangers of believing in God, and you refuse to address the other side of the argument which is relevant to this thread topic. If you are not willing to express what conservatism means to you, then my troll charge stands. If you prefer the term RINO or CINO, then so be it. To me, a troll is someone claiming to be something they are not to gain access to forums such as this one. That’s not a personal attack. It’s a judgment of your behavior.


181 posted on 04/30/2010 2:58:48 PM PDT by Safrguns
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 173 | View Replies]

To: Safrguns

Ok.

You are free to make whatever claims you choose.

I’m not afraid, I’m just not interested.


182 posted on 04/30/2010 3:17:28 PM PDT by NYCslicker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 181 | View Replies]

To: se_ohio_young_conservative
She is now an atheist. She is a great mom to our 16 month old twins.

Thanks for a thought-provoking post.

Since you have been so candid with us, would you mind sharing what religious plans (if any) you and your wife have for the twins as they get older?

That's some ways off but I'd surmise that this matter has been discussed.

183 posted on 04/30/2010 11:44:26 PM PDT by re_nortex (DP...that's what I like about Texas...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: randita
If you don’t believe in God, then you don’t believe that God is the granter of our rights and therefore, you must believe that men grant them.

No. Fallacy of the false dichotomy. There is literally a whole universe out there that does not have to be explained by either "God did it" or "man did it."

Fundamental rights are simply a necessary condition of being human. How rights, or any other philosophical construct, can exist a priori without resorting to a God who created them is a fairly complicated area of philosophy I won't delve into; suffice it to say that the simplest explanation, "God did it," is not the only coherent and logically consistent one. Mathematics flows from a few basic postulates, without regard to whether those came from an omnipotent creator or not.

"We hold these truths to be self-evident" -- not revealed by scripture. "their Creator" and, elsewhere in the Declaration, "the laws of nature and of nature's God." These are references to natural law, not to a particular religious tradition or a particular conception of the Divine.

God is the same yesterday, today and tomorrow. He will never change and he will never take back the Rights he gives us.

"to preserve these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. ...[W]henever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness."

This construction holds true whether the laws of nature exist as a synthetic a priori or as the gift of a benevolent God. If they are laws of an impersonal Nature, there is no universal assent to what those rights are, and the task falls to the people to determine what they are and how best to preserve them. If they are ordained by God, there is no universal assent, and the end result is the same.

184 posted on 05/01/2010 12:17:31 AM PDT by ReignOfError
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Secret Agent Man
If you’re not trying to live a moral code based on objective standards set by God, you only have to live up to whatever standards you decide are right.

If you are trying to live a moral code based on objective standards set by God, you only have to live up to whatever you decide those standards are.

185 posted on 05/01/2010 12:19:37 AM PDT by ReignOfError
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: ReignOfError

Thought provoking post. Very well written.


186 posted on 05/01/2010 6:04:57 AM PDT by randita (Visit keyhouseraces.com for a list of vulnerable DEM and must hold GOP House seats.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 184 | View Replies]

To: Loyal Sedition

I am actually somewhat impressed with the restraint of other posters, I expected it to happen sooner.

could have happened at any time, they’d still be wrong. Jeses Christ, the Son of God came to earth as a man. While here He founded one religion, on His diciples. That was the Catholic religionb......you don’t have to believe it but that doesn’t make it less true. I you can read, and do read the bible, it becomes very plain. Other than Catholics there were no other “christians” for 1500 years.


187 posted on 05/01/2010 6:24:20 PM PDT by terycarl (4)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 141 | View Replies]

To: NYCslicker; Safrguns
Check your demographics on churchgoers in this country. I think you might be surprised how the democrat and republican distribution breaks down. I know I was.

Why? What did you see when you did that?

188 posted on 05/08/2010 10:47:39 PM PDT by ansel12 (MITT: "I was an independent during the time of Reagan-Bush. I'm not trying to return to Reagan-Bush")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 173 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 121-140141-160161-180181-188 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson