Religion -vs.- Country

If a contradiction arises between a man’s religion and his country, which one does he disregard? I ask this question becuase last night I was reading about Jehovah’s Witnesses ( and i came across some startling beliefs of theirs. The following is an excerpt from the site I was reading:

"They forbid blood transfusions (they say that is eating blood). They also consider any salute to a flag as worship of that flag, and therefore prohibited. They don’t vote, hold public office or serve in the military. "

Now I agree that refusing a blood transfusion does not create a conflict with one’s nation and neither does not holding a public office. Voting, to me, isn’t as big of a deal as the flag and military issues, although I do believe that if you are given the privelege of living in a democracy then you have a duty to vote. But the refusal to fight in our military and defend your country in a time of need raises serious moral issues with me. And if I were to see a person that refused to salute Old Glory I would, should I be granted the power, throw them in jail for treason. What do you think about this?

i think it just comes down to which matters more to you? your religon or your country?

Think of the world when it first began, no people, of course no religion. It’s all been organized. From a perspective of a 17 year old teenager, that seems pretty screwed up right? Well, newayz, you can think of religion as something believed by so many, but not the truth of it all. Why would god be god? Who made his name, and how can you actually prove his exsistance, through the bible? No i dont think so. People have written in the bible for centuries, but how can you actually tell is they werent pop mushroom caps, or drinkin wine that this dude, Jesus, hooked them up with. My point is, life is just revolved around what it was so long ago. To believe in something that keeps you going, that gives us all hope of what will happen after they bury us, or torch us, is the point of all organized religion.

Why would not saluting the flag be treason?

Just because you happen to think living in the system you do is great, you should force others to think the same way huh? Doesn’t sound like much of a democracy to me. I suppose you were one of those people who were yelling for all the people who protested about the war in Iraq to be locked up cause they were being “un-patriotic”. Don’t you realise that patriotism is a way for your government to control you? A flag is just a flag.

Not saluting the flag could be considered treason because as the national anthem plays and the flag waves it is a sign of respect to remove your cap and salute. To stand with your arms at your side rather than over your heart is to say that your country doesn’t deserve any reverence. You are saying that the men who gave their lives to grant you freedom, the same freedom that gives you the right to choose not to salute, don’t deserve to be recognized and remembered for their heroic actions. You are saying that by dying to preserve democracy they haven’t done enough to merit a simple salute. That salute is a simple “thank-you” to the people who served and defended your country. Saluting the flag doesn’t mean that you are elevating your country over your religion; it simply means that you are greatful for what others have done for you. And, on a side note, I have no problem with protesters so long as they are protesting without disturbing other important things. For example, I have read about protesters who prevented and/or delayed the transfer of ships and planes that were heading to the Middle East. They were hindering our military and our troops. These vehicles were not carrying munitions, but they were carrying food and medical supplies for our soldiers. This is simply unacceptable and I believe that these persons should be locked up.

Yes. But we’re meant to have freedom of speech and thought. People died to preserve the right to dssent, that would be kind of futile if it was only actually allowed in state-sanctioned ways wouldn’t it?

Religion vs state?

State and religion should be completly seperate. A man may be religious but i do not feel his religion should be his focal point with politics.

One can have it both ways. He can do what his goverment and his religion ask him as long as the two do not conflict. And thats why state and religion should be completly seperate. One can base itself on the other but they should not mix.

I personally do not trust the counsel of Jehovah’s Witness because of their failed prophetic announcements and poor interpretation of the Greek New Testament; particularly John 1:1 and Colossians 1: 14-16. Back to your question, if there is a contradiction between God and country, I go to God. God’s laws are superior to the law of the land, especially when it violates God’s laws. One example would be,(this is asking for controversy :confused: ) abortion. I served my country faithfully for almost 10 years, and fortunately I had no problems

I agree w/ BluTGI when he says religion should be separated from state, but as Meno pointed out such things as abortion can conflict. What is a person to do in this instance. I must say that I agree with Meno.

No, actually, it’s to not say anything. It’s to silently abstain from participating in an activity that has only symbolic significance. And just like you attatch an assload meaning to the national anthem, such people might attatch their own meanings and reasonings to abstaining. To put words in their mouth is ignorant and thoroughly undemocratic. Besides, when last I checked, ungratefulness wasn’t a crime.

Perhaps Logo, there are people who do enjoy the vast freedoms that we as Americans enjoy. I served my country, by helping rescue the students held hostage in Grenada by the Cubans. Those students were very thankful that they were Americans. Whenever I see the flag or hear the National Anthem, I’m filled with thankfulness and pride to be an American. When I see people dishonoring the USA, my first thought is, try living in North Korea. America is far from the idealistic country, but it beats hollow Cuba, North Korea and other oppressive countries. Even though I’m a patriot, my first love is to God Almighty. :wink:

Indeed I completely agree with you, in fact I would still agree if they were carrying munitions, there is a process for voicing dissent and the only reason that civil disobedience should reach that stage is if there is a legitimate reason that the protestors believe THEIR rights are being violated, which they blatantly were not. I was referring to people who would carry placards, there were several distressing stories reported about perfectly normal middle class people in America who were subjected to being spat at, sworn at and accused of treason merely for voicing their opposition to the war, which I believe was disgraceful and exactly the kind of thing that the founding fathers would have found a deep insult to their memory.

However how I represent my thanks to previous generations should be me to decide and I’ve always though things like flag saluting etc. are more like the artefacts of unquestioning religious worship than a mature reasoned thoughtful reaction to living in a free country. That people are forced to do so in the US has always surprised me and I must admit I was thankful that reason saw the day eventually when those JoHos took it to the supreme court, regardless of their reason.

I tolerate religion unless it conflicts with reasonable law and then in my opinion the law wins through every time, regardless of religious freedoms. My tolerance disappears when religious people try to enforce their views on others such as militant anti-abortionists or lying creationists. They are violating other peoples rights and should be punished with the full extent of the law, more harshly than normal offenders because they are attacking the very concept of a free state and free thought, not just the concept they are trying to force others to relinquish.

Matt, Please explain lying creationists; It would seem to me that the reverse is true. For example Edward Dubois, who discovered Java Man tampered with evidence to make the fossil appear older; when in reality it was a baboon; Piltdownman is another. Used at the Scopes’ Monkey Trial in 1925 as evidence for man’s evolution. About 25 years later the man who discovered it confessed he had chemically treated the bones of the fossil to give apparent age. How about Nebraskaman, thought to be our ancestor, and was discovered to be built out of a pig’s tooth. These lies have been propogated in our country until the truth was brought out. What about Uranium/Lead dating, supposedly accurate, how can you accurately date rocks when you don’t even no the original parent/daughter ratio, or even if the decay rate has been a constant through the ages, or if there hasn’t been some external influence to alter the decay rate? Did you know Lead 207, the daughter element of Uranium 238, can change to Lead 206, if it absorbs certain minerals? How many times has the age of the Universe been changed, four? Pretty inconsistent if you ask me. Evolution promotes racism, that’s why Down’s Syndrome people used to be called mongoloids, until they discovered the Oriental culture wasn’t quite as stupid as they had assumed. Lying creationists is a contradiction in terms. Here’s another, Dinosaurus didn’t die out 60 million years ago; Greek historian Herodotus saw pteradactyl’s flying in the air when he visited Egypt. You know why Dinosaurus are so few in number? The same as other extinct/endangered species; man’s indiscriminate slaughter of animals. The Meteorite Theory is fanciful at best. :unamused:

cult vs country i choose neither both are pretty lame i disregard either

Meno, just because a few scientists tried to make a name for themselves by lying about their discoveries doesn’t mean the thousands of other scientists are wrong. On the other hand, Creationism has been thoroughly destroyed at every turn, the only pro-creationist “scientists” out there have degrees from universities that don’t exist or are non-accredited. Non-accredited means they have no academic credentials and are recognised by no education body. The people who set these places up then award themselves “professorships” and “doctorates”. You know the type of university, the ones that sell you diplomas over the internet for $20.

For example, a recent creationist science fair was reported on, the author is a doctor at Fellowship University, which doesn’t exist. By the way, everyone else, go to the website, it’s a hoot, the best ones being “My uncle is Steve (not a Monkey)”, “Women were designed for Homemaking” and “Using prayer to microevolve antibiotic resistance”. The same Richard Paley also wrote an essay on the evil of Mac computers cause their OS was called Darwin :sunglasses: You gotta love these creationists just from their utter lack of grip on reality.

If you truly wish to try and prove creationism try going to and really reading and paying attention to the whole site. It will open your eyes to the lies you’ve been fed by some crazy misguided Christians who have few or no academic qualifications and really do end up just lying to people. That is why I think that the people who push out the propoganda to try and force the teaching of creationism in schools should be locked up, as they are decieving people and commiting scientific fraud.

Anyway this isn’t a thread about the absurdity of creationism and it’s utter basis in deciet on the behalf of some strange people who want to take us back to the Dark ages. Go to the huge post about Evolution in the science thread. Everything you thought you knew about creationism will be utterly destroyed.

Matt, I have been to debates hosted by evolutionists,(Georgia Tech; Kutztown University in Pa. and others) supposedly the best in their field and were shown to be incorrect. How come you didn’t challenge my arguments? If evolution is true then there should be evidence. You statement about the type of degrees that creationist have earned is highly inaccurate, you need to be careful. There are several thousand scientist in a creationist organization with PhD and M.D. from accreditted universites. For example Dr. Andrew Snelling PhD in Geology at the University of Sydney; Dr. Dimtri Kuznetsov M.D. Internal diseases; PhD Biochemistry; D.Sc. Molecular Biology. He earned the USSR Council of Ministries prize for his work in biochemistry. Dr. Henry Morris, PhD Hydrology University of Minnesota, etc the Institue for Creation Research based in El Cajon, Ca is
an accreditted school, and grant Master’s level degrees in the Sciences. All the scientists that teach there hold a doctrate level degree from an accreditted university. I have also noticed during these debates, especially with the late Stephen J. Gould, evolutionist have resorted to name calling. I wonder why?

I’ve created a new topic in the science forum which is more appropiate for a debate on creationism, the link is See you there! :smiley: