SpawnPoint - Where Game Begins

With friends like Europe.. who needs enemies?

The United States has, as a population, identified themselves as predominantly Christian. – To the tune of 83% according to a 2002 ABC News poll. The rest of the world is much different. Only 33% of the world is Christian with 15% of the world practicing NO organized religion at all! Europe itself is a demographic with Christian roots but only 55% claim to be Christian. Only 30% ever attend Church (compared to 70% in the US).
As we go to political battle with other countries, what is the guiding principal behind our decisions? Many people outside of the US outright denounce BUSH because he is guided by religion and his personal beliefs as much as anything else. Within the US, we may beat on the poor bastard, but rarely if ever will you see someone denounce him for leading based on his faith and belief structure. If Christian principals are guiding our nation’s leaders, what principals are guiding the leaders of other nations? Especially our “friends” in Europe? Are they making 100% non-secular beliefs based on a pure “what is best for me” judgment? Perhaps that’s best – we certainly believe that by-and-large for our capital markets (where the principal tenet behind capitalism is selfishness—which leads in a counter-intuitive process to the betterment of society as a whole).

My concerns are that we continue to put too much emphasis on the wants and thoughts and likes of Europe. If Europe is moving farther and farther away from our own internal belief system, why should we continue to listen to them? What value is their judgement? These are people that would just as quickly side with Syrians as they would Israelis – they have no morale compass to guide them in this and so they go back to “what is best for me…”.

The US is a lot of things – and our government can screw up with the best of them – but I have faith that we will continue to lead and make decisions from a Christian perspective – one that puts at least some value in the morale compass we are raised with when we consider “what is best for us”.

Well i'm non-religious.

However, i was raised by my folks on beliefs based loosely on the christian faith.......

Let's be honest a lot of people outwith the US are anti-Bush not because he's religious or watever. They are anti-Bush due to his poor judgement in certain political decisions.

Religion has nothing to do with it Weaver.

As for listening to us "Europeans". When was the last time your government made any decision based on us heathens ;)

*runs away before being flamed*

Rob

I'll agree that many of our 'big' politcians are (or at least claim to be) Christians, but that is definitely not a requirement for office. I mean, look at Hilary Clinton. I think it's safe to say that she has drifted pretty darn far from Christian fundamentalism, and she has a very respectable shot at the American presidency.

I do not at all believe that the American religious statistics Weaver provided above are accurate (I'm not calling you imcompetent or anything, Weaver. You were simply relaying ABC's data. Don't ban me:)). With today's science craze, the atheist population is growing rapidly. I believe that the religious to non-religious ratio here in the States is roughly more along the lines of 50-50.

As I've said before, I know that Christians are most definitely a minority, and I have learned to just live with it. Though the American government seems to be moving away from its Christian roots, little by little, I hope that our country's leadership will at least base their decisions on Christianity's basic 'rules,' just as Weaver said. If you start with the laws stated in Exodus and Leviticus, and then take away the select ones asking for Christians to worship God in a certain manner, you're left with a central set of laws that any religiously-neutral country should strive to enforce.

I like George because his belief system is relatively simple compared to Clinton. Don't get me wrong - sometimes a complex system and thoughtful rationale is what we need. However, Bush got elected on the premise of a reduced govt, reduction of taxes, and a period of isolationism. I think without 911 Bush would have been a fine president, little world interaction, and a focus on our domestic politics.

911 happened. I am glad it didn't happen under Gore's watch or Kerry's watch. Their answer would have been too complex and we would still be discussing what we should do about Al Queda.

Whether or not we did the "right" thing (the smart thing), our movement was the "right" thing in a number of ways and I wouldn't repeal our decision. I may have done somethings different of course.

OK guys here is the can opener for the can o worms!!! Define CHRISTIAN then let's talk about Clinton and Bush... Yes I am opening this up again for good reason. There are 2 sides of the view point whether Bush was simply carrying on "DADDYS" agenda or not and Clinton.... I'm not going there at all Let's face it.... it doesn't matter who is in power they are HUMAN and subject to human whims. Yes whims and you all know what they are. Once something gets under your skin it stays there until YOU and only YOU are satisfied that it is gone. Then let's talk about EUROPE, or should I say define exactly what you mean by your statement and then we can attempt to discuss EUROPE.