CreateDebate is a social debate community built around ideas, discussion and democracy.
If this is your first time checking out a debate, here are some quick tips to help get you started:
Arguments with the highest score are displayed first.
Argument replies (both in favor and in opposition) are displayed below the original argument.
To follow along, you may find it helpful to show and hide the replies displayed below each argument.
To vote for an argument, use these icons:
You have the power to cast exactly one vote (either up or down) for each argument.
Once you vote, the icon will become grayed out and the argument's score will change.
Yes, you can change your vote.
Debate scores, side scores and tag scores are automatically calculated by an algorithm that primarily takes argument scores into account.
All scores are updated in real-time.
To learn more about the CreateDebate scoring system, check out the FAQ.
When you are ready to voice your opinion, use the Add Argument button to create an argument.
If you would like to address an existing argument, use the Support and Dispute link within that argument to create a new reply.
You can share this debate in three different ways:
#1
#2
#3
Paste this URL into an email or IM:
Click here to send this debate via your default email application.
Click here to login and CreateDebate will send an email for you.
Conservative Christians: closer to who? Jesus or Ayn Rand?
Many Conservative christians believe that they are standing up for biblical principles, however theyre constant attacks against social programs and financial safety nets seem to contradict what Jesus spoke about.
Yes they say and also do follow Christ with their own actions. I can test to see if they follow Christ and are a Christian if they say they are one. I don't believe they would be following Rand because Rand didn't die for mankind's sins or rose from the grave like Christ did.
No, I am not a troll. I am serious when it comes to debating with theses kinds of situations. I did understand what you were getting at but you thought I misunderstood you.
I apologize, it seems like no matter how much I explained my point to you, you reverted right back to your original argument, its hard to take you seriously that way
Not at all my good sir, if your strategy was to out stupid me then maybe you won, but you haven't made a sound argument yet, all you've done is deny my statements with no backup from yourself
Well are you going to respond to my other argument on how you know that Pat Robertson said that he blamed 9/11 on abortionists, and other stuff you mentioned?
ONCE AGAIN..... I know that they BELIEVE and WORSHIP him, but they do not FOLLOW his teachings.
For example, I may like and admire Ghandi, but if I went out and started fights for no reason, Im not following his teachings of peace, do you understand what I'm getting at here?
Have you read about the views of Right wing Christian fundementalists like Pat Robertson and James Dobson? Both filled with hate and apathy, very un christ like if you ask me, and Im an atheist
I have watched The 700 Club a couple of times where Pat Robertson was on there and I don't think he is filled with hate or apathy at all. I know you're an atheist because I clicked on your profile and found out.
They dont seem to, many promote guns, discrimination, greed, and are terrified of the idea of socialism, socialism is ideologically closer to Christ than capitalism
Christian Conservatives tend to give more to charity... and Jesus opposed the State in much of his doctrine.
Ayn Rand was AGAINST charity. Conservatives are just against the Welfare state, which if you truly believe in helping the poor you would eliminate the welfare state (well, the state in general, but Conservatives aren't that smart on economics, unfortunately).
Ayn Rand was an atheist. Jesus believed in turning the other cheek, but Ayn Rand was an isolationist... so really, Ayn Rand was closer to Jesus in comparison than Conservatives themselves on foreign policy.
I'd say the only thing linking Conservatives with Ayn Rand is their love for American Capitalism (keep in mind, not Free Market Capitalism, both of them are essentially Statists). Jesus, on the other hand, has no real say on the ideas of State Capitalism. He does, however, believe in "give a man a fish, eats for a day, teach a man to fish, he eats for eternity" which once again falls more in line with Free Market Capitalism.
It's sort of like the triple Venn-Diagram. You can find similarities between all three at different points.
Not really, jesus himself said it was more possible to get a camel through the hole of a needle than for a rich man to get into heaven, capitalism is based off the core ideology of how much richer can you get by competing with other people, in my opinion, it is impossible to be both a christian and a capitalist
capitalism is based off the core ideology of how much richer can you get by competing with other people
No it isn't.
It feeds off of greed, sure, but that's human nature. Capitalism, itself, is the concept of people using capital to progress their own innovations and goals. In today's financial economy (heavily fueled by the State and Federal Reserve), many find it desirable to gather as much money as possible instead of actually engaging in something productive. Capitalism is a non-thinking entity that is merely corrupted by tyranny and coercion. However, in order for the poor to better their lives, they would engage in capitalism. It is natural.
Socialism and Marxism are responses to State Capitalism and its atrocities. but the true culprit is the State.
Jesus's statement on rich men going to Heaven was simply attacking the sin of greed, which is hoarding things for yourself and not helping others. If you are rich, you have more than the average citizen (the Roman emperor was very rich and lived in luxury while people begged in the streets.) Jesus preached God as a loving God, and a loving God would not permit a selfish person into heaven.
But people who become rich from Capitalism still can (and do) give to charity. Welfare has turned charity into a racket via a bureaucratic process and is much more sinful than simple profits through Capitalism (since welfare requires coercion through taxation.)
Jesus would not attack Capitalism. He attacks the greedy. And as Milton Friedman said, greed can be seen in Communist/Socialist countries as much or even more than in Capitalist countries.
If he means complete sacrifice, then he was an idiot. It makes no sense to throw everything you have away just to help a few people.
As previously stated, he said "give a man a fish, teach a man a fish" and that meant providing for the ability for people to provide for themselves. Capitalists can and do do this. Anarcho-Socialism believes in collective ownership of all land and resources, but State Socialism is the idea of government owning all means for production and redistributing accordingly. Neither "philosophies" has Jesus supported.
According to his own words, unless he was a complete dumbass (based on your statement), he was a compassionate Capitalist. Make what you can and help others with the extra profits that you don't need for yourself. If you give away everything, you'll die and so will everyone who depends on you.
I would argue they are closer in practice to Christ. Conservative Christians give more than secular people across the board, volunteer time, money even blood. This fact holds true even when removing the Church tithe (donation). This giving is personal and private and is much more in accordance with Christ's theology than Rand's Objectivism.
Christ held that we should seek to quietly give and do so with a cheerful heart. That is far closer to the personal charity in concept that to social programs which are coercive and usually relatively boastful (given the tone and rhetoric of those who argue for them).
Rand's Objectivism held that no charity was permissible at all. That human interaction should be guided solely by mutually beneficial exchange rather than by any charitable instinct. Rand herself often criticized Christians for their giving, arguing that it was immoral to subsidize inaction.
As such, agree with the positions or not, it is clear that Conservative Christians are far, far closer to Christ than Rand.
I'll first note the 100% absolute lack of any actual evidence supporting those claims.
Your argument itself is relatively meaningless. Who cares if two large atheists do give a lot of money (the claim about Pat Robertson is an urban legend and warrants no response)?
Christians in the US give both a higher percentage (on average) of their wealth than the non-religious and give a larger absolute amount than the non-religious (those two included).
So really the question is, which is better for the world? More people giving more or a couple of big names to throw on a debate site? I think we both know the answer to that.
http://www.hks.harvard.edu/saguaro/communitysurvey/index.html From this data we see that those who actively participate in religion are 25% more likely than those who are areligious to donate money and 23% more likely to donate time. Interestingly, even if you remove Church activities and tithes (which I would maintain are still socially beneficial giving) the numbers are still high, 18 and 12 percent respectively.
Either party's existence is irrelevant to the question of philosophic similarity. 2 is closer to 5 than 10 is. I don't need to argue that either is physically real to make that claim.