I say this as an atheist.

Take heart.

here's the thing

THEY WILL HAVE YOUR KIDS MORE THAN YOU. And they are PROFESSIONAL EDUCATORS>

they know how ot indoctrinate

I went to catholic school and my teachers where DemSocs and Commies

I know

I thought we were talking about perfect state

Yes, Im aware of the apostate catholic state

I think schools should be secular but that they should teach morality

Where the pope is practicing apostasy

Hi

I'm an ex-sedevacantist

I dont think separation of church and state prohibits religion *in* government. It's simply to say that church and state should not become the same entity

^^

You dont want an Iran

WEll, then you have to pick an epistemological world view, Christianity is pretty good choice for European society.

No, and we didnt HAVE Iran up until the 1970s or whenver Chuch was forced out of schools

MUH GERMANIC PAGANISM

it wasnt Iran

That s an atheist wives tale

or jew.

Many modern people interpret separation of church and state to mean separation of religion and public life but i believe that's an oddity of our Anglo Saxon society

Which privatizes religion

When you have a community that is 100% chrisitan, how can the STATE tell them they cant have a school that REFLECTS that reality

Thats not in teh constitution.

Here's the thing

That was jewish judges who did that

look into it

KRITARCHY

American Protestantism couldn't be a state entity

thats not the way it's structured

Quakers, Baptists, Episcopalians, Presbyterians, Shakers

All these groups couldnt lead a state

because they are decentralized and private

the way religion should be

@Deleted User

Well it really depends on what you define religion to be. It isnt easy to separate religion from culture, especially in less modern societies

Religion plays a huge part in culture and vice versa

Personally I am a primitive baptist

Yeah I assume that's why the US is going downhill

Was it "Iran" in your Catholic school

What a shitty retort

Wait what

backtrack

Religion for europeans doesn't need definition

I am just saying you dont want an Iranian style theocracy

It's Christianity

No that's not what I proposed

More specifically, Protestantism

Monarchies had cooperation with a churchy

It wasnt theocri

Theocratic

You don't want people taking orders from someone else who runs a state

I know. But what im saying is decentralized religions could definitely lead a state if they were to first control the culture. People generally conflate religion to mean Western style religion aka Christianity.

England has an official church now!

It has had one for the past 1,700 years

haha

@Deleted User

You could have an ecumenical council that gives guidance to legislators and give us guidance to people on law - a christian-based ecumenical council that allows different sects to sit at the table sects of Christianity and that Christian Department would inform spiritual guidance morality guidance on those who requested it

A spiritual FDA that gives moral and spiritual health to the nation

In defining Christianity as the official Faith you weren't requiring people to be Christians but you are keeping that territory free of competing religions

no

And that is the biggest advantage

you don't need religious authorities in government

You need churches reinforcing western values

Besides that bureaucratizing religion like that is gay

not by order of the state

I disagree I think you could be done correctly that would make things better

And i doubt having an ecumenical counsel will actually get anything done. People have been trying for centuries to cut across sectarian lines and nothing has really been shown for it

Council of Nicea was a disaster

bribes

violence

corruption

Within Christianity..... Not with other religions

Look I mean you could look at examples of types of government that have failed in the past what we're talking about here is a new version keeping in mind the problems of the past

You did say a "Christian based ecumenical counsel"

And yeah other religions are just as fractured as Christianity

also when you speak of bribes corruption that sort of thing that is going to happen in any system you devise you cannot devise a system that won't have bribery and Corruption

Hinduism has thousands of sects as well

Why care about Hinduism.

Christian Ecumenism doesn't work well

it has worked very few times

the point is is there a problems we Face from perversion and some version from foreign religions and foreign moralities or even non moral systems so we have to look at that and make a decision we can't just stay in Perpetual indecision

You need freedom of religion

that is the essence of liberal constitutional democracy that we have now is that it is marked by Perpetual indecision and people with lack of power to actually affect any change

but restriction of cults

You can have freedom of religion but the territory has to have some definition and it has to be Define of the European spirituality

The culture has simply changed. Perhaps Christianity isnt the religion the West needs anymore

We can't have institutions of the state accommodating foreign spirituality we can't have the territory being converted and institutions of foreign religions being built within our territory

Much in the same way Christianity supplanted Roman paganism perhaps Christianity will be supplanted by something else

Catholicism did

Why should we try and do that.... To what would you welcome to replace Christianity with. I think that's a rather short-sighted View.... and leads to the non view or the non value are the directionless state that we have now that is being actively subverted by people who do not have the same doubt about what their religion is that you do

Do you think Islam or Jews or Hindus have the self-doubt about whether their religion is the right path for their people

No they don't

And they are here taking and convincing and minimizing Christians to their own self-doubt

Westernized Jews and Hindus do. Religion exists to serve specific needs and the way our culture is changing these needs are being served in other ways

It's time we be a little bit more defensive of our Traditions our culture are race and yes even or spirituality it is ours if we want to change it we can change it but we don't need it changed from without we don't need it changed by a foreign influence

Why would you even welcome that

Are you masochistic

Freedom of religion is essential

except for jews

but it must not be threatening to national security

No it's not essential it's a nicety we need to have our territory defined spiritually otherwise prepared to be conquered

I'm saying that it is impractical to keep holding onto something that may have run its course

Multi religious empires have thrived

and fallen

what is your point?

so has everything

Know what you're saying is is to allow foreign spiritualities to take over I don't think you're being practical in any way whatsoever

You are merely setting up the ability for Christianity to be subverted

Christianity was once a foreign religion from the Jewish people lmao

But was eventually adapted to suit the Romans

`foreign spiritualities`

for a guy using a popes name you don’t seem too faithful

Do you think you live in a vacuum where there is Christianity or Nothing at All.... I think you should look at the globe and see what's happening my friend

I am a protestant

Good

ahahahaha

It's time to stop being stupid

I see you haven't joined the Catholic cult

I use this pfp to make fun of sede's

I was a catholic

and pretending to be naive about these thought experiments were Christianity just goes away on its own and become something else in a vacuum without influence from foreign influence

This idiocy has led us to where we are now

John Locke was a fool

Imagine a world without Christianity

no he wasn't

@Deleted User

I dont think you're understanding. I'm not even implying it is either Christianity or nothing. I'm saying that as traditionalists we should know that traditionalism doesnt advocate for the holding onto of dead or dying values. Traditionalism does very much allow us to go forward and leave the past behind but in ways that are socially necessary and organic

He founded the fucking country your in RN

no he didn’t

Locke led to the USA

his theories are almost perfectly implemented in 1789

Try reading John Locke he's a Pie in the Sky Fantasy having philosopher totally untethered to reality totally ungrounded to the defensive nature that Western Civilization needed to have completely divorced from geopolitics and reality

with the writing of the consitutions

that’s like saying marx founded the ussr

You know what he meant

His pretty little rationalizations... Have shown themselves to be nonsensical in the modern world

And only barely made sense in the homogeneous states that he lived in in his time

yeah i knew what he meant and i said it’s wrong

Lmao

I can grant that he could not have foreseen multiculturalism but now we have seen it so we can't be so stupid

The problem with Lockeanism is that its state of nature never existed nor could ever exist

Social contract theory is big gay

why

Right

Social Contract is necessary

you need some order

Because people dont consciously come together to set up a society. Lockeanism assumes that the state of nature is actually kind of peaceful but it isnt. Civilization exists because violence is the fundamental problem plaguing humanity. People dont "come together" and agree on things in the sense of consciously willing this. They are pretty much forced

You have to understand it's limitations

As if the Constitution is a social contract

Imagine not living in America and not having basic rights

If we assume social contract theory then yeah the Constitution would be a social contract of some sort. There's nothing to suppose that the initial contract can't temporally spread out to be valid across generations

👌 😂 👌

Who voted for it..it was brought by violence

Our current state was brought by violence

Locke was just wrong

Dont go to Unite the Right 2

btw

Hobbes was right

please

dont go

LOLOL

don’t tell me what to do

I can't anyway

Have a vacation planned for then

You are making right wing look like retards

if you go

@Deleted User where

if i want to get in to street brawls well then ill get in to street brawls

Idiot

You will make everyone in your movement look bad

that’s why ill wear civnat and ancap stuff 👌 😂 👌

Well that's kinda the point. It's pretty unfeasible to get each new generation to verbally or consciously reaffirm the contract. People reaffirm it by inheriting, accepting, and living out its precepts. The whole point is that some violence must be done to ensure a functional society, if by violence you simply mean against one's will. But i dont accept that definition. Violence to me is conflict with ambiguity and there really is no ambiguity nor conflict when people implicitly accept the contract.

there is unironically nothing wrong with street brawls as long as you don’t instigate it

marching through streets is an essential part of all respectable movements

Brawlers will be flogged. Change my mind

Wyoming

Western vacation....like Westworld!

😁

You're so jealous

Not only is it unfeasible...it never happened initially!!!!!!!

It's a myth

Like I said it was created by raw power

Not lockean contractual permission

That never ever happened

youll never get to a point where you can flog anyone without a few brawls

So we have a foundational myth of social contract

Locke is almost used as a cover up

For reality

A facade

Weekly (I think) reminder that socialism is the best system to achieve fair pay for all, and stop the media-slave state.

but not everyone deserves fair pay, friend

I know. I said fair pay for all

How much do you know about socialism? I'll be more specific, democratic socialism. @Deleted User

LOLOL

OI

M8

I saw that

Egalitarianism will never be realized

BLADY WANKER

So now you've changed the message to fair pay, why don't you think everyone deserves fair pay? @Deleted User

fair pay? More like fair gay!

Lol

The disproportionate ability people have will always and instantly overwhelm any concept of egalitarianism.

And does.

@Deleted User Hm, seems I've found the reason people don't understand socialism. I've now said twice that it's *fair* pay, not equal pay, yet you still misunderstand the concept of people being paid fairly.

People dont get paid fairly now?

i think i get paid fairly

i have a job that pays minimum wage in my state and i think its good enough

i WISH it was higher because its fucking money but

Then prices increase making the increase in wage null

🚁🚁🚁🚁🚁🚁🚁🚁🚁

I think war should be used to further progress a nation.

Especially in Europe, war is what propelled Europe to the top due to the drive to innovate and push for deadlier and more effective ways to kill people, which translated into civilian use.

War is just diplomacy by other means

👍

@Jere Your thoughts?

About what?

I think that war should be used a lot more often as a way to achieve goals

'no'

@Deleted User ?

It's not profitable to start wars anymore

*oil*

yeah

to brown people

War is extremely profitable still if done correctly

I am both for that and against it. I don't want to start wars BUT I want my country to have good defence, and survive.

Even in Europe

ecks dee

no

Ukraine was insurgents

If you annex a country or even a portion of it, you can potentially get all their factories and resources

Yeah only if you have historical claims

that would only work with Russia

Who gives a shit about historical claims really?

Russia has claims to Ukraine/Belarus

The problem with that in Europe is that Great britain will most likely rush to try to stop it though

literally everyone

International recognition dosent matter

Ukraine/Belarus aren't real countries

Russia literally takes a part of ukraine and no one does anything

If you have the factories and they dont recognize you have factories they are just blind

factories aren't useful

Ukraine is rightfully part of Russia

or not as useful as you think

factories aren't useful