Okay let me work my theory out so you can all destroy it by pointing out all the flaws. I do enjoy constructive criticism. Say we did away with the division of church and state, and made the government in charge of Religion. Say we make everybody follow the Catholic religion. Well there are going to be some pros here. And we also kill everybody who disagrees. Besides the whole thing being immoral what do you think?
Also you could list the pros and cons of what would happen if we inserted other religions as the center of our government.
Let's take it a step further and say the UN agrees that everyone in the world who is not Catholic will die, so we can all get on an even footing and be very basic about this, okay?
With everyone believing in religion, like Catholicism, our laws will be reworked to fit what God believes, over time. Our technological and biological advances will either be slowed, stop, or dwindle. And when anyone comes outside the boundaries of Catholicism, like Saving said, they will be branded blasphemous and be killed.
Basically, we would be traveling back in time to where the Catholic Church DID have power and made sure everyone believed in God and not stray away from His beliefs.
To sum things up, I can only find cons. But at least people would be agreeing with each other right?
I didn't mean to say that I'm sorry I read separation of church and state and I thought it was actually separating religion from government. I should have read the first post and you should have chosen a different name for this thread so it's a double negative it cancels each other out.
um, ok, im going with insering another religion, "mormonism"
A. the world overpopulates, quickly, and we all end up starving to death.
B. underwear manufacturures would be out of a job
C. we would all be SUPER HAPPY, all the time, even if we werent wed never let on that we werent
D. did you know that mormons believe that black peoples skin is black because they didn't fight as valiantly as the white people in the battle of heaven and hell. NUTS!!!!
E. ultimately, if they had enough power, i mean to kill all non believers, they would, trust me.
F. in the end, it wouldn't fail, that is, if everything went as simply as saving suggests, how could it?? all non believers dead, even if you don't believe, you pretend you do out of fear.
ALTERNATIVE: i choose death, they go to church for three hours, i couldnt take it.
To sum things up, I can only find cons. But at least people would be agreeing with each other right?
Even when it was like that there were people who either just kept quiet to avoid prosecution or went into self exile. There would also be those few who would actively fight against it. So even with the church in such power not all the people would be in agreement.
Try the muslims religion. The world would be a better place. We would be living in turban world.
Insert paganism instead of catholicism, preferably celtic. Research would still be allowed and actually high esteemed (druids were some kind of pagan biologists^^), we would develop a way of living in tune with our environment; not necessarily going back to savage life, just a sustainable, modern way of living. Maybe we just could skip the human sacrifice part...
Let me point out one pro for catholicism while I look for others. If we inserted the Catholic Religion into the center. The Roman Catholics believe that people shouldn't marry unless the husband can support the wife. Good for the economy. Right?
And if everybody can support themselves and their family it would somehow affect the economy in a positive way. I'm not sure how though. I'm not even sure if it will. But I think it might.
I would say no use of contraceptives is a negative things given the benefits of there use.
And if everybody can support themselves and their family it would somehow affect the economy in a positive way.
You said that people wouldn't get married until the husband can support his wife. This wouldn't mean everyone would then be able to support themselves.
Oh what I meant was he would have to be able to support a family. Meaning himself and his wife, as well as his children.
I That still wouldn't mean everyone would be able to support themselves.
I'm not even sure just waiting until they can would happen given the number of Catholics in the real world who don't. Also given how common practice it is to have large families in Catholicism wouldn't that have an adverse effect on the economy?
I'm speaking Vatican 1 not Vatican 2. The strict Catholics. Vatican 2 allows contraception, and is not nearly as precise as Vatican 1(the traditional Catholics).
Not everybody would be ab le to support themselves, I guess I will agree with you, but at most the bigger families, assuming they pay attention to the law, will be able to support themselves.
