Talk:Christian values

message: Good - I found this page useful today. Dunxd 11:01, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: I agree that these are largely shared as Christian values, but they are the moreso values of prejudice. Christian values do include some prejudice (every religion does) but there are also very universal values like "do unto others as you would have them do unto you" which are predominantly Christian-based. I think the list simply needs more examples that are non-prejudice in addition to the ones listed already.
24.69.128.37 (talk) 18:50, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Maybe add some more values? 

message: I don't believe the authors of this article accurately represent the 21st century idea of Christian Values.
The desirability of laws against birth control
The desirability of laws against same-sex marriage and support for discrimination against homosexuals
The desirability of reinstating faculty-led prayer at taxpayer-funded schools
There is an element of truth to these, but none of them are correct.  I believe the Christian Values regarding birth control are more heavily levied by the Catholic church, which is not a blanket organization for the expression of Christian Values.
Most political conservatives would identify the desirability of laws against same-sex marriage as a Christian Value, but not discrimination against homosexuals - this is a very critical and ill-worded trait that shows bias in the author.
Likewise, another misleading word choice is the last Value that Christians desire faculty-led prayer.  This is not a part of any of the prayer-in-school agendas.  The desire is for the allowance of prayer in public schools by students, not the insistence that these prayers be faculty-led. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 157.142.134.213 (talk) 17:35, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, I agree. Being one kind of "Christian" myself I've experienced at least two or possibly three very disparate versions of "Christian values" (or "'Christian' values"). I think the article is not neutral as it is, as I should never ever have listed those values as specifically "Christian" – any moslem, jew, any hindu any buddhist could have listed those as "Islamic", "Jewish", "Hindu" or "Buddhist" values. I myself should instead have listed: 1. Jesus is son of god (this is fairly unique), 2. Jesus died on the cross in order to salvage us for our sins, 3. (Non-unique for christianity) The central law of Christianity is the golden rule (extended to being pleasant and forgiving towards enemies) and all other moral laws are temporal adaptions of this law. I think that this article should be modified to reflect various "'Christian' values" not allow certain politically minded individuals monopolizing this label for themselves, implicitly declaring people who don't think as themselves being "non-Christian". Said: Rursus ☻ 12:18, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

text: Laws against same-sex marriage would be discrimination against homosexuals, as they would be discriminated against when they attempt to apply for a marriage license, as they are currently in many places where Christian bigots have attempted to jackboot some legislation that would discriminate against homosexuals. 107.2.162.18 (talk) 05:46, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  21st Century "Christian Values" 

message: I added templates POV, citations, and wikify. OK, the article tries to be NPOV, but isn't. It makes one dialectic turn contrasting an initial alleged list of christian values with a political interpretation of what is "'Christian' values" – this is a good thing – an article like this should contain such dialectic contrastings – but considering that the initial list seems to be a far-fetched opinion on "original christian values" (just read John 8:1-12, and then Matt 7:1, to see why I claim that christianity is not quite a moral system but rather some kind of generical meta-ethics system), alternate well-cited lists of "'original' christian values" should be contrasted against many political "Christian" allegations. Personally I vindicate the freedom of Christianity from politics (except the pure humanist vindications which is the base of christianity – according to my opinion). The article also need headings per "christian value" list vindicated. Said: Rursus ☻ 12:38, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Wow! Things happen. Somebody – not me, added structure, so that wikify no longer qualifies. THX 103, someone! Said: Rursus ☻ 12:49, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

text: Glory goes to User:Avalon! Said: Rursus ☻ 12:51, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: I littered it up!

message: Did altruism get in the way of the pursuit of worldly goods or why does this miss completely in this article?
Altruism is the cornerstone of christian values ... at least it was taught to me like that in confirmation classes. --Arotto (talk) 10:28, 22 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I think that's covered in "love thy neighbor as thyself".Rick Norwood (talk) 12:11, 22 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: What? Altruism no more a christian value?

message: Is the phrase "Christian values" used to mean "conservative values" outside the US?  If so, the article should give examples.  If not, the article should find a source that identifies this as a peculiarly American usage. Rick Norwood (talk) 20:45, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  worldview 

message: If someone took an honest look at Christian values, they'd find a wide range of values that are probably too numerous list. The ones listed are not values akin to all Christians (the article does not differentiate between conservative Christians, mainline Christians, etc.). Heck, even within the various groups of Christians, not everyone shares those values. If we wanted to be as precise as possible, there would be only two values that are shared among Christians: loving God and loving others. Right now, though, this article just seems like a laundry list of social issues that some people hate regarding things they think all conservative Christians believe and do. Seregain (talk) 02:49, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Perhaps this article should be written to be more like the family values article. Seregain (talk) 17:36, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I fixed the article a little, mainly avoiding absolute language.--136.183.240.185 (talk) 00:01, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  I question the neutrality and even the validity of this article 

message: For some reason, the language of the article does not appear to be parallel. Under "Biblical authority", one can find "Biblical teachings of Jesus..." Now, take a look at the next section, which writes: "Modern use". This unparallel language strikes me as biased, because it's implying that the former are values while the latter are not. I think the article can be greatly be improved by parallel language. 
I think chastity would count as a Christian value. Because chastity would count as a religious value, the Christian Right favors abstinence-only education. In this respect, I think one must separate or remove the political aspects of these values. What I mean is, abstinence-only program is the action, whereas faithfulness and chastity are values. SuperSuperSmarty (talk) 17:30, 4 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Parallelism and language 

message: The biblical passage "uv'khol m'odekha" correctly translates into English as "with all your might" (or "all your means"), not "with all your mind", as the article incorrectly states. Indeed, English texts of the Sh'ma render it in exactly this way. (see, for example, the Wiki article on the Sh'ma). The idea that the passage reads [in English], "with all your mind" is the result of a homophonic misinterpretation. I have corrected the article again.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.103.51.147 (talk) 18:32, 23 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Excerpt from the Sh'ma 

message: "promoting separation of church and state[citation needed] and religious tolerance, consistent with the concept of Christ's kingdom not being "of this world" and warnings against the hunger for potentially corrupting temporal power throughout the Bible"
I don't understand the request.  Is this a request for a citation that separation of church and state is a Christian value.  Several Biblical quotes establish that, of which the most famous is "render unto God what is God's and unto Caesar what is Caesar's."  Or is it a request for a citation that liberals support separation of church and state.  Examples of that are also easy to provide.  But I'd like a clearer idea of what is requested, so as not to lumber the sentence with an unnecessary number of citations.Rick Norwood (talk) 11:53, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  citation needed