Take God Out of Government , Government Becomes God ?

Jump to Last Post 1-6 of 6 discussions (52 posts)
  1. profile image0
    ahorsebackposted 3 years ago

    Read about this , I thought that it was an interesting take , Can you prove it as being  wrong ?

    1. wilderness profile image97
      wildernessposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      God is defined as all powerful, able to accomplish anything it wishes, and with never an error.  Government can never do that.  Case dismissed.

    2. Credence2 profile image79
      Credence2posted 3 years agoin reply to this

      What God? Whose God?

      1. profile image0
        ahorsebackposted 3 years agoin reply to this

        The one described at the end of the declaration of independence , my God , America's God . Read it sometime.

        1. Credence2 profile image79
          Credence2posted 3 years agoin reply to this

          I know what is there. Obviously, you are out of step,  but aren't you always?

          What do you think has been so controversial over the last 250 years if this definition for God and how it applies were universally understood and appreciated?

          1. profile image0
            ahorsebackposted 3 years agoin reply to this

            Not 250 years in controversy , how about maybe twenty or so ?

            1. Credence2 profile image79
              Credence2posted 3 years agoin reply to this

              No, Ahorseback it has been much longer, you really don't know?

            2. wilderness profile image97
              wildernessposted 3 years agoin reply to this

              Credence is right: god, any god, has been controversial for thousands of years.  If it wasn't which god it was what god said and to whom.  What god wanted, what god demands.  Always controversial, but somehow the "government" always gets to define it all, whether the priesthood, the emperor/president/whatever or other more hidden controlling structure of that specific nation.

              1. profile image0
                ahorsebackposted 3 years agoin reply to this

                The existence of a God in itself controversial of course but not in constitutional US -speak   that is a relatively recent "pop" culture issue .   When has the US constitution  and its relationship  been controversial in any registrable amount before the 1950-s 60's other than in a media -social media hype ?

                1. Credence2 profile image79
                  Credence2posted 3 years agoin reply to this

                  So, you are tying the issue of the God mentioned in the Declaration as suddenly being contentious during the period of beatniks, hippies and the creation of the counter culture? First, that is more than 20 years ago.

                  So, you really think that we were all on the same page regarding this "God" as mentioned in the DOI before the middle of the last century?

                  Slavery: so which God was the true one referred to in the DOI? The God of the abolitionist against slavery or the one of the Southern Planters who said that it was a positive good and used their interpretation of God and the Bible to support their position.

                  Anti-semitism in America: did the DOI definition of God included considering Jews Christ killers?

                  Anti-Catholicism, who said that the DOI definition of God did not make provisions for a Pope?

                  Jehovah's witnesses fought the interpretation of the DOI God by being conscientious objectors during WWI, and were jailed because of it

                  Jehovah's Witnesses fought in the early 1940's and won a judicial ruling saying that they nor their children had to participate in the Pledge of Allegiance, and that they were not traitors nor blaspheming God for taking this stand.

                  God said that Women were the "weaker vessel", what would the 18th Century version of God and his expectations be in regard to equal rights for women? Much of that struggle operating in earnest during the 1st 3 decades of the 20th Century.

                  And again there was the issue of keeping school boards from indoctrinating students in the "ole time religion". The court rules in favor of the complainant. But. This was 1962, during the period when you said everything changed.

                  It is not the acknowledgement of God in American life that has so much disappeared more than a change in perspective and the times that are primarily orchestrated by people.

                  1. profile image0
                    ahorsebackposted 3 years agoin reply to this

                    I am saying that god -hate / god controversy  today wasn't prevalent in 1776 , not at all in fact , not until recent history .     You seem willing as are all the god haters today , of blaming god for all of mankind's shortcomings or social  issues.    I'm not debating that there has been atheisms for a hundred years or so in America , I'm saying the controversy was pretty much unheard of in the writing of the declaration .    How could atheism have been prevalent then , when the DOI  it was a puritan based writing by the founding fathers from it's initiation  ?

                    The fact is you're giving pop / atheism far too much history and giving god to much blame for recent mankind's evil transgressions . Believe in god or not ,  a moral based society is an inherently  better society anyday over a godless one .

                  2. wilderness profile image97
                    wildernessposted 3 years agoin reply to this

                    "So, you really think that we were all on the same page regarding this "God" as mentioned in the DOI before the middle of the last century?"

                    That we were not is the single biggest reason (if not the only one) that the separation of religion and state was written into the constitution.  No state wanted another state telling them what their god wants of them.

                2. wilderness profile image97
                  wildernessposted 3 years agoin reply to this

                  The existence of a god is controversial, yes.  So is what it wants and what it demands of people.  As is what it does, what it says and even what it did in the past.

                  In fact, everything about the gods are controversial.  And as I said, the controlling structure, not the people, are always the ones that get to define and determine all of these things.

  2. Aime F profile image80
    Aime Fposted 3 years ago

    I do pray to my Justin Trudeau poster every night and try to live my life by the guidance of his Facebook posts, so yeah, now that you mention it...

    1. profile image0
      ahorsebackposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      Hey , Has he and the Donald got a bromance going or what ......Huuuuuh ?

    2. IslandBites profile image90
      IslandBitesposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      LOL

  3. profile image0
    ahorsebackposted 3 years ago

    Funny that you seem to relate  the horrible faults of humanity , of societies  , of  political ideologies , of states , or armies or one race to another - as the fault solely of religion   ,  that is all kind of a cop- out Wilderness .   I'll give you this , religions at times don't have the best track records but a religiously moral society is way better than the lack of one .

    For instance , is the modern day occurrence of child molestation in the Catholic church then the fault of christianity too OR is it the individual man wearing the robe ? The deaths of women and children in Waco Texas a fault laid at the front step of God or of David Koresh ?  Jimmy Jones in Central America laced the cool-aid , God had nothing to do with that .  Lets not excuse the individual or collective accountability of mankind itself and lay all the blame at a god's feet .
    I still would rather a people of religion based morality than the lack of one.

    1. wilderness profile image97
      wildernessposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      "I'll give you this , religions at times don't have the best track records but a religiously moral society is way better than the lack of one ."

      I have yet to see a religiously controlled society I would want to live in.  Every one quickly degenerates into something that no one (outside the priesthood and their "pets") would enjoy and is no better than any other dictatorship we've seen.

      Yes, the Catholic church bears some responsibility (and perhaps a great deal of it) for the child molestation by the man in the robe...the man that the church demands suppress the instincts and drives that hundreds of thousands of years of evolution created him with.  It was the policies and rules of the church that led to such aberrations, not to speak of the requirement it be hidden when found.

      Koresh and Jones, no.  That was sheer stupidity of the people, for they were in no way forced to take part in those so-called "churches".  Although the children didn't have much choice...

      You may be happy with the morality of second class citizenry for women, hanging gays and pretending that gender is completely a function of gonads.  Of forcing teaching onto children that we know is false and a lie.  Of a controlling priesthood that can do and say anything it wants, forcing you to accept it or die.  Of inventing "witches" and other demons that can then be blamed for anything that goes wrong.  Of denying learning and discoveries that show the religious beliefs to be false.  Of near total control of how we live our lives.

      I'm not.

  4. psycheskinner profile image82
    psycheskinnerposted 3 years ago

    When it comes to how morality and religion interact overall I would suggest the effect is neutral.

    Being secular is about having a government that lets you choose what if any gods you follow.  So in a civil context it is more important than god.  By which I mean, it stops people from forcing their gods and their rules on other people who don't want them.  A secular society is to my mind superior to a theocracy where everyone is forced to follow a particular god whether they want to or not.  This is easy to appreciate if you imagine the theocracy choosing a religion, or even a sect of your religion, other than your own.

    1. profile image0
      ahorsebackposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      But you don't feel America allows that , that you believe in a God or sect of your choice ? Contrary to  modern , intelligent agnostics , no one forces anything on anyone in America .   How many times in these forums have we determined that christianity is a religion of faith based belief ?   Unless of course you consider the pair of teens on your front porch in white shirts and  dress slacks voluntarily spreading the word of the LDS church to you IF YOU wish to give them a moment ?

      psycheskinner ,This is a far cry from ".....forcing their gods and their rules on other people who don't want them ........"  You lose that debate every day and always will in modern America . Of course , if one needs a false cause for being outraged .........

  5. profile image0
    ahorsebackposted 3 years ago

    Well no wonder you live in America then if you wouldn't live in a religiously controlled society ,  The catholic church hold responsibility for letting it go on so long , I agree .

    Your last paragraph makes no sense except it that I've heard much of the same from those who probably and resentfully grew up in catholicism or perhaps had a strict southern baptist father , preacher , I've seen much of the same  in friends and acquaintances .  This whole" second class ..........witches  and other demons ....."nonsense is really just that  though sorry .    Your starting to sound much like the other "......stuffing religion down my throat "angered  people though , I don't wish to get you worked up .

    1. wilderness profile image97
      wildernessposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      And does the Catholic church bear some blame for forcing their upper echelon to live a life of celibacy, trying to roll back a million years of evolution because "God wants it that way"?

      When we have serious presidential candidates telling us that (their version of) God's law takes priority over the laws of the land, are we seeing force in the making? 

      When gays are murdered for openly being gay, are we seeing religious force?

      When the general population is forced to pay for religious icons (idolatry) on public property are we being forced?

      When laws are passed that require religious myth to be taught to our children as factual or even possible, are we being forced?

      When stores are closed forever because they sold the current version of pornography, or anything at all in some locations, are we being forced into the belief system of religion?

      I could go on forever, but another tack may show it better.  We are continually being told there is a "war" on religion, and Christianity, but when looked at and examined, the only "war" is to keep the religious from doing things like the above instances - to deny religion the ability to force others to live by the beliefs of the faithful.  That religious leaders or groups can no longer force others to accept their religious laws and beliefs makes it a "war" somehow, and is strongly objected to.  If they aren't trying to force beliefs onto others, what is there to object to?

      1. GA Anderson profile image92
        GA Andersonposted 3 years agoin reply to this

        Regardless of my perspective, or the particular points you addressed, that was well stated.

        GA

        1. wilderness profile image97
          wildernessposted 3 years agoin reply to this

          Thank you.  Really, that's my only beef with religion in general; that they take it as instruction from their god to force those around them to follow the tenets of their religion.  It can be overt (blue laws) or fairly well hidden (ID in schools or religious icons on public property) but it is always there. 

          What the religious believe or do behind closed doors is their business, but keep it there rather than trying to bring their beliefs into the law books.

      2. profile image0
        ahorsebackposted 3 years agoin reply to this

        "I could go on forever ............."and most of you often do when it comes to  the God hate  , I do believe that the very first forums I got into on hubpages dealt with religion , religious freedom , something like eight years ago ,    Why ? Because of what you are doing right here ,right now   Finger pointing or rather blame shifting .

        You are  blaming God for the ills of mankind and  every one of your accusatory points is simply that , point that finger in a direction other then where it belongs, at you , at me ,  at ourselves as mankind  .   First of all  I'm not a preacher , I don't attend church , I'm not an acting christian so you cannot judge my opinion as being of the flock ,so to speak but  I can see hypocrisy from a thousand miles away .  Your blame game of religion  is just simply that .

        Do the organized houses of the many factions  bare responsibility for some even horrible interpretations and manifestation of the written words ? Yes .   Do their leaders ? Yes . Do the men who attend to these organizations , yes . And there lay the ultimate responsibility  , The MAN who wrote , re-wrote , interpret  translate , and act out the then translated writing of the bible{ s}.

        You have not made one point that accomplishes anything in this debate BUT ultimately inadvertently point the blame at yourself , at me or at those around us .   Man is an animal of uncontrolled free thought , religiously , politically or individually and it is directly , ultimately that free thought that makes him stumble his way through his own accountability and interpretations of the bible or for that matter any book of instructions.   the gist of your opinion is ultimately that of the handyman in the garage who refuses to open the instruction manual and fix his own lawnmower but continues to tinker his way as the grass eternally grows ,as he pulls and pulls on the starter rope getting nowhere .  The quintessential guy in the car that refuses to listen to the wife with the map and drives around and around the mall looking for the way out of town .

        1. GA Anderson profile image92
          GA Andersonposted 3 years agoin reply to this

          In following this thread, ahorseback, relative to Wilderness' points, I think you are mistaken. It is not God that it being blamed, it is religion. Specifically, organized religion.  A religion isn't a God, so it is not God that is being blamed.

          If you could consider that the two - religion, and God, are not the same thing, would that have any effect on your perspective of "God-haters?"

          GA

          1. profile image0
            ahorsebackposted 3 years agoin reply to this

            By saying God  I am admitting religion as being the same G.A , My sole  point is that  it is unfair to blame religion [or any God  }  today for the infractions of human nature against itself because of  the human interpretation of the bible /religion
            I do believe that many people are injecting a certain amount of the  emotion of personal experiences here   , that's all .   I had a friend who was raised by a southern baptist preacher , apparently a mean Dad .  Any discussion of faith  prayer or religion  even periferal with him instantly turned nasty because of that mans personally despising of all things religion . THAT is what I perceive here beneath the surface of the debate .  The acts of man are his alone . where ever he gets his inspiration , religion  government or any controlled  inspiration otherwise attained AND so is the blame .

            The social / cultural limits of every act known to man , from burning witches at the stake to bombing distant capitals , from poisoning babies to enslaving another human being , from mixing the cool-Aid to drinking it , are the fault of man and not something in the eternities. When one day we all wake up to this become more humane and less animalistic  , then we become a better world, not by blaming the simple act of a man having faith in something higher than himself.

            1. Credence2 profile image79
              Credence2posted 3 years agoin reply to this

              You said:

              "By saying God  I am admitting religion as being the same G.A , My sole  point is that  it is unfair to blame religion [or any God  }  today for the infractions of human nature against itself because of  the human interpretation of the bible /religion"

              That is basically what I told you my take was in regard to this matter.

              I differ from you in the fact that we all have our own concept of God or lack thereof to contend with and that the God you identify in the DOI is not necessarily the one that we are all going to acknowledge. I fight for the right for people to believe and worship as they may wish. I will take my chances with secular humanism anytime over someone lording over me a deity of their own design and choosing.

              1. profile image0
                ahorsebackposted 3 years agoin reply to this

                Part ofthe point  that I'm trying to explain and not doing very well,  is that a moral people by even the basic parameters  of a religious society , Is just going to have more morals , ethical standards and  human kindness " do unto others ",  than a godless society . IMHO.

                1. Credence2 profile image79
                  Credence2posted 3 years agoin reply to this

                  Europe, for example, has a lot less affinity for organized religion than the United States if one used their surveys as to denomination affiliation and church attendance as indicators. Can we really say that their societies are lacking in morals, ethical standards or human kindness relative to America?

                  1. profile image0
                    ahorsebackposted 3 years agoin reply to this

                    We'd have to compare so many details of cultures ,societies  legal systems , religions , justice systems as to probably be impossible to determine  ?  America is a fairly religious nation though wouldn't you say ? I think I'd hate to see our country less religious or lacking it altogether given its current state of affairs ?

            2. IslandBites profile image90
              IslandBitesposted 3 years agoin reply to this

              So, Islam too, right?

              Change of heart, again?  smile

            3. GA Anderson profile image92
              GA Andersonposted 3 years agoin reply to this

              This would be better addressed by Wilderness, than I, ahorseback. but I don't think you should consider religion and God, (any God), as being the same thing.

              It is true that the human failures you mention should be attributed to the failures of man, and not of a God, but man uses religion as justification for those failures. Man uses religion as authority to commit those "failures." He says God says, when in fact it is his religion that says, not his God.

              I believe I may understand your point to be that a life of faith, (any faith), can be a wonderful thing. And I agree. I can imagine how much less stressful life would be if you have an instruction manual to handle all its problems. A set of rules to live by.

              But that individual faith should be just that - individual. I think it is when that faith is part of a man-created, structured, and defined religion that it separates from its God. And that is where the blame for the problems should placed. Not on man's imperfections, but on organized, (perhaps there may be exceptions),  religion's manipulations of those imperfections. At least in a discussion such as this. Otherwise, I believe the truth of the matter is that no matter our level of civilization - man is still an animal. Just peel away a few layers of our security, and even a God won't be needed to justify Godless behavior.

              I hope you might consider this perspective. I think it might lessen your sense of your God being blamed, when I think it is the religion that supposes to worship him, (or her, or it), that is and should be blamed.

              Just offering a perspective ahorseback, I am out of my depth here and don't presume any authority at all for my opinion.

              GA

              1. wilderness profile image97
                wildernessposted 3 years agoin reply to this

                You did as well as I could have.  Religion is not a god - it is a collection of men that purport to know what a god wants, and it's a funny thing that (according to religion) that god always wants close to what is common practice of the time.  Usually a little more conservative, but close.

  6. profile image0
    ahorsebackposted 3 years ago

    I shouldn't be at all surprised that we are at a point where we can blame anything but the man for any hu-man condition whatsoever ,    Man has always had his needs for organizing in groups  starting from his days in the caves .  From the acquisition  of food , to planting the corn , defending his family , to  procreating and so why not his spirituality .  For most men anyway and maybe I can say all I say  because I'm not personally into groups of any kind  .

    Considering too that he is first born mentally naked , alone and afraid  and so dies that same way  ,  I wonder at what point it was  that he first sticks out his finger and says  " This that I have done today is all your fault " the first time he took a life ?  The first time he raped a woman ?  The first time or the last that his merry little group of man encountered the next village and swept in murdering ,maiming , raping and pillaging  .

    No matter how we define mankind's groups , the horrible infractions of mankind or his beliefs   . We first have to blame man himself for all that has occurred under his watch , We  now stand in circles and point at the stars and say it's your fault , you are  the object of destruction , we point  at a club , a gun , a sword , a  chariot  , at the longer  and better armed line of the soldiers of the enemy and say , It's all your fault  ?

    Long before man became a very persuading minister  a warrior , a leader of men , a teacher of others , a king or a world leader he was first just a man .And right there is where all of the blame for anything he has ever done or will ever do lies . Mankind and all the infractions of man are the fault of nothing other than man himself .   The very object of mans goodness or his evil is his conscience , a conscience in which he himself choses , so whether he lets his conscience be controlled or persuaded by others ,  it is still HIS conscience . singularly or in groups .

    So of all of the bitter infractions of mankind  we blame a mans spirituality  ? No , don't blame the group , blame him alone .

    1. wilderness profile image97
      wildernessposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      On this there can be no argument, for there are precious few events in our lives not caused by man, and most of the time by ourselves.  Unfortunately, just as you point out, it has become the norm to blame something else; a person, the weather, the past.  Anything that we think will get us "off the hook" for poor behavior.

      1. profile image0
        ahorsebackposted 3 years agoin reply to this

        I do agree that the religions ,  led by man , for instance the Southern Baptist Church  or the Catholic diocese even and  the perhaps over -abundance of man organised groups can be as much at fault as man himself . Yet the generalization of " religions , churches"   is kind of like saying all black men or all white men ,all women or all men  whatever the accused group is just that . simply Generalizing . Wouldn't you agree that undoubtedly all  groups , including government , are way better off WITH the general morality of that which religion teaches ?  I don't know that the NEA is teaching morality 101 especially today ?

        1. wilderness profile image97
          wildernessposted 3 years agoin reply to this

          No.  I can't say that we would be better off with the "morality" being taught by religion. 

          Although far, far improved from what it was in centuries past I still look at the "morality" of trying to scare a gay or trans-gender "straight" by telling them they will go to Hell if they don't quit behaving against God's will.   I look at the "morality" of insisting innocent, impressionable children be taught a myth as fact in our schools.  I look at the "morality" of allowing children to die when a simple blood transfusion or other common medical care would save them (currently being fought in my state).  I look at the "morality" of absolute insistence that the One True God is the one the speaker believes in and that everyone must obey the edicts of that god, but without ever having any evidence whatsoever that the statement is true.

          And that's just Christianity; I look at what is happening in the Muslim countries with people, firm in their faith, killing any that do not agree to accept Islam as the guiding light, maiming others and setting up a second class citizenry all in the name of their god.

          And when I look at these kinds of things I recognize that no god worth worshiping would ever support such behavior; that the morals being espoused and demanded are coming straight from man.  Religion is teaching man's notion of morality, not those of any god; whether in America, the middle east or the far east, the morals being taught were designed and implemented by man.

          Each and every one of us has the capacity to access the "spirituality" within us.  Some will find a rather dark place but most are quite capable of finding within themselves what is right and what is wrong (though it will always be based on their own culture and history).  But even those good concepts are perverted and twisted by religion; when it becomes necessary or desirable to support the church, to maintain the power of the priesthood, to control others according to our own spirituality (or that of the priesthood) the "morals" of the church fail abysmally.  It has been so throughout our history and is so today, for the fake morality of the church always lags behind that of society; the church is always playing "catch up" in the field of morals and it does so only when the gold streaming into church coffers begins to fall because religions teachings and morals are not something that people can swallow any more.  Society changes and religion, slowly, changes with it or goes under.

          1. profile image0
            ahorsebackposted 3 years agoin reply to this

            Well you're obviously a bit biased , as long as morality is more taught  than genetic and taught whether parental , systematic or theologically . I'm not sure if your implying that it's genetic is a truth , we'll have to disagree on that one but as long as it IS taught we have to assume the other positive accolades , integrity , honesty and compassions of humanity  are the same , better instilled in a man than not.   I don't think I'd want to live in a country without spirituality  , it's a far better place

            1. wilderness profile image97
              wildernessposted 3 years agoin reply to this

              Well, I'd have to say that some of what we call morality, as a species, IS genetic.  That evolution has produced at least a semblance of morality in all of us or the species would not exist.  An example might be that cannibalism is very rare in the animal kingdom; species that eat their own don't tend to survive for long and when they do there is some kind of off-setting attribute like extreme reproduction rates.

              But I'll also say that that is only the beginning; that we go far beyond that most basic of moral principles in generating a moral code for ourselves.   But Horse, it sounds as if you're falling into the trap that there is, somewhere, a set of ethics and morals that apply to everyone on the planet and that, somehow, you have found that code and live (or try to) by it.

              That isn't true; every society and every culture designs it's own morals.  What is perfectly acceptable, even lauded, in one is a punishable offense in another; an evil that sometimes cannot be allowed to continue to live.  It is a part of what makes it obvious that morals do not come from a god, but from man himself.

              1. profile image0
                ahorsebackposted 3 years agoin reply to this

                So simply put , You don't believe there is any percentage  value in the sunday school teachers  ,  in the teaching of the ten commandments , in the teaching of "do onto others" , by higher rather  than a lower percentage ?

                ".......morals that apply to everyone on the planet ......" ?  if that's a trap,  then it's a trap of all religions , faiths  or denominations as being better than none ?  Free will cannot replace the positive guidance of any familial or an outside source . You cannot tell me the lone child evolving  in a cave of solitude will be as moral , ethical or conscientious as the one raised in the surroundings of church , schools or basic society. He's born pretty much with a mind but an empty one .

                1. wilderness profile image97
                  wildernessposted 3 years agoin reply to this

                  No, there is no value in teaching children that they shall have no god but the Christian one (and from the same sect to boot).  Or that they will be punished because their father did wrong or that that shall not produce sculptures.  No value in being taught not to take the name of a myth in vain or to do nothing but lie around one day per week.

                  There is absolutely value in learning the golden rule...and in practicing it - something that churches utterly fail in doing for they all demand that everyone follow their tenets and beliefs without considering whether they would like to be forced to follow the belief system of others themselves.

                  Morals do not come from a single individual - how could they, for all morals (real ones, not the fake ones from religion) concern how others are treated and a single individual HAS no others.  Morals come from society, from a culture and without either one there are no morals.

                  But will a lone child in a cave have better "morals" than the Islamic radicals?    Or than the inventors of the Inquisition, or those that stole Indian children to indoctrinate them in Christianity?  Personally I would have to say that a totally amoral person (happens in some mental illnesses) is better than some of those that cause such harm because they are told their god wants them to.

                  1. profile image0
                    ahorsebackposted 3 years agoin reply to this

                    Wilderness , where generally you are pretty fair I have to say , if you cannot at least acknowledge the simple attritional probability  of a church attendee from a young age  as probably being a more moral , decent and conscientious person than a non attendee , then I have to paint you as being a bit biased  for whatever reason .

    2. GA Anderson profile image92
      GA Andersonposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      Well damn ahorseback, I think your comment strays a bit from the original religious aspect of this "blame" discussion, but I hope you aren't expecting an argument on your point. I agree with you.

      GA

 
working

This website uses cookies

As a user in the EEA, your approval is needed on a few things. To provide a better website experience, hubpages.com uses cookies (and other similar technologies) and may collect, process, and share personal data. Please choose which areas of our service you consent to our doing so.

For more information on managing or withdrawing consents and how we handle data, visit our Privacy Policy at: https://corp.maven.io/privacy-policy

Show Details
Necessary
HubPages Device IDThis is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.
LoginThis is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.
Google RecaptchaThis is used to prevent bots and spam. (Privacy Policy)
AkismetThis is used to detect comment spam. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide data on traffic to our website, all personally identifyable data is anonymized. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Traffic PixelThis is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.
Amazon Web ServicesThis is a cloud services platform that we used to host our service. (Privacy Policy)
CloudflareThis is a cloud CDN service that we use to efficiently deliver files required for our service to operate such as javascript, cascading style sheets, images, and videos. (Privacy Policy)
Google Hosted LibrariesJavascript software libraries such as jQuery are loaded at endpoints on the googleapis.com or gstatic.com domains, for performance and efficiency reasons. (Privacy Policy)
Features
Google Custom SearchThis is feature allows you to search the site. (Privacy Policy)
Google MapsSome articles have Google Maps embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
Google ChartsThis is used to display charts and graphs on articles and the author center. (Privacy Policy)
Google AdSense Host APIThis service allows you to sign up for or associate a Google AdSense account with HubPages, so that you can earn money from ads on your articles. No data is shared unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Google YouTubeSome articles have YouTube videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
VimeoSome articles have Vimeo videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
PaypalThis is used for a registered author who enrolls in the HubPages Earnings program and requests to be paid via PayPal. No data is shared with Paypal unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook LoginYou can use this to streamline signing up for, or signing in to your Hubpages account. No data is shared with Facebook unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
MavenThis supports the Maven widget and search functionality. (Privacy Policy)
Marketing
Google AdSenseThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Google DoubleClickGoogle provides ad serving technology and runs an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Index ExchangeThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
SovrnThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook AdsThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Unified Ad MarketplaceThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
AppNexusThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
OpenxThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Rubicon ProjectThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
TripleLiftThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Say MediaWe partner with Say Media to deliver ad campaigns on our sites. (Privacy Policy)
Remarketing PixelsWe may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.
Conversion Tracking PixelsWe may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.
Statistics
Author Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide traffic data and reports to the authors of articles on the HubPages Service. (Privacy Policy)
ComscoreComScore is a media measurement and analytics company providing marketing data and analytics to enterprises, media and advertising agencies, and publishers. Non-consent will result in ComScore only processing obfuscated personal data. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Tracking PixelSome articles display amazon products as part of the Amazon Affiliate program, this pixel provides traffic statistics for those products (Privacy Policy)
ClickscoThis is a data management platform studying reader behavior (Privacy Policy)