Tsk tsk... You need to delve into a deeper understanding of the issue.
Conclusion: "On the basis of these two theological understandings (that God Himself had ordained the institution of civil government, and that God had explicitly authorized civil self-defense) the Founding Fathers and the majority of American Christians in that day believed that they were conducting themselves in a manner that was not in rebellion to God or the Scriptures."
I'm only judging what you post, and let me just remind you that the gospels actually mandate for us to speak up for morality and against immorality. If you consider that "folly", well then I guess you have an issue with what Jesus taught.
Nor have you answered the question posed to you about who Jesus is (divine God of the Trinity along with the Father and the Holy Spirit; and resurrected Savior)?
Read the bottom of my posts ("My Faith Statement") for an indication of where I'm coming from.
Also, I'm not exactly sure why you think this is pertinent to what's being discussed If you want to take this to a more appropriate forum, I'm quite willing to do that. Set it up, notify me where, and I'll go there.
Most Christians I know can't shut up about Jesus. You're so full of passing judgment you can't seem to respond. Are you ashamed of Jesus?
No, I ashamed of those who read and hear about Jesus' teachings to "love one another" in the Bible, in church, and elsewhere, but then basically ignore that while claiming that they're Christian. I'm not judging you, but I am judging what you are posting here that is so hate-filled and nasty at times.
I'm only judging what you post, and let me just remind you that the gospels actually mandate for us to speak up for morality and against immorality. If you consider that "folly", well then I guess you have an issue with what Jesus taught.
Read the bottom of my posts ("My Faith Statement") for an indication of where I'm coming from.
Your "faith statement" could include any number of so-called deities.
So, still no answer from you on who Jesus is. That's amazing. All those years of study and you're unable to provide a cogent response as to who you say Jesus is? Divine God along with the Father and the Holy Spirit? Or not? Why can't you just answer the question?
Your "faith statement" could include any number of so-called deities.
So, still no answer from you on who Jesus is. That's amazing. All those years of study and you're unable to provide a cogent response as to who you say Jesus is? Divine God along with the Father and the Holy Spirit? Or not? Why can't you just answer the question?
I wrote "Also, I'm not exactly sure why you think this is pertinent to what's being discussed If you want to take this to a more appropriate forum, I'm quite willing to do that. Set it up, notify me where, and I'll go there".
People here at RF who know me a lot better than you do well know that I don't avoid controversy.
In regards to whether or not there is a war on Christianity ... there is not. IMO, the push back comes when Christians advocate that laws be based solely on their personal religion.
In regards to whether or not there is a war on Christianity ... there is not. IMO, the push back comes when Christians advocate that laws be based solely on their personal religion.
They will never get back .O1% of what they have
pushed on others, coming back at them. There is a most
unseemly air of the spoiled whine about this
"war" complaint.
I think you misunderstood my original claim. My claim was not that the majority of Christians are fundamentalists. My claim was that the majority of fundamentalists in this country are Christians.
Read this article, and find that in a discussion of the horrendous attacks on Christian Churches in Sri Lanka, Hillary Clinton and Barak Obama cannot bring themselves to use the word "Christian." Instead they use the sanitized euphemism "Easter worshippers." Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton tip anti-Christian ‘Easter worshippers’ hats Why?
Why? Perhaps because they were worshiping on Easter? That offends you? If they were killed while having a picnic, they might have been called picnickers even if they were Christian.
You are aware, aren't you, that Hillary and Barack are both Bible reading, church attending Christians that are unashamed to call themselves Christians, although if in a church on Easter, they might call themselves Easter worshipers as well.
This from you is nothing but more conservative slander of liberals and liberalism, this time directed at prominent liberal American politicians, all targeted by conservative media sources without exception since Bill Clinton, including Gore, Kerry, Daschle, Reid, Pelosi, Hillary, and Obama. This is the ethics of conservative indoctrination, and you are happy to serve as its vector.
And this kind of behavior is very destructive. You drive the wedge between the American left and right a little deeper, further separating any connection. Every time I see this kind of thing, I like conservatives just a little less.
That's why we have the Rightist media - to make sure to keep the American people informed about Christian persecution throughout the world.
I did a little investigating on Google and searched the Boko Haram sex slavery abductions issue. Here are some of the hits from the first page of links. None were from Fox News, Wall Street Journal, Hannity, Drudge, or Breitbart, but as you will see, the rest of the Rightist media was all over the story.
Here's a little coverage I found from the Rightists at The Washington Post
Yeppers, sounds like a war on Christianity by America's left to me, with only the Rightistas willing to tell the world what the left is too cowardly or indifferent to report. That's your thesis, correct?
Actually, aren't you just continuing the never-ending war on the left with this outrageous accusation, and the use of words like "Leftist" (I've taken your lead with "Rightist")? We're liberals, and once you conservatives treated us like decent, fellow Americans who shared a common vision and values with you even if the specifics of how to accomplish them varied.
Now, it's like this - conservatives like you taking potshots at America's liberals and falsely accusing them of declaring war on Christianity just to demean them. What connection do you think we should feel back? How should liberals feel about conservatives, or atheists about Christianity?
It's Christianity that has been at war with atheists and unbelief since antiquity, not the other way around, and American conservative Christianity that is at war with America's liberals and liberalism today.
Speaking of suspicious reporting, how about you reporting only the 112 Christian girls abducted when the story was about 276 abducted girls? Do only Christians matter to you?
I used to think it was we Jews who had it bad. I remember when I lived in North Hollywood, CA and two Jewish men were shot going into morning prayers at their shul -- not a single newspaper or TV media outlet covered the event. And that was typical back then for our neighborhood. Jews were seen as part of the "rich white oppressor" by the Left.
American Jews have changed. When I was young, Jews were typically Roosevelt Democrats or the children of such people. Prominent American Jews of the mid-20th century were mostly liberals such as justices Frankfurter, Goldberg, and Fortas, Mayors Koch and Beame.
Likewise with Hollywood. Prominent Jews in show business like Woody Allen and Mel Brooks were typically liberal.
But today, we see prominent Jews in politics are far more often conservatives like Mnuchin, Kissinger, Perle, Feith, Krystal, Krauthammer, Savage, Frum and Wolfowitz
As much coverage as I needed. One report was enough.
Why are you pointing at the left? And why are you calling a relative indifference to the plight of Christians by Americans and their media a war on Christianity?
Yeah. Where were the churches? Isn't this a matter for them to attend to? Shouldn't they be the ones collecting money from their congregants, presumably to rebuild burned foreign churches?
it's unrealistic to expect Americans to be very concerned about these matters, even when that American is Christian and it is other Christians in the cross hairs.
Also, protecting the religious freedoms of people in foreign lands is not the American people's job. Once again, if the churches object, let them send the people and other resources needed to address that problem.
This just isn't a pressing issue to people with their hands full trying to raise a family and tend to a household as their country falls apart around them. It's one of thousands of problems in the world that are unfortunate, but beyond the reach of most people to impact.
112 Christian schoolgirls kidnapped by Boko Haram are still missing. We know from those who have escaped that they have been beaten, forced to convert to Islam, and married as child brides to older Muslim men. But no one cares about them in the Media
Yes, 112 of the 276 girls were Christian. Those who never heard this story until now are now aware. What's next? Mention it a few more times? Plan a rescue mission? Send money? What are you hoping for from others?
Here's what comes up for "Fox News Boko Haram." The story of interest to you didn't make the first page of hits at all, although it seems to have been mentioned in passing in one of these stories
Incidentally, American Rightists treat America's liberals about as shabbily as American Christianity treats America's atheists, just as you are doing here by blaming liberals for not carrying a story that as you can see, was covered by multiple mainstream media sources, most of them called the liberal media by conservatives, who outperformed Rightist news sources.
Now the hatred is spreading, and Christianity is the most persecuted religion in the world, first by Islam, and second by the Left. And I'm sorry to say, but the bigotry extends even to my own country.
Perhaps it's not normative to you, but it's certainly a legitimate title. And I certainly don't see why you would consider it OFFENSIVE in any way... unless you were just looking to be offended.
Especially when it surrounds somebody taking the time out of their day to express their condolences. I find it kind of bizarre that such a thing would offend anyone.
... Unless they were looking to be offended.
Sounds like your worldview is incompatible with the principles of Scouting. A Scout is friendly - he's "a friend to everyone, even people who are very different from [him]."
A Scout is also reverent, which in the BSA's formulation includes respecting the beliefs of others.
Boy Scout Oath or Promise. On my honor, I will do my best To do my duty to God and my country and to obey the Scout Law; To help other people at all times; To keep myself physically strong, mentally awake and morally straight.
The crime of Sodom and Gomorrah is that they were wealthy and treated strangers badly..
In the Middle East hospitality to the stranger is part of their code... They must provide food, shelter and water to the stranger or traveler.
Christians, Muslims and Jews lived all over the Arab world for 1300 years with very little conflict. Before the 6 day war Muslims and Christians lived and worked side by side in East Jerusalem and the West bank... I used to love going there. In fact, if you look at old city maps, the Arab Quarter was quite large.
Christians, Muslims and Jews lived all over the Arab world for 1300 years with very little conflict. Before the 6 day war Muslims and Christians lived and worked side by side in East Jerusalem and the West bank... I used to love going there. In fact, if you look at old city maps, the Arab Quarter was quite large.
Not in this case. It would make it so that you have to be elected, and you're not installed simply for being a specific idiotic denomination. Pay attention next time.
I live in the USA. We have had very few religious 'tests' for elected office, and those are found to be unconstitutional, when they aren't completely ignored (most are) or challenged. Other nations, however, have had a specific state religion as a part of their foundation for many, many years (though I was astounded to find out that, except for one...perhaps two...nations, ours happens to be the oldest continuous government on the planet). I'm very much against religious tests for elected office, or for public office in general.
That, however, isn't the point of the conversation I was having when you interrupted and made it specifically about this. Perhaps I'm not the one who needs to pay better attention?
I don't like it, but she is somewhat benign. It is a part of history and the Queen is basically a tourist attraction and marketing arm of the UK. We wheel her out to impress easily impressed foreign dignitaries.
You obviously don't follow the latest YouGov Polls on religion.
42% of British Adults have no religion. In the 18-39 year olds they are over 50% - it doesn't bode well for religion in the future in the UK.
Possibly not. It's not the first time this sort of thing has happened in a culture, however. Doesn't matter, though...it definitely doesn't matter to the point I was making now, does it?