Religious Politics - Christian antagonists

[Pah]

From an article by Austin Cline, Would Pat Buchanan Prefer a White, Christian America?

http://atheism.about.com/b/a/258113.htm?nl=1

This isn't surprising because racism, slavery, and segregation in America have historically received very strong backing from Christianity theology and Christian institutions. However much Christians may have worked hard to end such things, we dare not forget the fact that Christian abolitionists and Christian Civil Rights workers were all working hard against other Christians who were just as devout and just as sincere in their belief that their positions were either authorized or mandated by God, the Bible, and Christian tradition.

Don't we have the same circumstances in the fight for/against same-sex marriage?

 

[SoliDeoGloria]

You know Pah, I have noticed this trend from you to exploit extremes of "Christian" theocracists and trying to make it look like all Christians are this way. While I see the logic of why you are so passionate about legalized homosexual marriage in the U.S., do you really think this is fair? Would it be fair of me to find homosexually related websites that claim that women should be executed because, soon, science will find a way to impregnate men, making women obsolete and claim that all males who practice homosexuality think this way? If you don't think these websites exist, put the challenge to me and I'll find and post them for you. I'm sure there are more extremes I could find too.

From an article by Austin Cline, Would Pat Buchanan Prefer a White, Christian America?

I would hope that my opinion of all politics would be known by now by reading some of my previous post so I won't comment on that.

http://atheism.about.com/b/a/258113.htm?nl=1

an atheistic related website trying to make "Christians" look like racists, big suprise there.

This isn't surprising because racism, slavery, and segregation in America have historically received very strong backing from Christianity theology and Christian institutions. However much Christians may have worked hard to end such things, we dare not forget the fact that Christian abolitionists and Christian Civil Rights workers were all working hard against other Christians who were just as devout and just as sincere in their belief that their positions were either authorized or mandated by God, the Bible, and Christian tradition.

LOL, the article acknowledges that it was in fact Christians that "may have" worked hard to end such things and then sides with the "Christians" that were claiming that thier positions were "mandated by God, the Bible, and Christian tradition." for the sake of smearing as much mud on Christianity as possible. This article has more biased presuppositions in it than fact. I expected better from you than this Pah .

Don't we have the same circumstances in the fight for/against same-sex marriage?

Until there is exhaustive scientific evidence proving that all types of sexuality are as unavoidable as races then my answer is no. I have already made it clear that even as a Christian who believes that the Bible clearly states homosexuality as a sin would have no problem with legalized homosexual marriages so for you to do this is trully upsetting. I thought that you were above such tactics Pah.

Sincerely,
Solideogloria

 

[Green Gaia]

I think what Pah is trying to do is to nudge Christians like yourself who are fairminded to fight back against those hijacking your religion like the Pat Buchanan's and the "Christian" theocracists and use to hurt others for their own political and power gain.

We can't fight them alone. We need your help. They're not going to listen to gays and atheists, but they may listen to their brothers and sisters in Christ.

 

[Quiddity]

I think what Pah is trying to do is to nudge Christians like yourself who are fairminded to fight back against those ......

It is having the opposite affect in my opinion.

 

[SoliDeoGloria]

I think what Pah is trying to do is to nudge Christians like yourself who are fairminded to fight back against those hijacking your religion like the Pat Buchanan's and the "Christian" theocracists and use to hurt others for their own political and power gain.

Well then him and atheists have a funny way of putting it.

We can't fight them alone. We need your help. They're not going to listen to gays and atheists, but they may listen to their brothers and sisters in Christ.

There have been extremist groups that have claimed Christianity probably since it's beginnings. Groups like these trully anger me more than I could put into words. Actual Christians have been fighting groups like this since the apostle Paul and others gave instruction to "contend for the faith that was once for all entrusted to the saints" (Jude 3). It is trully unfortunate that these groups still exist today. If you want to know the reason for it, just read my signature.

Sincerely,
SoliDeoGloria

 

[robtex]

We can't fight them alone. We need your help. They're not going to listen to gays and atheists, but they may listen to their brothers and sisters in Christ.

So well put. Perfectly put. Amy that was beautifully phrased to an article well presented by Bob.

I just don't get why compassionate Christians can't understand this simple and plainly visable concept. All we non-christians are asking is that the Christians assume some responsiblity for the tresspasses made against humanity in their Lord's name.

 

[Halcyon]

Don't we have the same circumstances in the fight for/against same-sex marriage?

Yes, i think so.

I personally believe certain things, like ethics, are black and white. Either you're doing the right thing, or you're not.

Suppressing a person's human rights, the right to live their life as they wish (so long as it harms no-one else) and to live a happy life are, in my mind, evil and stem from hate.

To me, this boils down to good Christians verses bad Christians.

 

[robtex]

There have been extremist groups that have claimed Christianity probably since it's beginnings. Groups like these trully anger me more than I could put into words. Actual Christians have been fighting groups like this since the apostle Paul and others gave instruction to "contend for the faith that was once for all entrusted to the saints" (Jude 3). It is trully unfortunate that these groups still exist today. If you want to know the reason for it, just read my signature.

Sincerely,
SoliDeoGloria

Can I inquire about your partipation in this? When was the last time you spoke out agaisnt the KKK? What emails letters or words did you send denouncing support of Robertson or other extremists? What was your vote for any gay marriage amendments in your state? Do you belong to a church that has ties to white supremecy or anti-gay initiatives? If not are they apathic or pro freedom of non-whites and gays and if so why do you belong?

You don't get the luxury of a neutral position when the organization you belong to has members in tangent ranks that are taking anti-humanist positions. If you have taken a stand my hats off to you but if you haven't realize in non-christian eyes you are part of a the problem by not being part of the solution due to your religious ties however, different the extremest positions are from yours.

 

[Green Gaia]

There have been extremist groups that have claimed Christianity probably since it's beginnings.

The thing is.... it's not just the extremist groups that are pushing for laws that hurt BGLT citizens. It's the church down the street, my next door neighbors, my co-workers and fellow students. They're being told they must support civil laws that hurt other citizens because that is what their religion would want. We can't fight that effectively from the outside, we're the evil enemy. We need inside help from Christians who don't like what is being done to American citizens in the name of their religion.

 

[Pah]

You know Pah, I have noticed this trend from you to exploit extremes of "Christian" theocracists and trying to make it look like all Christians are this way. While I see the logic of why you are so passionate about legalized homosexual marriage in the U.S., do you really think this is fair? Would it be fair of me to find homosexually related websites that claim that women should be executed because, soon, science will find a way to impregnate men, making women obsolete and claim that all males who practice homosexuality think this way? If you don't think these websites exist, put the challenge to me and I'll find and post them for you. I'm sure there are more extremes I could find too.

One of the biggest problems with the nature of the Religious Right is the apologetics that it is only extreme. Christian Nationalism is pervasive in government and in pulpit. Many of my sources are new found and founded religious organizations.

By the way, I doubt you can find such a site. It will more likely also reference that "soon" women will have no more need of men in procreating.

... an atheistic related website trying to make "Christians" look like racists, big suprise there.

LOL, the article acknowledges that it was in fact Christians that "may have" worked hard to end such things and then sides with the "Christians" that were claiming that thier positions were "mandated by God, the Bible, and Christian tradition." for the sake of smearing as much mud on Christianity as possible. This article has more biased presuppositions in it than fact. I expected better from you than this Pah .

Sounds like the old saw - an atheist can not be moral becuase he or she is atheist. I would say that you reside in a dark closet if you are not aware of the religious politcs in suppression of others.

Until there is exhaustive scientific evidence proving that all types of sexuality are as unavoidable as races then my answer is no.

Julian Bond seems to think so. But then he's dismissive, even with his personal travails, because he's not a scientist. Both Martin Luther King and his wife seem to think so also.

Another by the way, "exhaustive" is not a criteria for scientific truth.

I have already made it clear that even as a Christian who believes that the Bible clearly states homosexuality as a sin would have no problem with legalized homosexual marriages so for you to do this is trully upsetting. I thought that you were above such tactics Pah.

Sincerely,
Solideogloria

Then don't take it personally. But I am dismayed that you would be upset at my tactics and not those of the Religious Right.

 

[Halcyon]

Until there is exhaustive scientific evidence proving that all types of sexuality are as unavoidable as races then my answer is no.

Here you go;
http://chronicle.uchicago.edu/031120/sex-orientation.shtml

This is interesting, if flawed;
http://serendip.brynmawr.edu/bb/neuro/neuro01/web1/Rana.html

This paper is good as it shows how male-to-female transexual brains are more similar to female brains than to male, resulting from hormone concentrations in the womb;
http://www.symposion.com/ijt/ijtc0106.htm

This is the abstract of research into homosexual animals;
http://www.newsrx.com/newsletters/Sex-Weekly-Plus/1997-06-23/199706233334SW.html

 

[Pah]

It is having the opposite affect in my opinion.

It does tend to gel the opposition but it also is a wake-up call to other, unenfranchised Christians

 

[SoliDeoGloria]

So well put. Perfectly put. Amy that was beautifully phrased to an article well presented by Bob.

I just don't get why compassionate Christians can't understand this simple and plainly visable concept. All we non-christians are asking is that the Christians assume some responsiblity for the tresspasses made against humanity in their Lord's name.

Are you willing to take persoanl responsibility for all tresspasses against humanity in the name of anti religion (Communism comes to mind in a quick hurry) or are you going to "pass the buck" and state that communism and other related things "aren't the same thing". But wouldn't that be what you are accusing "Christians" of doing. How's about we'll just act really immature and keep pointing fingers at each other. Here, I am sincerely sorry that people have committed gross atrocities on humaity in the name of my LORD Jesus Christ. Does that make you happy? I'll bet a years wages that it doesn't. Now the ball is in your court.

Can I inquire about your partipation in this? When was the last time you spoke out agaisnt the KKK? What emails letters or words did you send denouncing support of Robertson or other extremists?

I am an ex felon who spent plenty of time with chumps like this and have gotten into plenty of arguments with people like that with my own physical wellbeing hanging in the balance. As one who claims to have been working with "corrections" for some time, you should be able to understand that. Do you really want me to quote every time and what the conversation entailed. What have you done to fix the ateistic reputation, "pass the buck"? your ability to thow personal jabs out never ceases to amaze me Rob. BTW, I am an ex-felon living in Iowa. Why don't you tell me if I can vote or not.

Do you belong to a church that has ties to white supremecy or anti-gay initiatives? If not are they apathic or pro freedom of non-whites and gays and if so why do you belong?

As far as I know, No. Then again I pick churches by what they preach and the people that go there. There is not one person in the church I go to that is out holding signs stating profanities about "gays". Who do you affiliate yourself with Rob, the communist party? Since you seem to love getting immaturely personal, lets do it. How low can you go?

You don't get the luxury of a neutral position when the organization you belong to has members in tangent ranks that are taking anti-humanist positions

This steriotyping is you keep resorting to is the very problem you are acting as if you are fighting against. A bit hypocritical don't you think?

If you have taken a stand my hats off to you but if you haven't realize in non-christian eyes you are part of a the problem by not being part of the solution due to your religious ties however, different the extremest positions are from yours.

Well being as how you have already made your judgement, there's not much I could do to convince you otherwise. It is blatantly obvious that anything short of denouncing my faith and being put to death by people claiming to be "Christians" isn't satisfactory for you.

P.S. it is probably a good thing that I have to go to work now and I was mandated to take "anger management" treatment while incarcerated or else I'd probably get myself kicked out of here. I'll answer the other posts ASAP.

Sincerely,
James/SoliDeoGloria

 

[Green Gaia]

First they came for the Jews
and I did not speak out
because I was not a Jew.



Then they came for the Communists
and I did not speak out
because I was not a Communist.



Then they came for the trade unionists
and I did not speak out
because I was not a trade unionist.



Then they came for me
and there was no one left
to speak out for me.


~Pastor Martin Niemöller

 

[GloriaPatri]

One of the biggest problems with the nature of the Religious Right is the apologetics that it is only extreme. Christian Nationalism is pervasive in government and in pulpit. Many of my sources are new found and founded religious organizations.

I'm sorry, but Christina Nationalism is not pervasive in our government. I know you're going to say "but George Bush is a right wing Christian!" You can look to the many military Junta's that used to rule South America as examples of Christian Nationalist governments.

By the way, I doubt you can find such a site. It will more likely also reference that "soon" women will have no more need of men in procreating.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S.C.U.M._Manifesto

The S.C.U.M Manifesto advocates the extermination of males. Using your logic I should say "feminists are all nazi's and want to kill guys for no reason" just because a few crazy ones want to.

 

[GloriaPatri]

First they came for the Jews
and I did not speak out
because I was not a Jew.



Then they came for the Communists
and I did not speak out
because I was not a Communist.



Then they came for the trade unionists
and I did not speak out
because I was not a trade unionist.



Then they came for me
and there was no one left
to speak out for me.


~Pastor Martin Niemöller

The difference is no one is 'coming' for gays, communists, Jews, ethnic minorities, the mentally disabled, or trade unionists like in Nazi Germany.

 

[Green Gaia]

The difference is no one is 'coming' for gays, communists, Jews, ethnic minorities, the mentally disabled, or trade unionists like in Nazi Germany.

Not yet....but they are trying to take away legal rights of gays and make us second class citizens. Who will they do that too next? Muslims? Atheists? Christians who don't agree with them? Once they take away legal rights, what's the next step against us?

 

[doppelganger]

The difference is no one is 'coming' for gays, communists, Jews, ethnic minorities, the mentally disabled, or trade unionists like in Nazi Germany.

Not that I'm saying they will in the U.S. (certainly not on the scale and with the violence they did in Germany), but I think it bears pointing out that until the Nazis assumed complete power, nobody was "coming" for these groups in Germany, either.

Things can change awfully quickly - even in well-educated, industrialized "modern" societies.

 

[GloriaPatri]

Not yet....but they are trying to take away legal rights of gays and make us second class citizens. Who will they do that too next? Muslims? Atheists? Christians who don't agree with them? Once they take away legal rights, what's the next step against us?

Like the right to get married? I don't recall marriage being a constitutional right. No one has taken any of your rights away. While I agree that gays should be afforded the same recognition under the law - it's a bit of a stretch to call it a right.

 

[doppelganger]

Like the right to get married? I don't recall marriage being a constitutional right. No one has taken any of your rights away. While I agree that gays should be afforded the same recognition under the law - it's a bit of a stretch to call it a right.

Well, it could be construed as an aspect of the right to privacy under the Due Process Clause, and since it is provided to some people a matter covered by the Equal Protection Clause of the Consitution. Of course, I concede that is a matter of interpretation (and not a popular one for obvious reasons). But the Constitution hypothetically at least could include a protected right to marriage.

Marriage itself is a product of state law, BTW. What consitutes legal marriage is defined differently for each state by reference to statutes and even (in some states) the "common law."