Part IV: An Opposing Viewpoint

Turtle

Administrator
Staff member
Retired Expediter
Schools are one problem area. Christian students are told they can't pray and Muslims have special prayer rooms built for them. Why can't Christians pray on campus? Don't even begin to bring up the separation clause as that has nothing to do with it and is NOT applicable nor did the Founders intend it to be. Believe that to be the case if you want but anyone believing so is wrong.
The Supreme Court says otherwise. Of course, they also say you can take someone's land and give it to a private developer as long as the development will benefit the public in some way, even if it won't.

They have taken a simple concept of separation of church and state, which is state-mandated or state-condoned religion, and twisted it to mean you can't practice or discuss religion on state property because some whiny goober who can't think for their self is afraid they might be added to the Borg Collective if they are subjected to horrors of real life like religion.

I don't have a problem with a morning prayer over the PA system in school, as long as the teachers don't make listening to it or praying with it mandatory. Free speech is free speech, and it should apply to people who work for the state, as well, just as long as they don't use that free speech to mandate a particular religion to others. Like a judge who wants to hang the Ten Commandments in his court room. Who cares? It's not like the State is forcing you to believe them, or even endorsing them.

But it's not so much liberals who are all gung ho with the separation of church and state. There are quite a few conservative atheists and agnostics. "Conservative" and "religious" aren't necessarily one in the same. Just as there are quite a few religious liberals.
 

OntarioVanMan

Retired Expediter
Owner/Operator
The only good thing ever to come out of religion was the music.

I think everyone should treat one another in a Christian manner. I will not, however, be responsible for the consequences.

“When Will Jesus Bring the Pork Chops?” This title offends all three major religions, and even vegetarians!

Commandment # 11.... Thou shalt keep thy religion to thyself.

When you’re born you get a ticket to the freak show. When you’re born in America, you get a front-row seat.:D
 

Turtle

Administrator
Staff member
Retired Expediter
vegetariana.jpg
 

Pilgrim

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
Are the Republicans terminally stupid, or are they just playing the dangerous fool?
In either case, the irrational attack on Muslims everywhere by the GOP's leadership is not only deeply subversive with regard to the American ideal of religious tolerance but also poses a profound threat to our national security. Nor does it help that some top Democrats, like Harry Reid, are willing to demean Muslims even as we fight two wars in which victory depends on our ability to convey a respect for their religion.

Just ask Gen. David Petraeus, who is leading the war without end to win the hearts and minds of Muslims in Afghanistan, how helpful it is to the Taliban for American politicians to identify all Muslims with terrorism. Or to the theocratic leaders of Iran who justify their hard line with the insistence that the U.S. is obsessively anti-Muslim.

Demonization of the Muslim religion is what this brouhaha is all about. Talk of the sensitivity of the victims of Sept. 11, ignoring those who were Muslim, is just camouflage.

It is as absurd as it would be to blame all religious Jews for the assassination of Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin, killed by one gunman from a fanatical Jewish fringe group, or to ban the erection of an Orthodox synagogue anywhere near Rabin's grave. As irrational an act of scapegoating as blaming all ethnic Germans for the acts of Nazis, many of whom claimed to be God-fearing Christians.

An opposing viewpoint from Charles Krauthammer:

"The intelligentsia is near unanimous that the only possible grounds for opposition is bigotry toward Muslims. This smug attribution of bigotry to two-thirds of the population hinges on the insistence on a complete lack of connection between Islam and radical Islam, a proposition that dovetails perfectly with the Obama administration's pretense that we are at war with nothing more than "violent extremists" of inscrutable motive and indiscernible belief. Those who reject this as both ridiculous and politically correct (an admitted redundancy) are declared Islamophobes, the ad hominem du jour."

washingtonpost.com
 

Turtle

Administrator
Staff member
Retired Expediter
Christians don't like Muslims, and Muslims don't like Christians. Demonization of the Muslim religion is absolutely what this brouhaha is all about. It's no different than the Muslims who try and demonize all westerners as evil infidels. The extremists on both sides see it as a classic 'us versus them', and that's the attitude that spills over into the two cultures, where eventually even the laid back moderates on both sides have to decide who they want to be identified with - us or them. It's the epitome of bigotry. But at it's most basic, it's as simple as, "They're different from us. They think different from us. Therefor, they need to be eliminated in order to prevent their evil and crazy thoughts from entering into ours and effecting us."

That's pure bigotry, and I have yet to hear an explanation for it, or defense of it, that doesn't include bigotry. One thing that is absolute, and always has been, bigots don't see themselves as being bigots, they simply see themselves as being right.
 

witness23

Veteran Expediter
That's pure bigotry, and I have yet to hear an explanation for it, or defense of it, that doesn't include bigotry. One thing that is absolute, and always has been, bigots don't see themselves as being bigots, they simply see themselves as being right.

Amen to that!!!
 

dieseldiva

Veteran Expediter
Internal eyesight is a common malady with all. One example that comes to mind is....a gas bag doesn't know he's a gas bag...he just thinks he's right.....about EVERYTHING. :rolleyes:
 

Turtle

Administrator
Staff member
Retired Expediter
We're talking about specific issues, and you throw that out there? What's wrong with you? Ignorance can be fixed. Are you really and truly that bitter because what you have can't be fixed? I mean, even Forrest Gump realized what he was, yet he didn't run around taking pot shots at others because of it. Why do you?
 

Pilgrim

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
Christians don't like Muslims, and Muslims don't like Christians. Demonization of the Muslim religion is absolutely what this brouhaha is all about. It's no different than the Muslims who try and demonize all westerners as evil infidels. The extremists on both sides see it as a classic 'us versus them', and that's the attitude that spills over into the two cultures, where eventually even the laid back moderates on both sides have to decide who they want to be identified with - us or them. It's the epitome of bigotry. But at it's most basic, it's as simple as, "They're different from us. They think different from us. Therefor, they need to be eliminated in order to prevent their evil and crazy thoughts from entering into ours and effecting us."

That's pure bigotry, and I have yet to hear an explanation for it, or defense of it, that doesn't include bigotry. One thing that is absolute, and always has been, bigots don't see themselves as being bigots, they simply see themselves as being right.
The same could be said for politicians and politics; just substitute Liberals and Conservatives for Muslims and Christians. However, is it bigotry to have a set of beliefs and principles and to stick with them in spite of the fact that they might be at odds with the current political correctness? According to a lot liberals in the media and in Washington DC, that's exactly the case. Also, anyone who disagrees with Barack Hussein Obama is a racist; those who oppose gay marriage are homophobes. It seems that the liberal use of these labeling techniques is beginning to lose its effectiveness. It's going to be interesting to see if the liberals continue the use of this strategy up to Nov 2d.
 

Turtle

Administrator
Staff member
Retired Expediter
xxxxxxxxx:D:D:D
That's the most intelligent thing you've said in weeks.
rimshot.gif



♪ I'm a little bit country. ♪

♪ I'm a little bit rock and roll. ♪

Next week on The Diva and Turtle Show - Engelbert Humperdinck and George Carlin.
 

OntarioVanMan

Retired Expediter
Owner/Operator
That's the most intelligent thing you've said in weeks.
rimshot.gif



♪ I'm a little bit country. ♪

♪ I'm a little bit rock and roll. ♪

Next week on The Diva and Turtle Show - Engelbert Humperdinck and George Carlin.

I'd pay to see that...:p
 

Turtle

Administrator
Staff member
Retired Expediter
The same could be said for politicians and politics; just substitute Liberals and Conservatives for Muslims and Christians.
Absolutely true.

However, is it bigotry to have a set of beliefs and principles and to stick with them in spite of the fact that they might be at odds with the current political correctness?
Worded that way, solely in the context of political correctness? No. They may be at odds and still be bigoted, tho. Racism is one example that is definitely at odds with political correctness and is still bigoted nonetheless.

According to a lot liberals in the media and in Washington DC, that's exactly the case. Also, anyone who disagrees with Barack Hussein Obama is a racist; those who oppose gay marriage are homophobes.
It's a classic technique to associate something distasteful with something that someone is doing, as a means of getting them to stop doing it. Equating Civil Rights to Gay Rights, and therefore anyone who is against Gay Rights is against Civil Rights, and certainly no one wants to be thought of as being against Civil Rights, so they should be in favor of Gay Rights, too. No one wants to be thought of as being a racist <gasp> so they should think twice about disagreeing with Obama. Islamophobia is truly funny, because it's a purely made up word to get that evil homophobia-esque "phobia" on the end of it to denote someone who has an illegitimate hatred or fear of Islam and Muslims. They had to use Islamophobia because Muslophobia comes to close to Musophobia, which is a real phobia (morbid fear of mice).

Those who hate all Muslims, those who have an irrational fear of them, would in fact be Islamophobic, since not all Muslims are the cause of the hatred or fear of all Muslims. It's certainly not an illegitimate hatred or fear, since all Christians hate and fear all Muslims, and visa versa. However silly and misguided it is it's still very real. The problem is, it's a small minority of Muslims who want to kill Christians just because they're Christians. But many Christians can't or won't separate the extremists from the non-extremists. The result is, the more Christians fight back at the Muslims who don't hold those views, the more Muslims there are who begin to hold those views. Self-fulfilling prophecy.

It seems that the liberal use of these labeling techniques is beginning to lose its effectiveness. It's going to be interesting to see if the liberals continue the use of this strategy up to Nov 2d.
They won't give up on it. It's the only thing they know. It's an emotional thing.
 

witness23

Veteran Expediter
SO I am going to ask when did Beck start his own church or re-write the bible?

I never said he started his own Church but he has been preaching to the masses on his radio show for quite sometime now. He does not practice what he preaches, you know why? Because it doesn't get ratings and advertising.

Eric Deggans from St. Petersburg Press.

At a moment when ultra-conservative Tea Party activists need to look more mainstream to independent voters before a crucial midterm election, Beck just handed them the blueprint for keeping conservative supporters in the fold while downplaying their most divisive beliefs.

Of course, Beck being Beck, he also contradicted himself. "We must get the poison of hatred out of us," he said at one point. "We must defend those who disagree with us." But in the past, Beck has called the President of the United States a Marxist, whose health care policy amounts to "reparations," insisting he is a racist who hates white people. He said on Fox News Sunday that "people aren't recognizing [President Obama's] version of Christianity." That sure felt like a veiled reference to persistent, mistaken beliefs that Obama is a Muslim, though Beck has criticized Obama's ties to controversial Chicago preacher Rev. Jeremiah Wright.

Maybe Beck's move toward eliminating hatred could start with his own radio and TV appearances.

Do you listen to Beck? Or watch his Television show? C'mon

To be exact I have yet to hear him say anything that has perverted any thing to do with his religious beliefs unless you are saying Mormon religion has done just that, perverted Christianity right?

Do you listen to Beck? Or watch his Television show? C'mon!
The man is a Charlatan, he is wrapping himself in the American flag while holding a Bible(or book of Mormom) while he does his morning zoo radio show acting like the self professed rodeo clown. Do not get me wrong, I have seen some of the things he said at his rally, and I liked some of the things he has said but coming from a hyporcite such as him it rings hollow. It is about Glenn Beck and his brand, that is it.

Let's see, Beck was first supposed to unveil his, "Plan for America for the next hundred years", then it turned into "Reclaiming the Civil Rights movement"(what a joke that is), then it turned into a religious revival which was more of his Apocalyptical view of America. One of his guests on his show on Friday before the rally and a speaker at the Lincoln Monument was John Hagee, I suggest you check him out.

I won't even touch the subject of the bible outside of this - can't a revision be considered a perversion?

Here is just a sample of what Mormons believe and practice, now there are different sects(hmmmm....almost like the Muslims that we've talked about) that include:

From Wikipedia
Mainstream Mormon Theology:

Mainstream Mormonism is defined by the leadership of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Members of the LDS Church consider their top leaders to be prophets and Apostles, and are encouraged to question them on matters of theology, by means of self-study of the Book of Mormon and the Bible. Self-prayer is encouraged as well. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is by far the largest branch of Mormonism. It has continuously existed since succession crisis of 1844 that split the Latter Day Saint movement after the death of founder Joseph Smith, Jr.

Partly for public relations and proselytizing reasons, the church seeks to distance itself from other branches of Mormonism, and particularly from the practice of polygamy. The LDS Church practiced polygamy in the 1800s. However, the church abandoned that practice around the turn of the 20th century when male members began using the excuse to marry much younger females. Today, the church maintains a degree of orthodoxy within the church by excommunicating or disciplining its members who take positions or engage in practices viewed as apostasy. For example, the church excommunicates its members who practice polygamy, or who adopt the beliefs and practices of Mormon fundamentalism. The church also may excommunicate or discipline those within the church who openly oppose the church's top leadership, which is viewed as a sign of apostasy.

Mormon Fundamentalism;

One way Mormon fundamentalism distinguishes itself from mainstream Mormonism is through the practice of plural marriage. Fundamentalists initially broke from the LDS Church after that doctrine was discontinued around the beginning of the 20th century. Mormon fundamentalism teaches that plural marriage is a requirement for exaltation (the highest degree of salvation), which will allow them to live as gods and goddesses in the afterlife. Mainstream Mormons, by contrast, believe that a single Celestial marriage is necessary for exaltation.

In distinction with the LDS Church, Mormon fundamentalists also often believe in a number of other doctrines taught and practiced by Brigham Young in the 19th century, which the LDS Church has either abandoned, repudiated, or put in abeyance. These include:

the law of consecration also known as the United Order (put in abeyance by the LDS Church in the 19th century);

the Adam–God teachings taught by Brigham Young and other early leaders of the LDS Church (repudiated by the LDS Church in the mid-20th century);

the principle of blood atonement (repudiated by the LDS Church in the mid-20th century); and

the exclusion of black men from the priesthood (abandoned by the LDS Church in 1978).


Mormon fundamentalists believe that these principles were wrongly abandoned or changed by the LDS Church, in large part due to the desire of its leadership and members to assimilate into mainstream American society and avoid the persecutions and conflict that had characterized the church throughout its early years. Others believe that it was a necessity at some point for "a restoration of all things" to be a truly restored Church.


and Liberal reformist theology:

A small movement within Mormonism seeks theologically liberal reform within the religion. Many of these are members of the LDS Church and work for liberal reform from the inside. Others have left the LDS Church but consider themselves to be cultural Mormons. Others have formed new religions. One of the first of these, the Godbeites, broke from the LDS Church in the late 1800s on the basis of both political and religious liberalism. More recently, the Restoration Church of Jesus Christ broke from the LDS Church as an LGBT-friendly denomination. An online church called Reform Mormonism has attempted to reform Mormon rituals and situate Mormonism within liberal rationalism.

I will steal a quote from Beck, ""I think he is a Christian that Christians don't recognize".

Well, you would know Mr. Beck.
 
Last edited:
Top