<p>No, it says anyone who does not accept Jesus will go to hell. ITS WHAT THEY SAY!!!</p>
<p>I care because these people want to be in power and bring that belief sysytim into governemnt. THEY SAY THAT. That the bible is the ultimate source of all truths.</p>
<p>The people at PHC think and SAY it is okay to discriminate based on religion. They want that to be government policy. So, never have to hire anyone who doesn’t believe. That is why we care.</p>
<p>I won’t got to (&*$. That is their belief, but when they see me as a sinner, and want to make it that a busines doesn;t have to hire me because I am not Christian, well, lets look back in time.</p>
<p>Funding father, we don’t care about anyones beliefs, really we don’t. It the taking it into the government arena and wanting to make policy based on biblical tenants and based on one basic belief system that you are a sinner and therefore someone to be saved or shunned or discriminated against, then we get concerned. </p>
<p>I guess no one read the PHC website. I have. They say that religion is not something to be protected in discrimination. And that should be government policy.</p>
<p>if they ‘discriminate’ as in really harm someone in any way, you know God will be first to take care of that. no need to worry.</p>
<p>if they ‘discriminate’ as in really harm someone in any way, you know God will be first to take care of that. no need to worry.</p>
<p>oh ok
So I assume another Holocaust, not a problem???</p>
<p>Our whole country was founded for freedom of religion and to make sure there was a seperation of church and state. I can’t believe we’re back debating this. America was formed to be free for everyone to practice their own religions and not to be told what they can or cannot do based on another’s beliefs. Most immigrants came from countries with state religions and THEY CAME HERE OFTEN BECAUSE WE DIDN’T HAVE ONE. Why is this even in question lately? Intereresting… some countries with a state religion, like France and England have fewer religious people. Maybe after the fundamentalists totally take over our government here and people see how bad that is citizens here will decide not to be religious anymore. Hey, you can have a belief and you can change a belief…or drop a belief… If you’re spiritual, but not necessarily religious you’re more likely to believe we are are part of the Tao…that is part of “All that is”. We are all parts of the whole. Maybe that’s what the origional great thinkers where trying to say, but they were misinterpreted and dogma was added…then some power trips and you ended up with the mess we have now. Current religions do divide…you’re us or you’re them. Is that possibly what they could have meant??? I think not.</p>
<p>Much as a developer stacking the planning commission might raise eyebrows, a religious group trying to stack a governmental body MUST be watched carefullly and OUGHT to engender concern.</p>
<p>Im not sure I follow your analogy, do you mean to say that Christians have some ignoble intent in pursuit of government service, much as a developer, motivated one assumes by greed, would try to stake the planning commission of a local government?</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>Probably not according to Franklin Graham, he would probably even call it a wicked practice of an evil and wicked religion, although he would be wrong: it is no part of Islam.</p>
<p>Iraqi Christians expressed fear that the evangelicals would undermine Christian-Muslim harmony here
For the record, I am something of a Christian, my wife is a Muslim and my daughter is a Sufi who also attends Catholic mass. We are a multi-cultural microcosm. As a rule, I believe it is, for the most part, atheists and the occasional Christian who object to the religious practices of others and im particular Christians in the USA.</p>
<p>I am saying any group with an agenda is going to want to promote its agenda.</p>
<p>Whether or not the intent is ignoble is pretty much in the eye of the beholder. Developers often see themselves as the guardians of a chugging-forward economy. They don’t see thamselves a pillagers, though environmentalists do. </p>
<p>I have no doubt that the Christian kids at PH are idealistic and want to improve our country. But their improvements may not be everyone’s cup of tea. Even the one girl was taken aback by some of the insularity and some of the expectations for women.</p>
<p>My example of clitorectomy was extreme, but I wanted to find something so repugnant that most human beings agree it is wrong, and also something affiliated with a tradition of a given people. I do not believe one would be bigoted against tribal Ethiopians to deem the practice wrong. My point was to illustrate that objection to one aspect of a group’s belief system is not ipsofacto bigotry.</p>
<p>
We agree. Those darned “factions” that Madison warned against, but which were born fully-formed as soon as George Washington declined a third term. These factions always believe that their agendas are superior to those of the other factions. The members of these factions always claim to lead public and private lives informed by the principles of their “agendas.” Assuming CGM believes in hell (she may not, but that’s beside the point), she believes that she lives a better life than some greed-head with four houses and a garage full of collectible cars who does no soup kitchen work (OK, I was not trying to reference John Kerry) and that she will get to heaven, whereas the other person will probably not. So what?</p>
<p>If they bring their very limited religious beliefs into our government and try to force it on others it will be a problem. That is the point. A fundamentalist government, whether it is Taliban or the Religious right is still led by people of limited view…us versus the rest of you. And then starts the discrimitation…oh, wait, it’s already here…especially if they limit the internships and mostly give them to that school’s students,
Woodwork…Atheists don’t object to anyone’s religious practices…as long as everyone else is not forced to observe them. Well…unless we were talking about human sacrifice…I do think most would object to that…
I find that religous people CAN have more hate for others than some non-religous people. Instead of trying to understand people who are different they’re more likely to reject them. I am not speaking about all religious people just some, especially those who seem to be in government now.
For a very common example: A lot of religious people hate homosexuals…homosexuality is actually a natural state and part of nature. Penguins tend to have a certain percentage of homosexual members. They do not choose, they, too, are born that way. Religious people think if you are different you are “evil” and are choosing to be evil. That kind of view can not be allowed in a government built previously on freedom from religion.</p>
<p>
But let’s not single out religious people as if they are the only people to hate homosexuals. Homophobia is agnostic in terms of belief system. For the extreme in hating of homosexuals, look at Hitler. He would hardly feel at home in a Billy Graham revival.</p>
<p>Too many people interpret the Christian/Muslim/(name your religion here) view of homosexuality as being sinful with hating homosexuals. They are NOT one and the same.</p>
<p>
Perhaps you could give an example of those in government now and what they have done to substantiate your position? Is it the non-support of gay marriage? If so, does it matter that the vast majority of people, even in solidly Blue states also disapprove of gay marriage. Does it matter that most Democrats also disapprove of gay marriage? </p>
<p>Maybe it’s not gay marriage that causes you to make your claim. If not, what exact incidences have occured in this administration to cause you to make this claim?</p>
<p>I think that while many don’t want gay marriage to have the same weight as hetero marriage, the majority do approve of civil unions, of gays being allowed to adopt- for their partners to be recognized as family in adoption, legal and medical situations. For there to be no discrimination in work /education/housing situations.
So yes by standing in the way for gays to have equal rights- extremists have harmed American citizens</p>
<p>
Can you point to any quotes or positions of the current administration that would indicate their non-support of civil unions and the other rights that you mentioned?</p>
<p>I think most people do approve of a civil union, if you put it in terms of knowing someone personally who has been kept out of a dying partners room and not been allowed to make medical decisions, who has found it hard to adopt in certain states and not been allowed to have benefits that would have been available if they had been legally wed or had a civil union.This is the point, if it’s “THEM” versus someone you know suddently it all seems crazy. Having two cousins who are gay, and many friends at college who were as well, I know them as people and hence knew they were very wonderful caring people and never believed others people and their hate rhetoric about gays.
BTW Hitler was discriminating on religion.that is the point he wanted only Christians and Aryans…no Jews (that’s a religion). He did include others by race, but I think your argument goes out the window…</p>
<p>Our government and it’s new found policies…just gay marriage?? How about non Christians and the air force academy? They barely got a slap on the wrist. How about giving government money to religious groups to help others, instead of just letting the major social programs exist. Gotta get the religious fingers in the pie. They know the money will go mostly to the religous follows pockets (even if they’re needed) still it discriminates.
"That is not stopping Bush, however, from using presidential authority and the intricacies of the federal bureaucracy from funneling billions of dollars to religion-tainted social service programs. The White House is fully engaged in an aggressive program to encourage churches, mosques, temples and other houses of worship to apply for government grants. Bush has also expanded the roster of federal agencies he wants to actively court the nation’s religious community by including faith-based groups in the granting process.</p>
<p>It is all being done without the consent of Congress"</p>
<p>How about the Snowflake program:
"Couples adopting or donating Snowflakes embryos are mostly Christian, and most embryo donors are white, Ms. Maze said. Some families are Roman Catholic, even though the church has historically opposed in vitro fertilization.</p>
<p>Couples must agree to adoption-like procedures: receiving families are screened and must undergo counseling, and Snowflakes allows donating and receiving families to designate criteria for each other, meet and maintain contact after birth. Adopting couples must agree not to abort any embryos.</p>
<p>Those conditions were fine with Bob and Angie Deacon of Virginia Beach, Va., who donated their 13 embryos after having twins and being discouraged from another pregnancy by a doctor. “With another program, to be honest with you, they could have been adopted by lesbian parents, and I’m totally against that,” said Mr. Deacon, 35.</p>
<p>It took two and a half years to bring themselves to fill out the papers. On their forms, they said the adopting family must be conservative Christians and, ideally, include a stay-at-home mother.
Law or no law, these people were at the White House. AT THE WHITE HOUSE, at the invitation of the president. The president wanted this to be THE MODEL for the country - religious-based (and who knows, race-based?) discrimination as the model for the entire country."</p>
<p>Try this link…
<a href=“http://edwards.house.gov/html/speeches.cfm?id=384[/url]”>http://edwards.house.gov/html/speeches.cfm?id=384</a></p>
<p>George W. Bush & the Holocaust
Why has the Bush administration been hindering a lawsuit brought by Holocaust survivors? According to some, it is to create goodwill and ensure that Poland would join the occupation of Iraq. Talk about dirty politics…</p>
<p>FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
JULY 11, 2001
10:30 AM
CONTACT: Americans United for Separation of Church and State
Joseph Conn or Rob Boston 202-466-3234 </p>
<p>here’s another article. (Hey Funding Father, Don’t you read anything but College Confidential??)</p>
<p>Alleged White House Retreat On Employment Discrimination Is Just A Shell Game, Says AU </p>
<p>WASHINGTON - July 11 - Although a White House/Salvation Army deal has fallen apart, the Bush administration’s faith-based initiative continues to allow federally funded employment discrimination, according to Americans United for Separation of Church and State.
Yesterday, media reports revealed that the White House had engaged in secret negotiations with the Salvation Army. In exchange for the religious group’s political support for the faith-based initiative in Congress, the Bush administration allegedly promised to make regulatory changes that would allow the Salvation Army and other religious groups to discriminate in hiring with public funds. The religious group was particularly concerned about overriding state and local laws barring job discrimination against gays.</p>
<p>Last night, Bush officials indicated they were backing off from making those regulatory changes. However, while some have characterized this step as progress on improving the measure, Americans United, the nation’s leading opponent of the faith-based initiative, said nothing has really changed.</p>
<p>“The Bush administration is engaged in an outrageous shell game,” said the Rev. Barry W. Lynn, executive director of Americans United. "The faith-based initiative still mandates federally funded employment discrimination on religious grounds. White House spin doctors are trying to paper over the employment discrimination at the core of this initiative, but no one should be fooled.</p>
<p>“White House officials have promised that they won’t pursue discrimination through executive order,” Lynn added. “But they don’t need regulations to allow discrimination – it’s already a key component of the federal legislation working its way through Congress.”</p>
<p>The “Community Solutions Act” (H.R. 7), introduced by Rep. J.C. Watts (R-Okla.), is the congressional version of the Bush initiative. “Charitable choice” provisions of the bill, which would direct federal grants and contracts to churches and other religious groups without legal safeguards, have been controversial for a series of reasons, including questions about discrimination with public funds.</p>
<p>Sorry, but your very difficult to read post doesn’t seem to include any instances to support your notion that our current government has “more hate for others than some non-religous people”. You may not approve of federally funded faith-based initiatives, but that is a looong stretch to conclude that they “hate” others who don’t share their views.</p>
<p>
The answer is yes, very much so. But why the disparaging comment? I suggest you read your own comment:
</p>
<p>Lauras50–
Relax a little bit. I see you’re quite new here…it’s always good to provide cites for the things you quote in these discussions.</p>
<p>Well, some quotes did include where they were quoted from, but you’re right some didn’t. What i am feeling is perhaps not “hate” from many leaders in our country, but the feeling they feel if we don’t agree with them we’re damned. or are doomed to being “left behind”. Many REALLY BELIEVE THAT.Although how Bush can feel he is going to Heaven after being responsible for many innocent Iraqi and civian deaths (by lying) and many death sentence while being governer beats me.
The quotes i did have, very clearly show the bias being built into our government programs. That breeds subtle if not outright discrimmination. That may not be hate, but it’s not fair. No one should feel like an outcast in their own country.</p>
<p>
OK, so you don’t feel that they hate you but you feel that they think that you may be damned. Why does the opinion of someone with whom you strongly disagree with bother you?</p>
<p>It’s true I’m new, but actually I’ve been reading CC for ages, but don’t post much. This hit my hot button. The religious right and the puppet Bush government. Why do I mind so much??? They talk religion, yet steal from the middle class and poor to give to the rich. They spout vitriol and lie to us to support an unnecessary war…just so we can do the bidding of the neo-cons…whose theories are now proven totally wrong. They talk religion yet want to kill environmental laws. They spout religion, yet say enough garbage to cause people to vote for them and AGAINST their own interests. “What’s the matter with Kansas” is a good book and the article I Posted yesterday. They spout religion yet go unprovoked against a sovereign country…who did not have WMD and it was known they didn’t. My neighbor who worked for the UN weapons inspectors told me that Iraq got rid of the weapons in the early 1990’s. She was 100% correct. They spout religion yet are trying to kill Social Security, which many people need to survive. They spout religion and outsource many jobs so company CEO’s can earn even more money than the ever can spend. They spout religion and promote guns. The spout religion yet we are the only industrialized nation with no national health care. They control every portion of my life and I don’t agree with ANYTHING they do. Why isn’t everyone else angry? Lying to the people of the US shows hatred and distain for all of us. They spout religion and want to change the courts to be against people and more for companies and the rich. What is in the water that makes everyone else so gullible? Do I feel hatred from virtually every part of the current government? Hell yes.</p>
<p>Laura, with all respect, you seem to spend way too much time at what are basically anti-Bush porn sites. What goes in is what comes out. I don’t hate you for it, though.</p>