<p>First, emeraldkity4, a holocaust to wipe out all who discriminate against you… sounds like something you want. Also, I think all of us are angry at those hypocrites who ACT LIKE THE PHARISEES. We know even Jesus thought they were not as good as tax collectors and prostitutes, so why are we thinking that every Christian agrees with Bush?</p>
<p>Thanks Brieg…you’re right…Driver…what did I say that was not accurate? .just the facts. I don’t watch Fox…mostly NY times and some CNN. No political porn sites here. I do admit to reading Thomas Paine… But i’m smart enough to see what is happening. I don’t need Fox to interpret for me. Scary thought…I was out to dinner and had a panic attack that I was going to be investigated and arrested for anti govt talk. That’s how much i trust the first amendment lately. I think I’m done with posting …bye…</p>
<p>To avoid those inevitable attacks where Karl Rove attempts to mind-meld with you while you’re out to dinner, you might want to try one of these. Or not, it’s still a free country.
<a href=“http://www.ericisgreat.com/tinfoilhats/[/url]”>http://www.ericisgreat.com/tinfoilhats/</a></p>
<p>Driver, anti bush porn sites…is that what you call everything that disagrees with Bush? My My My </p>
<p>What are the anti bush webstie, I would LOVE to check them out!!</p>
<p>nd its not that every Christian agrees with Bush, its that a very powerful group does, and they want the government to reflect their beliefs and are gaining power because of starting on the grass roots level, and unless those that believe in other religions, other faiths, and the constitution pay attention, well, then , who knows what will happen.</p>
<p>I really believe in live and let live as long as it is consenting adults and hurts no one else and you take responsibilities for your actions, and you don’t impose your religious beliefs into the government.</p>
<p>THere are plenty of laws dealing with what needs to be dealt with. There are protections for those that need protection. But, certain people are using religion and their faith system to try and govern other people. It is just starting and we need to be vigilant.</p>
<p>I have been called a bigot by certain posters on this board. That is okay. I realize where the judgement is coming from. I can take it. I disagree, but I can handle it.</p>
<p>And, it is really lazy to just use one station to get information. And kind of sad.</p>
<p>“But, certain people are using religion and their faith system to try and govern other people. It is just starting and we need to be vigilant.”</p>
<p>I believe, if they are real Christians their motive is the other way around: to govern according to the moral principals of Christianity. If they do not abide by these principals themselves, then I guess they don’t really have any ‘religion or faith systems’, correct? I don’t think there’s a need to worry judging by the way Christians are judged by society; even if they are the first group of people who govern by governing themselves first, it is unlikely that they will succeed and become accepted by society.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Finally, something combines my two pleasures in life.</p>
<p>bump bump bump</p>
<p>I noticed a few posts on the Patrick Henry College article in the New Yorker, and I’m fairly shocked and disappointed at what some of the content was like. I, for one, am a small-government, libertarian Republican. I’d vote for the likes of McCain, Giuliani, and Schwartznegger in a heartbeat. Thus, before you start calling me a, as paraphrased from another post, “liberal, leftists, progressive, socialist, anarchist - or whatever you call it,” know that I’ve got good credentials. </p>
<p>Here are a few questions for my fellow republicans who happen to be of the fundamentalist, socially ultra-conservative kind:
- How do you not believe in global warming?
- How do you not believe in evolution? Do you at least profess to believe in Intelligent Design? Or is even that too “scientific” and “logically sound” for you?
- How on earth can you agree with the doctrine of these conservative colleges that espouse rhetoric along the likes of “physical, sexual contact between males and females is sin,” or “those who die outside christ are damned to hell.” </p>
<p>Before you go on yapping about ‘freedom of speech, thought and expression’ in this nation, let me say that you are certainly free to think in whatever you wish. However, I certainly would like to question how you can logically and empirically justify your beliefs. And before you even think about replying to this post, don’t tell me science is highly flawed or it isn’t the entire truth. The whole purpose of science is to seek the truth through various forms of reasoning and data collection. Our nation was founded upon scientific reasoning, founded on the ideas of the great enlightenment philosophers of locke, rousseau, montenesque, smith, voltaire. These were figures who despised those who took scripture by the word as some irrefutable doctrine. Lastly, pertaining to the article, realize that a college has a responsibility to educate students in the skills of reasoning. Students shouldn’t have to be anchored to any one particular ideology - they should be allowed to find their own through the natural human abilities of reasoning, deduction, induction and empirical observation. So, in my view, a college that trains its students to believe ONLY in christ, shoves down their throats untenable theories such as creationism and asexual marriage need to be shut down, let alone be training our future politicians. </p>
<p>And before I go, know that I will be challenging your fundamentalist asses in the Republican primaries. I can just feel our founding fathers, especially jefferson, turning in their graves</p>
<p>Wow Doctorx88, thank you for the detailed analysis. I have just read an excellent book regarding Christianity and here are some of the things that are interesting to thinking about.</p>
<p>First, Creationism. In the beginning, God said this, said that, blah blah blah, and things were created. Now using some logical reasoning, soudwaves =energy =mass<em>c squared; and we all know now that there is an interesting relationship between energy(wave) and matter. I don’t think people as absurd when they think that all matter was created by energy. Also, this theory does not directly contradict the big bang theory; maybe God did speak a little too loud when He was creating the world. I do not get biology period, but the book gives another good example: a molecule with 221 nucleotides is so complex that there are actually 4 ^221 or 10^133 combinations, and in these combinations, only one is good for living organisms. If, if the rate of combination of nucleotides was 10^4 time per second, and supposing that the universe is 30 billion years old, then from the beginning of the universe to now the universe can make only 10^105</em>10^18*10^4= 10^127, which is really insignificant compared to the 10^133 combinations we have to really try out. 221 nucleotides is actually insignificant to the average 1200 nucleotides of molecules of simple organisms. I do not think these students will not be able to reason. </p>
<p>Regarding sex and sin, I think there is something worth considering. First, God loves human beings, including sinners, but God hates sin. The statement looks contradictory, but here’s some more reasoning before we conclude that both these statements are false. God hates sin, and God loves human beings, which means that sin must not love, or hurt what He loves. Sin hurts people, and it hurts the sinner. Being extra cautious to not hurt anyone or oneself sounds fairly reasonable! </p>
<p>Personally, Christianity is what has changed many misconceptions media forces into my mind; and I know that for many Christians, reasoning has always been part of their spiritual lives.</p>
<p>You fundamentalists are no better than the terrorists, get out of my country</p>
<p>Truly, you are one enlightened democrat. Is the above quote from anyone on your list of the great enlightenment philosophers of locke, rousseau, montenesque, smith, voltaire or did you just make that one up yourself?</p>
<p>Dearest fundamentalists.
The point is that the US was formed so that there would be freedom of religion FOR EVERYONE. That’s why many people came here to begin with. That means that Fundamentalists can not shove their views into our government nor down the rest of our throats, although they are free to believe anything they want. The rest of us CAN BELIEVE WHATEVER we want whether it be another religion OR NOT. No current laws nor the constitution can support YOUR VIEW over ours. We DO NOT HAVE AN OFFICIAL RELIGION IN THIS COUNTRY AMD THE REST OF US DO NOT WANT ONE. Is that clear??? Even if you think you might be protecting us from future Hell visitations…which we may OR MAY NOT BELIEVE IN you are NOT here to save our souls. We all have equal rights in the US. Just because you believe you have the one true belief and have found the one true way does not give you MORE RIGHTS than the rest of us. I don’t think it gets any clearer than this.</p>
<p>That means that Fundamentalists can not shove their views into our government nor down the rest of our throats, although they are free to believe anything they want.</p>
<p> .</p>
<p>See, that’s what I never seem to get. </p>
<p>I thought that in a democracy we are not just free to believe what we want, as you sayafter-all, you could do that in the USSR or Maoist China, perhaps even in Nazi Germany–but rather to advocate for what you believe…you know, a free-market of ideas and may the best ideas win, blah, blah, blah. </p>
<p>Am I wrong? </p>
<p>Are only the correct ideas to be advocated for? </p>
<p>And how do I figure out which ideas are the correct ones so I can get on board the truth-train?</p>
<p>What a predicament.</p>
<p>Fountain Siren, I believe doctor said he is not a democrat.</p>
<p>You are free to advocate your POV but not to do that in an official governmental capacity.</p>
<p>Intellectual freedom and the seperation of church and state are weighty matters that will continue to bedevil our society as they will continue to collide. We need the ability as Fitzgerald said (I think) to “hold two opposing ideas in our minds and still act.” A person of faith upholding the seperation of church and state or setting aside religious convictions when operating in a public arena is doing this. </p>
<p>It is hard for someone who is governed by religious belief to do this, but it is noble. It relies on that person realizing that a free, pluralistic society is as important-- on a different plane-- as their personal faith is, because one allows the other.</p>
<p>Ah, that is the point. We must ALL agree on what is correct. Everyone has some good ideas which must be melded in our melting pot of views until there’s a bit of everyone’s ideas and a consensus on what everyone can agree upon. That is a democracy…A consensus of opposing ideas that can work for everyone. And that’s why most countries can’t get it right, because it calls for moderation. education, an open mind and a belief that everyone, in every gender, religion, race and sexual orientation is equal. Most people can not get over the us versus them view and that means democracy is one of the toughest governments to get right. Some countries are always going to find it near impossible, I would have thought with our country we would have had enough time to figure it out…but I’m having my doubts. There is no room in democracy for fundamentalists, totalitarians and others who feel there is NO OTHER RIGHT VIEW. That is the death of democracy.</p>
<p>I believe doctor said he is not a democrat.</p>
<p>I believe he said he is a Republican, although, most Republicans consider themselves democrats (d). I was referring to his belief in democracy (small d).</p>
<p>You are free to advocate your POV but not to do that in an official governmental capacity.</p>
<p>Perhaps not as a bureaucrat, but as a policy-maker, by definition, you will and do.</p>
<p>We need the ability as Fitzgerald said (I think) to "hold two opposing ideas in our minds and still act."</p>
<p>This is a noble achievement in anyone, however, it is not a condition of government service, I think. Moreover, it may be that the opposing idea is either wrong (if there is such a thing as right or wrong), right or even, god forbid, fundamentalist Christian in origin (I myself could hardly be called a fundamentalist Christian, I am, after all, a Sufi I am, however, a believer in actual democracy).</p>
<p>Perhaps it was also hard for:
Washington, Jefferson, Adams, Madison, Franklin, Lincoln, FDR, Truman, Kennedy, Carter, Regan etc. Perhaps it would be better to say, </p>
<p>It is hard for someone who is governed by THINKING THAT THEIR BELEIFS/OPINIONS ARE CORRECT to do this, but it is noble than to say It is hard for someone who is governed by religious belief to do this, but it is noble.</p>
<p>
You do realize that it was religious leaders who were the primary advocates for the abolition of slavery as well as the civil rights movement? I am dumfounded by the venom that was posted by DoctorX88 and his followers. I will repeat my questions that I have raised before: show me one bit of legislation at the federal level that has been put forth that caters to the religious right that infringes on the majority view? Prohibition of late term/partial birth abortion? Nope - this has widespread, majority appeal. Ban on gay marriage? Nope - this has widespread public as well as bipartisan approval. So, just what is it that brings out such venomous posts as Doctorx88’s?</p>
<p>why did Senators not sign the anti lynching legislation…yeah, I now back in the past democrats from the south blocked similar legislation…that was awful, but why not sign on now, even if just for symoblism</p>
<p>Funding father…here’s the first problem, if all citizens have an equal voice in our democracy, than gay’s have a right to marry. The minute you say that SOME people don’t have equal rights or an equal voice you no longer truely believe in a true democracy. Logic please? You show me where it says Jesus didn’t like gays. Oh that’s right Jesus didn’t write the bible, MEN did and since when have any men gotten history and “truth” correct with no bias. Oh that’s right. Never.</p>
<p>
And when exactly was that passed? Or are you so much against it that you don’t even want anyone to advocate for it? Personnaly, I’m not big on the idea of prayer in school, but I am not afraid of those who want it and certainly would not tell those who want it to “get out of my country”. That is the height of bigotry.</p>
<p>Laura, you may want gay marriage and that is your right. Personnaly, I’m ambivalent about it. However, to target fundamentalist Christians as someone to be feared/loathed over this issue is ridiculous and indicates a high level of intolerance on your part. The vast majority od people in this country, including the majority of the Democrats are against gay marriage. Why single out Christians?</p>