<p>Who…the Uni-bomber?</p>
<p>Wasn’t he an atheist environmentalist?</p>
<p>No. I believe the Una-bomber was an equal opportunity anti-technology nut-job. We can all claim or discard a little piece of that one. ;)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Kind of like Chris Hedges.
Hate is hate.</p>
<h2>“It’s been perverted but not by us. Just google it and the name of a American White Supremacist organization . You’ll see what I mean.”</h2>
<p>(Forgive me Curmudgeon…I’m using your statement as an example.)</p>
<p>Actually, it doesn’t matter WHO perverts it (Klan or Klan-hater), it’s still perversion. Perverting for the purpose of rallying the Klan OR for the purpose of taking potshots at Christians is equally wrong. The original intent of the song (and the words are clear on this) is not to incite war on fellow humans, but on evil (Satan). Try to recognize that many, in fact, MOST Christians are NOT Klansmen, or the like, and do NOT interpret the song in any way other than what was originally intended. </p>
<p>Sometimes I am amazed at what some of you think you know about Christianity! Most people here are so intelligent and well-educated and make it their business to be well-informed on a breathtaking array of topics…except Christianity and what it means to be a Christian. I am constantly floored at the inaccuracies. And this is my issue with Christian-bashing, most of it has its genesis in misinformation. Bash the Klan if you want, bash fundamentalism if you want, bash extremism and bigotry if you want. But don’t equate these things with Christianity. Just as Muslim does not equal terrorist, Christian does not equal crusader.</p>
<p>Sorry, ldmom. I don’t think “Onward, Christian Soldiers” gets off so easily. Of course, it wasn’t written as a Klan anthem, but it is a pretty good relic of the Victorian “white man’s burden” sense that it was the role of Christians to bring enlightenment to the world, sometimes by military means if resistance was encountered. And there is a long tradition in Christianity of the “Church Militant”, which is reflected in the song, and which includes lots of Crusaders. This tradition recognizes that sometimes the battle against Satan* is carried out by actual combat against actual human beings who may be doing Satan’s work, whether or not they know it. Including, of course, some purported Christians (see the Hundred Years’ War).</p>
<p>So, no, not everyone who sings “Onward, Christian Soldiers” is a Klansman or a Crusader – I’m certainly neither – but I don’t think the Klansmen or Crusaders are misreading it completely when they sing it, either.</p>
<ul>
<li>Your use of “Satan” as “evil” illustrates some of the double-edged provenance of lots of common ideas. I wish I knew more about how Satan became a name for the Christian embodiment of evil, but the name comes out of Job and various Jewish apocryphal texts in which he is, effectively, God’s prosecutor – someone who identifies sins legalistically, investigates them, proves them, and demands appropriate punishment. Scary and merciless, perhaps (mercy being left to God), but far from evil. However, very much a representation of what Christians considered Old Testament legalism, i.e., a prototypical Jew. In other words, there is more than a trace of historical anti-semitism in the equation of Satan with Evil.</li>
</ul>
<p>
</p>
<p>Exactly. And, as I tried (evidently unsuccessfully) to point out, it is the same type of thinking that is evolving here. Extreme radicalism that thinks it’s the chosen elite and everyone else is doomed, and being willing to ‘fight’ (use violence) to achieve their ends…and being unwilling to negotiate or ever admit they’re wrong…being unable to ever consider the other point of view…</p>
<p>Not sure exactly where the line is drawn between Christian fascism and Christian fundamentalists. Would it be accurate to say that all Christian fascists are fundamentalists but not all Christian fundamentalists are fascists? And of those who are, do the even consider themselves fascists?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>In terms of violent crusades, very true. </p>
<p>However, the attitude of ‘crusading’ in terms of proselytyzing and CRUSADING to convert the ‘heathen’ to Christ is a very big part of evangelical/fundamentalist/born-again Christianity. They think it is their duty, even if it means intruding into others’ lives/countries thru war. No, I’m NOT saying that many of these would become violent - most wouldn’t - most are good, loving people - but I’m sure that the Germans were basically good, loving people too. What I am concerned about is that so many of their leaders, like Dobson, Hagee et al, have such a powerful hold on these people. I have been told a number of times by fund. Christian friends that they did not even bother to get educated about whom to vote for in the last election, and they did not bother to get educated about the Iraq war - they just followed what their pastor recommended that they do. THIS I find disturbing.</p>
<p>I always love these debates on the poor christians and how oppressed they are. Hasn’t it been since about the 13-14th century that christianity been the world’s dominate religion? How oppressed are they really compared to other religions? </p>
<p>Bemoaning that you don’t have 100% of your way isn’t something to worry about when compared to other religions.</p>
<p>for those who think it all just fine these days and that we shouldn’t be watchful:</p>
<p>Black people ‘should get over’ slavery? Comment stuns lawmakers in Virginia
THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
01/17/2007</p>
<p>RICHMOND, Va. — A state legislator said black people “should get over” slavery and questioned whether Jews should apologize “for killing Christ,” drawing denunciations Tuesday from stunned colleagues. </p>
<p>Delegate Frank D. Hargrove, who is white and Christian, made his remarks in opposition to a measure that would apologize on the state’s behalf to the descendants of slaves. </p>
<p>In an interview published Tuesday in The Daily Progress of Charlottesville, Hargrove, 79, said slavery ended nearly 140 years ago with the Civil War and added that “our black citizens should get over it.” </p>
<p>The newspaper also quoted him as saying, “are we going to force the Jews to apologize for killing Christ?” </p>
<p>Black lawmakers swiftly denounced Hargrove’s comments. </p>
<p>“When somebody tells me I should just get over slavery, I can only express my emotion by projecting that I am appalled, absolutely appalled,” said Delegate Dwight C. Jones, head of the Legislative Black Caucus. </p>
<p>Delegate David L. Englin also criticized Hargrove’s remarks, recalling that his grandparents were driven from their homes in Poland “by people who believed that as Jews, we killed Christ.” </p>
<p>When Hargrove rose to speak, he told Englin he didn’t care about Englin’s religion. “I think your skin was a little too thin,” Hargrove said as lawmakers gasped and groaned. "</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Exactly! I always marvel when I see all these HUGE Christian churches in my city. Hundreds of Christian churches listed in the phone book. But only 1 Buddhist temple and 2 New Age ‘churches.’ And I don’t see anything listed for Pagans or Hindus. (Well I guess places for atheist gatherings wouldn’t be listed at all.)</p>
<p>Very good point, Opie. They equate ‘not getting their way’ and ‘not being able to impose their views on others’ as oppression!</p>
<p>“They” huh.</p>
<p>Well after a long couple of days debating…let’s just pack it in and agree to agree that Christians–whether “fundamentalist” or “fascist” (lealdragon)–are indeed anti-Semitic (JHS), racist (cgm), sometimes violent (curmudgeon) and absolutely fascist (opie).</p>
<p>We’ll just hope (certainly not pray) that GWB doesn’t achieve his theocratic takeover within the two long years he has left.</p>
<p>And heaven (?) help us, the hymn “Onward Christian Soliders” will never be the same for me. :)</p>
<p>"The newspaper also quoted him as saying, “are we going to force the Jews to apologize for killing Christ?” </p>
<p>Jews didn’t kill Jesus; it was the EYE-talians.</p>
<p>well, actually it was the Romans…</p>
<p>same difference. ;)</p>
<p>This is silliness.</p>
<p>America is most certainly NOT on the road to a theocracy, of any kind – not if the neoconservative network that controls the Bush White House and most of the Republican Party today has anything to say about it. Neoconservatives – basically, social liberals who desire to create a worldwide democratic revolution through military might, to protect the interests of the State of Israel first and foremost – are at their core a decidedly secular bunch. For all of Bush’s quasi-religious rhetoric, there is nothing at all religious about the people who have so heavily influenced this president’s administration (as well as Canada’s current federal government). Neoconservatives use religious people to further their goals – mainly fundamentalist “Zionist” Christians who believe that the Second Coming of Jesus will arrive sooner if Israel destroys all of its foes, as well as many unwitting mainline Christians who feel a quite natural kinship with the Jewish people through the historical and Biblical roots of their faith – but the stark reality is that once their revolution really takes hold they will almost certainly turn on their Christian “friends” as being “backward,” and otherwise not conducive to their very secular, ultimately anti-religious ideals.</p>
<p>In short, religion is simply not a part of the neoconservatives’ agenda – not in the long run. They have replaced wordwide socialism with worldwide liberal democracy as their goal, but they are still Godless Trotskyites. And they comprise the cabal which has dictated almost every aspect of the Bush administration’s foreign and domestic policies since 9/11. If what is currently going on in Iraq and beyond is a Crusade, it is not a Crusade in the name of Jesus; it is a Crusade in the name of secularism and the ultimate eradication of religion.</p>
<p>These people are not Christians, and they are not conservatives. They are leftists in every way except for a willingness to wage war on anyone who threatens their goals.</p>
<p>In Christ,</p>
<p>FeR
(ex-neoconservative pawn)</p>
<p>“Oklahoma City ring any bells?”</p>
<p>Curm, did you read the Congressional Report? It was inconclusive, of course, and as I posted at the time just goes to show that the execution of McVeigh was a travesty, but serious people question whether there was an Islamic link to the OKC bombings. I wonder how that would change the dialogue if it turned out to be an even more bizarro conspiracy.</p>
<p>"I always love these debates on the poor christians and how oppressed they are. Hasn’t it been since about the 13-14th century that christianity been the world’s dominate religion? How oppressed are they really compared to other religions? "</p>
<p>You know what annoys me? The lumping of all Christians together. (not accusing the poster, just commenting). There is a vast difference between mainstream Protestants, fundamentalists and even Catholics.</p>
<p>"Neoconservatives – basically, social liberals who desire to create a worldwide democratic revolution through military might, to protect the interests of the State of Israel first and foremost – are at their core a decidedly secular bunch. "
This amuses me, not on its merits but because “neocon” is so often a code word for “Jews controlling the world.”</p>
<p>It’s no secret (or, rather, coincidence) that all prominent neoconservative organizations, think-tanks, publications, etc., are funded by Zionists. </p>
<p>Interestingly, the neoconservative student group on my campus is one of the very few that doesn’t rely on the University’s student union for its funding. They are fully funded by B’nai Brith, which gives them hundreds of thousands of dollars to blow each year and even built them their own lush building on campus. </p>
<p>I used to enjoy it, until my conscience caught up with me.</p>