Printable View
Not only has he turned this thread into a distasteful attempt to bash conservatives, but he is also insulting Christianity. If I were to defend my religious beliefs and my conservative viewpoints, or to state my opposition to liberalism, not only would it be inappropriate for this thread, but it would likely be seen as retaliation and I would be banned from SRP.
Being a Christian, his statements are offensive, that’s all I’m saying and I will leave it at that.
That's the problem the inability to seperate ones spiritual beliefs from the politcal machine that organized religion has become. My comments are about those that use peoples faith to further politcal agendas that truthfully are the opposite of the teachings of Christ.
If religious organizations want to play in politics then they are subject to the scrutiny that any other lobby group is under.
I doubt Christ would have had anything to do with either party.
Oh, I don't know about that. On this site, I've been called a "liberal babykiller," a communist, I've been told that what I've said was "unamerican, and I've been told that I have obviously forgotten about 9/11, among other things. Nobody's been banned to my knowledge.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike7120
At this point, I think you might accept that what's being said here is not an indictment of faith, but an opinion expressed that some political activities made under the banner of some portions of organized religion are hypocritical.
j
And so it goes. It seems impossible to discuss politics without the discussion diverting to religion and once that happens the conversation degrades into silly, namecalling nonsense. I can see why more wars have been fought and more people killed in the name of one god or another. Religion is a volatile substance. Like gasoline it should be kept in its appropriate container and used with extreme caution.
Does this not equate also to the "left" and its God, or pantheon rather, of socialized medicine, abortions on demand for reason, the extremes of NAMBLA and other affiliated groups, percieved destruction of the nuclear family, the ability of the state to dictate from on high and at a distance even the most miniscule of trade, etc. etc. etc. One's religion may not contain a "God", per se, but even the unbelievers rabidly worship at the alter of unbelief. I do agree with you that Christ probably wouldn't have much to do with either party as a party. "Render unto Caeser", as it were. Also, the question I posed is not a gauntlet thrown to anyone, simply an observation that what the extreme Right does, so does the Left. And when viewed from a distance, seems to be for the same reason. ("I'm right and I'm going legislate you into heaven!" "I'm right and I'm going to remove those silly blinders of an archaic belief system from your eyes and make you see that mankind is the the zenith of wisdom!" In other words, "I'M RIGHT!")Quote:
Originally Posted by Hutch
Pearls before swine my son...pearls before swine!:rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by maplemaker
Actually, no, it does not equate at all to secular political opinion. That's just the point. There's a fundamental difference between saying "I think this is the best thing for our society to do" and saying "God wants us to do this." And no, you can't make a religion out of social programs with which you disagree. That's a tactic used by Christian social conservatives to try to insinuate religion into the debate. What they're saying is "But the other guys are a religion, too!" It's completely bogus.Quote:
Originally Posted by maplemaker
I guess we need another religion thread, as we've veered significantly from the Defense of Sarah Palin thread. On the other hand, she never answered the questions she was asked either.
j
Hi All,
No offense to any poster, but this has gotten waaaay off topic. I'd hope this thread would remain open at least until the election coming up is over with. I can see this thing's starting to go south, and would ask members to skip any strong religious commentary. I agree with others who know what a minefield that topic can be, and would hope inflammatory comments meant to confront would be kept out of this particular discussion. Believe me, I have my own thoughts on that subject, but that's a whole other deal.
I believe there IS a religious connection to a certain party, and leave it at that. No comments on the methods of control being used or why.........no comments on how it looks to most others.....nope, I'm not gonna bring that up here. Hehe, I'd rather keep things on the 'lighter' side, and mention political observations on how the GOP is doing with marketing the Palin strategy and the like. That's a LOT less dangerous to post about than this religion stuff. You know, religion can **** people off like few other subjects, and I'd hate to see this thread evolve into a flame war.
Sigh.......I realize none of you know me or my previous experiences, but I WAS involved in a terrible war of words on another forum. This was 2-3 years ago, and some nasty things were said by both sides. It was a fight against..........oh hell, I'm not gonna get into that. The fighting lasted for well over a month, and finally reached the breaking point. I should mention that not only posting in the forum was going on, but live chat was also occurring on that site as well. Yeah, real time yelling at someone, with 40-50 other members watching the whole thing unfold. Not good.
Finally, the owners shut down the forum altogether for many months. When it returned, open for posting again, all the energy had been burnt out of the place. It never did recover and this forum became a ghost town. Turns out that even though my side won the battle, both sides ended up losing the war. I still stop in there and post very infrequently, but it's a dead zone now. I usta be fairly well known there, having been a member for 6 years now.
So yeah, I know when a thread's about to explode (and be closed), and would hope to head that off if possible. As I said in a previous post, the members here have impressed me with being able to handle political subjects in a gentlemanly way. That's tough enough, but religion is a whole other can of worms. I don't wanna even touch that booby trapped can.
Thanks for reading,
Martin
Oh Jim? Hehe, I just saw what you'd posted right above this one.........thanks.
I have to ask...are you saying these are the planks in the Democrats platform?Quote:
Originally Posted by maplemaker
I really don't think it has gone that far south, Sarah Palin was chosen to appease the religious right base that weren't going for McCain because he was seen as a moderate. So the dicussio really does fit in with the topic.
I believe I outlined my reasons for voting for Obama in an earlier post, that is not to say I agree with him on all things, for one his stance or lack there of on gun control. I just agree with him more than I do McCain.
McCain lost me when he ran to the extreme right, his pick of Sarah Palin is proof of that. I also don't like his tone of fear mongering that Bush had ran on. The reality is the world is a relatively safe and good place, and it has nothing to do with the last 8 years of Bush or the previous 8 with Clinton neither.
McCain running on the Conservative line that government is bad, I also find very annoying, does the government make mistakes, sure it does, does private industry make mistakes, hell yes. This notion that the government can't be trusted with health care is silly. We trust government to protect us with the military, and police, they fight our fires, I don't see anyone wanting these to go to private industry. This thought that someones healthcare should be a profit center is absurd. Listen to the Nixon tapes with regards to Kaiser Permante . Nixon jokes that his Kaiser plan to make money is to limit access to health care.
I'm not for on demand abortions, what I am for is the persons right to make there own decision, even if it is wrong.
I neither align myself with the left nor right, I have very little use for extremist, be they christian, muslim, jew or any other. If I had to describe myself I would say I'm a social liberal and fiscal conservative. The Conservative party both at the administration level as well as the 6 out of the last 8 years in the house have demonstrated that they are far from fiscally conservative. My definition of fiscally conservative is spending money wisely, not just not spending money.
I too am impressed with the level of discussion, especially those I disagree with.