Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Friday, March 02, 2007
John Hawkins :: Townhall.com Columnist
Liberal Contempt for Christians
by John Hawkins
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Was the Copenhagen Global Warming Summit Walk-Out a Win for the U.S.?


"Liberals hate religion because politics is a religion substitute for liberals and they can't stand the competition." -- Ann Coulter

Most liberals in this country tend to treat Christians one of two ways: either with open, sniggering contempt or if they think they need their votes, they tend to switch over to hamhanded and grotesque pandering. That's not to say that there aren't liberal Christians, there are plenty of them, but they've just become accustomed to being treated by their fellow liberals like the sort of refuse you scrape off your shoes after a long walk through a cow pasture.

Every Christmas you have liberals fighting to purge any mention of Christianity or Jesus from Christmas celebrations. Then, during the year, liberal atheists like Michael Newdow and liberal organizations like the ACLU use the legal system to ceaselessly assault Christianity at every opportunity. Whether you're talking about the Pledge of Allegiance, the Mt. Soledad Cross, or the Ten Commandments on the walls of a courthouse -- you have liberals trolling through the courts looking for a liberal judge who'll be willing to twist the Constitution in order to stick a thumb in the eye of their mutual Christian foes.

Meanwhile, the assault on Christianity continues unabated amongst the liberal rank and file. It's always something. As an example, two anti-Christian bloggers were recently hired by the John Edwards campaign. Both of them later quit the campaign after it was revealed that they said things like this on their blogs,

Q: What if Mary had taken Plan B after the Lord filled her with his hot, white, sticky Holy Spirit? A: You’d have to justify your misogyny with another ancient mythology.

Of course, in all fairness to Edwards, this sort of attitude towards Christianity is the rule, not the exception on the left side of the blogosphere, so the odds weren't in his favor. For example, quotations like these aren't terribly unusual on the left,

"Don't you understand that the "Culture of Life" means bombing abortion clinics, bashing gays, and calling for the wholesale persecution and harassment of people who don't share your religious views? In fact, nowhere is the radical Christian agenda being carried out with more zeal and aplomb than in Baghdad. KILL ANYONE WHO DOESN'T BELIEVE AS YOU BELIEVE!! TORTURE THEM IN THE PUBLIC SQUARE!! SET THEM ON FIIIIIIIIRE!! We don't need no steenkin' love and tolerance!! We're CHRISTIANS!! WE MUST KILL!! KILL!! KIIIIILLLLL!!!" -- Firedoglake

"Religious fanaticism is simply institutionalized psychosis and if we ever needed all the help we could get from reality folk (mystics) and courageous scientists, it's now. Our planet cannot be pummeled much longer by these nut cases without passing infinitely tragic points of no return." -- The Smirking Chimp

Here's a personal favorite, an eye catching post-election 2004 rant from Ken Layne, who's now at the popular liberal blog Wonkette,

"Rove's re-election strategy was elegantly simple: Scare the bejesus out of Jesusland. F@ggots are headed your way! Satanic Muslims are hiding everywhere! That's all it took to get Jesusland to do the job. Intellectual conservatives like the National Review staff are flattering themselves if they honestly believe Jesusland cares about conservative thought. The "reality-based" folks are learning that Jesusland doesn't even care about jobs or the economy. In Jesusland, it's all the will of Jesus. No job? No money? Daughter got her cl*t pierced? Jesus is just f*cking with you again, testing your faith. Got the cancer? Oh well. Soon you'll be with Jesus. Reality is no match for a mystical world in which an all-powerful god is constantly toying with every detail of your mundane life, just to see what you'll do about it. Keep praying and always keep your eye out for homosexuals and terrorists, and you will eventually be rewarded ... all you have to do is die, and then it's SuperJesusLand, where you will be a ghost floating in a magic cloud with all the other ghosts from Jesusland, with Jesus Himself presiding over an Eternal Church Service."

Moving on, there's James Cameron's latest documentary/blasphemy, "The Lost Tomb of Christ," which claims that Jesus was married to Mary Magdalene and had children, based on some coffins that were found that may have had their names on them. Even though that's a thin reed to hang a documentary on, notice that I said "may." Biblical scholar Steven Pfann says that the name on the key coffin looks to be Hanun, not Jesus. But Hanun, Jesus, whatever, as long as there is an attack on Christians involved, liberals don't care much about the particulars. That's why Hollywood habitually treats Christians with such disdain on the silver screen and why liberals will tell you that dropping a crucifix in urine or smearing the Virgin Mary with feces is the sort of "art" we should be funding with our tax dollars.

Now usually, when you accurately explain to people what many liberals believe and use their own quotes to prove it, liberals come out of the woodwork to call it a "smear campaign" or claim that you're "cherry picking" their comments. But, what I'm saying here has been said by other liberals, even if they tend to gloss over the magnitude of the problem. Take, for example, these comments from Barack Obama just last year,

"At worst, there are some liberals who dismiss religion in the public square as inherently irrational or intolerant, insisting on a caricature of religious Americans that paints them as fanatical, or thinking that the very word "Christian" describes one's political opponents, not people of faith."

If Barack had replaced, "some liberals" with "most liberals," he would have been spot-on.

This would be a better country if liberals like Barack Obama would regularly stand up and say, "This is not acceptable," when their fellow travelers on the left attack Christians instead of tossing out a line in a speech every now and again. It might not stop liberals from being inherently hostile to people of faith, but it might encourage them to think about their anti-Christian bigotry, instead of blindly following the crowd on the left.

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author
John Hawkins is a professional blogger who runs Right Wing News, Linkiest, and Viral Footage.
 
TOWNHALL DAILY: Sign up today and receive Townhall.com daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.
Very True
This article is tragic but true. The Bible clearly states that Christians will be persecuted for their faith.

It's a shame that the country that was founded on Judeo-Christian principles has turned its back on that foundation.

We will pay a great price for this, and someday our country will implode because we have turned our back on what is right and good and true.

quotations like these are not unusual...
Citing blogs as evidence of mainstream ideology is stupid. The internet is the worst thing to happen to public discourse since... perhaps the 24-hour news channel. Boosters can chant about giving voice to the people, but that doesn't change the fact that the most significant effect of blogs is a tremendous lowering of standards in terms of content, rhetoric, and decorum. The passages cited in this article are rather mild. There are plenty of mouthbreathers posting constantly to townhall.com who make equally outrageous essentializing blanket claims.

There certainly are well-written blogs, but not enough to justify the credit they recieve. And the possibilities for nitpicking which the internet affords (cf. Dan Rather) are hardly innovative. In fact, they're only unique for the amount of self-congratulation the bloggers can later bestow upon themselves.

The "blogosphere" (and that wretched word itself should be stricken from the lexicon!) only promotes childishness. (See? I'm no exception. I'm sorry about the "mouthbreathers".)

I have no interest in arguing the other aspects of this article. I've said my peace.

bitaforitpush
so you are basically saying that he cherry-picked?

Kath:
What do you mean we? I get sick of hearing super passive Christians pointing out that we are informed in scripture that we will be scorned and persecuted for our faith. Invariably they follow this pious observation with a statement like yours.

"We will pay a great price for this, and some day our country will implode because we have turned our back on what is right and good and true".


Have you turned your back on what is good? I don't think I have. The congregation in my church have not turned their backs on what is good. Too many of them spout passive rhetoric like yours, but they try to walk a Christian walk.


I have to tell you that I believe that our country will implode because of pious, passive Christians who refuse to do anything to defend Christianity. The scripture is full of accounts of wars waged by Christians. Did you ever hear of David and his slingshot?


If people who allow themselves to be whipping boys for secularists who are committed to destroying Christianity for political purposes, I think that you are assisting them. These secularists bullies are emboldened because no matter how they insult and vilify Christians, they know that there is no price to pay for their actions.


I reject that brand of Christianity, and I am sick to death of hearing it. You can stretch out on the ground and let these people walk all over you if you want to. I won't, and I don't appreciate your "kick me, spit on me, I am holy" interpretation of scripture.

Christianity
Christianity is no longer a theology to be discussed but simply a foil for political opportunists. Religious "conservatives" are political first and religious second, if at all. The measure of their "Christianity" is how they stand on particular issues -- war in Iraq, abortion, flag burning, homosexual marriages etc.

For instance, when Pope John Paul II came out against the war in Iraq Sean Hannity, a Catholic, said that Pope was "liberal." Why was the Pope liberal in Hannity's eyes? Because he didn't support a war. The Pope's opposition to the war, and really any opposition to the war, didn't necessarily come from "liberalism" but the criteria for a just war. The war in Iraq failed t satisfy the criteria for a just war so naturally the Vatican had to oppose it.

Christianity isn't really a living theology anymore, but just another part of the cesspool of modern politics.






Ain't gonna happen
-- This would be a better country if liberals like Barack Obama would regularly stand up and say, "This is not acceptable," when their fellow travelers on the left attack Christians instead of tossing out a line in a speech every now and again. --

This won't happen for the simplest of reasons: the Barack Obamas of our nation need the Ken Laynes and Amanda Marcottes, not vice-versa. Politicians pander to voters and their prejudices; Democrats are the most assiduous practitioners of the art.

Don't expect any Democrat ever to say something that might alienate the affections of a substantial left-leaning interest group -- and like it or not, quite a lot of left-liberals are innately hostile to Christianity.

my 2 cents
The phrase "Liberal contempt for Christians". Would it be overstating the obvious to say that the feeling is mutual?

Media
The problem with this whole situation is that by the nature of the beast (that being the media) we can only see a small sample of ... well ... anything. And that small sample is whatever part of it the medium in question wants you to see. I have maintained for years that TV shows us the worst examples of people on both sides of the political spectrum. When you see a conservative it's often someone who is clearly not very bright, or some disgraced Republican politician (who usually isn't particularly conservative, but the masses don't know that)(such as Mark Foley and Duke Cunningham), or some corrupt Businessman (Though most corrupt businessmen are totally apolitical, not caring a wit beyond their own organizations) (Ken Lay), Mel Gibson, or some over-zealous religious fanatic. For the Left, we have most of Hollywood, Cindy Sheehan, the ACLU, Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, Michael Moore, and the most radical of university professors (like Ward Churchill). The problem is that the extremes are presented as the main-stream, rank-and-file of either side, either intentionally (doing a story on what those crazy (insert political direction here)ists are doing), or accidentally simply by giving them exposure.

How reasonable people think is not news. No one cares what the average Joe American on the street has to say. You won't sell newspapers or attract viewers by showing reasonable people debating in a reasonable manner about some political topic. So the extremists are the ones who get exposure. It's also worth noting that the relatively normal people in Hollywood (like Tom Selleck, who is a conservative to a degree) don't get up and make political speeches as if they actually know anything about politics (or anything more than you or I do.) Most actors on both sides follow the advice of "shut up and act." But it's the extremists we have to hear about.

Certainly there are rank-and-file conservatives who are religious fanatics, just as there are rank-and-file liberals who are just as fanatically against religion. There are rank-and-file conservatives who are idiots, same with liberals. The opposite holds true as well. Most are reasonable people, however, and most reasonable people would rather deal with a reasonable political opponent than one who is fanatically (or blindly) like-minded.

Note to Self
Don't waste any more time reading columns by John Hawkins

LGM
Your pablum is off of the mark. Ahmadinejad criticized the USA last year NOT for being Christians but for NOT being Christian ENOUGH!

BTW, if you have a fugging INKLING of what you are yammering about, you'd KNOW that Islam and the Koran especially HATE pagans and atheists like yourself. Debunking your spew is really too easy but then again, what else can we expect from someone like you with a brain "a mile-wide and an inch-deep?"

http://noliberalspin.townhall.com/g/74739593-1f11-45d7-af4a-3b359992de61

this again?
It is interesting but not too amazing that such a young and inarticulate person is finding residency at TH. There is no real thought in this tired remake of a thoroughly over played conservative topic.

Yes, some people hate Christians. Unfortunately, if you use this as a definition for liberal, you will find very few liberal in this country. Therefore, what’s the point? The “evidence” offered here is worthless as it can be refuted in several ways.

I may be wrong since this is only the second time I’ve read John Hawkins, but compared to others at TH that I don’t care for he just doesn’t measure up to even them.

I saw a book in a Christian store
the other day which made me almost embarrassed to be a believer.

I'd gone in there hoping to find a good spiritual book by Madeleine L'Engle. Her "Walking on Water: Reflections on Faith and Art" is very important to me, and I have read through her yearly devotional book, "Glimpses of Grace," more than once. But when I asked the lady at the desk where L'Engle's work might be, she typed the name into the computer and then replied that it and her works were not listed anywhere on the store's database.

What the store DID have was a little book on "dangerous entertainment" -- a book that claimed that parents who took their kids to see "Finding Nemo" were indoctrinating them into the theory of Evolution. I've seen "Finding Nemo" more than once, and I didn't even think about evolution as I was watching; I was following the characters through their story, because that's what I do when I watch movies. It claimed that parents who showed their kids "The Sword in the Stone" were teaching them to be good little Wiccans. Now, my problem with "The Sword in the Stone" is that it's not a very good movie (especially when compared with genuine Disney classics like "Dumbo" and "Pinnochio"). But I always assumed it's a fantasy and therefore only metaphorically -- METAPHORICALLY -- linked to real life. In real life no one can do what Merlyn could do, and thank God they can't; however, in the realm of fantasy fiction, such characters offer meditations on the effect of power on the human psyche... y'know, like the "Harry Potter" books.

After seeing this, I vowed I would not go into that store again; henceforth, I would use Amazon.com to purchase works by L'Engle, C.S. Lewis, and other Christian writers I admire.

My point? Some Christians make it entirely too easy for liberals to have contempt for us. Sometimes we give them the very ammunition they use to destroy us.

Maybe we should stop doing that.
Maybe it's time for better-read, more imaginative, more thoughtful, more SPIRITUAL Christians -- Christians of the Lewis ilk, and poets whose work is more along the John Donne/ Gerard Manley Hopkins line than Helen Steiner Rice -- to step up to the plate and speak up. I DARE the Leftist to have contempt for the likes of Lewis, Donne, Hopkins, and L'Engle. I double-dog DARE them.

Kath
Please explain what persecutions Christians face. I am able to go to church every Sunday. My church's ministries have never been threatened. Sure, there are people who are indifferent or hostile to Christianity, but they don't do anything. It seems to me that people define persecution as either not receiving total affirmation or being upset that the government is not favoring their particular belief over others. If you are upset that there is no Nativity Scene at the town hall, put one up on your property. If you wish more kids come to Christ, get involved in youth ministries. I have and it greatly rewarding for everyone concerned. I am afraid that the problem is not that Christians are persecuted. They have just become lazy.

"compassionate liberalism."
Butchering babies, killing the elderly, & murdering civilians in Waco; along with confiscating earned assets to be given to parasites (useful idiots) is what best describes "comapssionate liberalism" (Naziism/communism).

Some honest words from an ex-liberal
I'm not referring to myself, but to Harry Stein, author of the fine book "How I Accidentally Joined the Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy (And Found Inner Peace)" (2000, Delacorte Press, New York.)

In the following passage, he's positing how he used to think as "Old Me", and how he thinks now as "New Me." He gets it right about liberalism, but note how he thinks about the Religious Right, which is the DEFAULT liberal position.

"The Religious Right
Old Me: A bunch of crazed zealots out to impose their repressive, intolerant theocratic values on the rest of us. The greatest threat to our freedom.
New Me: A bunch of crazed zealots who pretty much kept to themselves until 'progressive' zealots started imposing THEIR values on them and their via popular culture and the schools. The SECOND greatest threat to our freedom."

Liberal Contempt For Christians
This article was so sad and yet so true.I have heard many say that they thought that as far as the democrats go-Mr.Edwards was thought to be a christian,and morally good man,to those I will be sending them this article.He never had me fooled.I must say that the what the bloggers say sent chills down my spine and I think,is this what our country has come too?just to have an election??Is it necessary that we have to bring Jesus into it and crucify him all over again?I think we all need to rethink what we are doing for an election and also we need to remember what our forefathers wanted,fought and died for,for this great country of ours....

As a literate Christian...
I'm somewhat embarrassed by the exchange between "Kath" and "Skip", above, and by the book store Pamela described. It's not entirely the fault of modern Evangelicalism, it's just as much -- no, a great deal more -- the fault of the assault of cultural progressives on the American system of education over the past 150 years, but most of us simply can't think very clearly.

Yesterday I listened to the radio program of a very well-known, distinguished Christian leader and psychologist, and he was discussing recent movies. After denouncing most of the Academy's "Best Picture" nominees, he lauded a film called The Illusionist, complaining only that they included 45 seconds of human flesh while making love. Now, The Illusionist was an entertaining film, but somehow this "leader" missed the fact that the main premise of the film involved a massive violation of the 9th commandment, "Don't bear false witness." They framed the Crown Prince of Austria with a murder he didn't commit. And this IDIOT of a Christian "leader" complained only about 45 seconds of legs, arms, and sides, and called this WHOLESOME.

I'm devoting the rest of my life to the reconstruction of an education system worth its name. We've completely lost the ability to think.

persecutions christians face?
Ken,they are taking our Christ out of Christmas.They say my saviour Jesus was married to Mary Magdelene!!and had children....killing babies and no longer at 12wks.,it is now done all the way up to 9mons(partial birth abortion)which is nothing but pure torture!They no longer want the 10 commandments displayed in any govt.buildings,shall I go on?Yet every other religion has not been infringed on what so ever.Christianity is what this country was founded on afterall like it or not but yet you are free to worship whatever God you please.We just would like to worship our God and display it in our country because that is afterall what our country is all about.or WAS!

WHAT?
As a Christian I will not appoligize for
1) Choosing life

cherry-picking?
"Cherry-picking" their comments? Ha! That's too easy because there are barrel-fulls of cherries out there. Too easy to pick on libs.

You've earned your ridicule
The majority of the christians who have responded today are the reasons that non-religious persons critisize christians. The ridicule is earned from 2,000 yrs of violence and oppression. The true christians (fundamentalists) subscribe to exactly the same ideology as the true muslims (fundamentalists).
There is a study that has just been released showing that people exposed to violence in the bible act with more hostility.


ken - persecution Christians face
First of all, you need to spend a little time browsing the web sites at http://www.persecution.org, http://www.perscution.com (those are 2 different sites), and http://www.persecutedchurch.org. More Christians are living under explicit, government-sanctioned persecution now than at any time in the Church's history.

And it's happening here in the US as well. In the latest of a long series of targeted anti-Christian legal actions, 5 individuals were arrested in Philadelphia for evangelizing at a Gay Rights rally and charged with crimes carrying a possible penalty of 47 years' imprisonment. After a confrontation with a gay group calling themselves the Pink Angels, police arrested 5 men who were quoting Bible passages and displaying signs carrying Bible verses.

The crimes with which these individuals have been cited include "ethnic intimidation" (one of the new "hate crimes" laws), criminal conspiracy, possession of instruments of crime, reckless endangerment of another person, riot, failure to disperse, disorderly conduct, and obstructing highways.

None of the Pink Angels were arrested or cited. View the tape of the arrest here (http://www.afa.net/clp/video/philly11.wmv) and tell me who you think was obstructing whom.

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=42705 , and read the articles they link to as well.

A similar incident occurred in Chicago in 2006: http://headlines.agapepress.org/archive/7/202006b.asp. Note that the offense was passing out literature to gays.

These are not isolated incidents. Incidents like these have been occurring for decades, as police in some parts of the country routinely arrest Christians for doing perfectly legal things while allowing others to do precisely the same things under secular auspices.

I'll try to find other instances if you'd like.




DA
You wrote, "The ridicule is earned from 2,000 yrs of violence and oppression."

No, son, the reason folks like you criticize Christians is that you absolutely hate the fact that there exist individuals who dare to say that you're responsible for your own unprincipled acts.

You wrote: "The true christians (fundamentalists) subscribe to exactly the same ideology as the true muslims (fundamentalists)."

Really? Ok, then, take a look at http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/index.html#Attacks (or better yet, browse the entire site), and then point me to a similar compilation of attacks and heinous acts perpetrated by Christians. Since we subscribe to "the same ideology as the true muslims," and since there are more Christians worldwide than Muslims, it should be SIMPLE to gather together a list of the heinous attacks and behavior of fundamentalist Christians. Have at it.

I'm not holding my breath, by the way.

Here's the only relevant fact in this discussion: you, sir, are a bigot.

another conservative myth
i am a proud liberal christian
i am liberal because i am a christian
i believe in the soul
i believe in faith and the power of prayer
i believe in John 3:16
i believe in the Father, Son ,Holy Ghost
i believe conservative fundamentalists have hi-jacked christianity for political purposes
i believe the congregation in my church and my denomination would be puzzled by this article.

there are millions of christians who are liberal.in fact a large majority of liberals are christian.
this author insults the american baptists, methodists, presbyterians and other denominations who are liberal in their thinking but just as christian as any conservative.

why do conservative writers like this want to bash other christians.
is it not permissible in this country anymore to hold religious beliefs different from conservative politics and still be considered a christian.

this is political correctness at an hysterical level.

how does this author know how liberals think.
what studies has he done.
how many liberals did he survey to come to these conclusions.

do david duke and pat robertson and haggard represent conservative christianity?

of course not.

but have one liberal say negative thing about christianity and conservatives paint all liberals with that broad brush.

this is shameful and disgusting.

religious liberal
Ah, it's Ms. "80% of liberals are Christians," back to spouting spurious statistics about the deep, deep faith of America's cultural progressives.

Today it's "in fact a large majority of liberals are christian."

Care to supply scientifically-gathered statistics demonstrating the truth of this claim?

And while you're at it, you might also attempt to explain to us why the religious tenets espoused by the leftward-leaning leadership of the Christian denominations you mentioned sound so very, very much like the diatribes written by American Marxists?

inkling revival
i will not do your research for you but i just got off google before i wrote that. there is plenty of evidence for my statements.

there is no such thing as cultural progressive it is a made up name by olielly who is a sexual predator himself trying to make amends.

so you say american baptists, methodists(g.w. bush's denomination, so you arre saying george is a marxist) and presbyterians sound like marxists. lol

you know nothing of what you speak.

it is conservatives like you who are christian bashers.
if someone has a different political philosophy than you than you assume they can't be christians.

like i said that is political correctness run wild.

if you were a christian you would know the statements you make are false.
liberal churches
sing the same songs
preach the same sermons
read the same scripture
pray the same prayers (the Lords Prayer)

you are nothing but a christian basher yourself.



myth?
David Limbaugh wrote an expose' about the increasing legal persecution of Christians in the US, entitled "Persecution."

Here's are excerpts from customer reviews of the book, found at http://www.amazon.com, citing incidents described and documented in the book:

"In 1995 a US District judge in Texas said that any student saying the word "Jesus" would be arrested and spend 6 months in jail. A Vermont kindergarten student was expressly forbidden to say "God is not dead" to his classmates.

"A teacher was rebuked for leaving religious literature in a New Jersey school faculty lounge, while literature trashing the `religious right' was plentiful and fully allowed. After the 1999 Columbine High School massacre, students painted tiles and placed them above their lockers to help in the grieving process. Around 90 of them were removed however because they contained inflammatory rhetoric such as "God is love."

"Prayer of course has been banned, and textbooks even mentioning biblical characters are considered offensive and therefore must be removed."

"Limbaugh cites a litany of cases that range from schools refusing Christian clubs access to campus facilities to a public library's firing of an employee for wearing a cross necklace to work. "

Such events are daily occurrences in the US, almost always accompanied by uneducated references to "separation of church and state" or "sensitivity to people of other faiths."

This is not the level of persecution experienced by, say, residents of Cuba or Vietnam, where pastors are routinely shot in the head. But they are precursors to those things. The good news is, many instances are followed by a lawsuit reinstating the rights of the offended. The bad news is, the incidents occur in increasing numbers.

religious lib
You wrote: "i [sic] will not do your research for you"

Of course you won't. You haven't even done it for yourself.

Nice chattin' with ya.

I don't know
I still think this is a silly debate but I like the way inkling_revival keeps it in perspective. There is a great deal of antipathy but little outright contempt and persecution.

Consider this:
anti-socialist, much of what you described also happened at cities in Germany and Japan during WWII. It takes a contrivance to condone one and condemn the other.

southernlady76: You would like to worship your God and display it in our country and you say I am free to do likewise. That’s great, but you’re asking for more than that. You want precedence in the public sphere unless you’re willing to let me place my idols alongside yours.

In many ways, this is the same type of contrivance that Kimberly employs.

The first quote
The first quote was from John Edwards' former blog advisors, can't get much more mainstream than that.

Red Tooth
Maybe Hannity understands what a "just war" is better than the Pope:

1) Declared by an agent with authority.
No question the US had that, altough I am sure you would want to obfuscate with a constitutional debate.
2) Must be a just cause....like self defense, or should be fought to end injustice....Saddam's treatment of Kurds, perhaps. Refer to Romans 13.
3) Must be winnable, Saddam's statue was toppled in days, the both him and his sons are no more.


Maybe Hannity's disagreement with the Pope is on Christian grounds, not political grounds. Unless convinced by scripture or plain reason, here Hannity stands.

inkling revival-
in your world where you don't deal with facts i know it is hard to believe other people do their research before speaking.


The survey finds that about a third of all Christians (32%) identify themselves as "liberal" or "progressive" Christians. By comparison, only a somewhat higher percentage (38%) describe themselves as "born again" or evangelical Christians.

However, these characterizations overlap for many people and are far from being mutually exclusive. For example, more than a third of evangelicals (36%) also describe themselves as liberal or progressive Christians.

so inkling if you add 32 and 36 you get
68% of liberals who consider themselves christian.


heresyarch
“3) Must be winnable, Saddam's statue was toppled in days, the both him and his sons are no more.”

Wow, I am so relieved. You know I’ve had this strange reoccurring image of our soldiers still being over there, of fighting still happening every day and of constantly mounting casualties.


Christians
Many people who call themselves "christian" are not disciples of Jesus, the Christ. It has nothing to do with belonging to a church or denomination. It is a relationship. The label was usurped long ago, when to say you were not a Christian could result in persecution, even death.

Yes, true followers of Christ can be members of different political parties; the apostles themselves had different political view points. Being a Christian is not a political position.

southernlady76
No one is taking Christ out of your Christmas celebrations, unless you are. There are people who object to relgious content to government funded or sponsered Christmas celebrations, but that is no assault on you or what you do.

There are people apparently trying to make money off of religious nonsense with this ludicrous claim that they have discovered the tomb of Jesus. But the fact that there are such shysters out there hardly constitutes repression of Christians.

Wiccan soldiers have to fight to get their religious symbols on their gravesites in the same manner that soldiers of other religions do. That could reasonably be considered a matter of relgious repression. The fact that other people are saying things you don't like does not.

DA/Kimbat
You and the other moonbats feel entitled to bash Christians because of all the Christian “violence and oppression” you’ve suffered through?!?
You're not a bigot...you're an idiot.

Kimbat,
If you would have just admitted that the liberal comments contained in this article were hateful and unnecessary, you could have earned at least a small speck of credibility. Instead, we get your standard, unhinged, vile, incomprehensible, and frothing at the mouth diatribe. You are truly incapable of independent thought on ANY issue.

inkling_revival
-absolutely hate the fact that there exist individuals who dare to say that you're responsible for your own unprincipled acts.-

What acts would those be?
-spending 15 yrs in the US army and reserves
-spending 8 years in college
-marrying the woman I love and the daughter I love
-speaking out against oppression of minorities

Rise and Fall of America?
From God in the Wasteland (page 11, footnotes):

"In 1786, 80% of the obituaries made reference to character. By 1810, this figure had fallen to 71 percent; by 1830, to 45 percent; by 1900, to 10%; after that, no such references are found. (from Salem [MA] Evening News, 1786 to 1990)

In 1786, only 15% of the obituaries mentioned the person's occupation. By 1900, this figure had grown to 70%. It then declined for a time, but by 1990, it had rebounded and increased to 80%. (from Salem [MA] Evening News, 1786 to 1990)

In 1786, 79% of the obituaries used religious language in speaking of the person's death. By 1810, only 70% did; by 1830, only 20%; and by 1900, such references had vanished completely. (from Salem [MA] Evening News, 1786 to 1990)

In 1786, 65% of the obituaries spoke of the connection the person had had with the community and often of the person's contributions. By 1810, this figure had fallen to 57%; by 1830, to 11%; and by 1900, this form of measuring and identifying the deceased had fallen into disuse entirely. (from Salem [MA] Evening News, 1786 to 1990)"

Liberalism in action, as the secularization and urbanization grew, the moral imperatives declined. These can be seen today in the great divide between the "blue" city areas and the "red" flyover areas of our country.

Kimberly
"and twist the bible's teachings to suit their anti-gay agenda."

can you site an example of this?

I doubt it , but I can hope.

I'm not a Christian
But even I can see how Leftists groups are dismantling Christianity in all its forms. I don't need percentage, polls, or google-tripe to tell me this. All I have to do is watch my local news and see it for myself everyday.

My sister is one of those liberals who hates Christians for ridiculous reasons, like what Tehran Kim stated in her rant.

My sister hates Christians more than she does the Muslim extremists who are out to destroy us. In fact, I think if Liberals had a choice to:

A. Destroy every Christian and all things pertaining to Christianity forever on this earth.

or

B. Destroy our Muslim extremist enemies who wish to kill us all.

I can be my sister and 90% of liberals would choose A.

"SKIP"PING ON THIN BIBLICAL ICE...
Skip, dear Skip, Why did you tear into Kath, by wacking her over the head with perhaps a favorite reference from the (book of Hezzikiah)? Then you say, "The scripture is full of accounts of wars waged by Christians. Did you ever hear of David and his slingshot?"

You also speak of "rejecting" someone's "interpretation of scriptures".

Ah, Skip, at this point in your "walk" you might ought to read more, and speak less. I'm wondering what Bible your pastor teaches /preaches from.

By the way, just so you know, David was NOT a Christian.

Also, though "Christians" have fought wars you won't find these conflits chronicaled in scripture, especially, the New Testiment where they (Christians) are first called such.

As for your thoughts about Christians being overly pacifist door mats, I do lean somewhat, kinda, sorta, toward your views. I say this in that I will not hesitate to stop any attempt of thugs conducting home invasion, or other forms of violence toward myself, my loved ones, neighbors, and needy strangers. And, this I will do to the point of swift deadly force, if called for.

Then, I will be glad to pray for the quick healing of those perpitrators who survive, and their swift processing through our civil justice system.

Finally, Skip, "... if you have not sword, sell you cloak and buy one." - Jesus



religiouslib's new "math"
"...The survey finds that about a third of all Christians (32%) identify themselves as "liberal" or "progressive" Christians. By comparison, only a somewhat higher percentage (38%) describe themselves as "born again" or evangelical Christians.

However, these characterizations overlap for many people and are far from being mutually exclusive. For example, more than a third of evangelicals (36%) also describe themselves as liberal or progressive Christians.

so inkling if you add 32 and 36 you get
68% of liberals who consider themselves christian..."


Would you care to detail for us the mathematical steps you took to arrive at your conclusions? Your numbers make no sense at all, which is par for the course when libs are forced to use rationality and logic.

But maybe I can help you.

32% of ALL Christians are liberal. Fine, a valid, believable number.

38% of ALL Christians are evangelical. Fine, another valid, believable number.

Now, here is where your math and statistical analysis fails the test. If 36% of evangelicals are liberal, this reduces to 14% (36 x 38) of ALL Christians, and says that 44% (14/32) of Christian liberals are evangelical. Frankly, this figure sounds bogus to me. I would think that a far smaller percentage of Christian liberals are evangelical than compared to the entire set of Christians.

How you can conclude that 68% of libs are Christian from these ENTIRELY unrelated stats is beyond me. Methinks you need to both find a site with legitimate numbers and finish high school math.

PARTING SHOTS AND DUDS
Sorry about that Skip. It should be< "... if you have no sword, sell your cloak and buy one"

Yes, I should also read more and speak less!

Humble pie Bafundi

Liberals vs Christianity?
I'm not sure which is the greater enemy of religion: those liberals who disrespect religious people (mostly out of prejudice or ignorance) or those conservatives who warp Christianity into a political cult.

As a Protestant, liberal on some issues (equal rights) and conservative on others (immigration), I become disgusted with liberals who lump all religion together, assume that we're all foolish fundamentalists. It's that the fundamentalists make the loudest noise. Most Protestants (and Catholics) I know are reasonable, moderate people.

I tire, for example, of the way the ACLU always seems to be targeting Christian traditions that most of us treasure. But I also tire of those flag-wavers who consider all who oppose the foolish invasion of Iraq as unpatriotic or appeasers. A plague on both their houses!

Many conservatives seek to warp Christianity into a political ally. I attended an independent Baptist church one Sunday recently and the guest evangelist immediately used the pulpit to attack Hillary. I'm not all that admiring of Hillary, but I didn't go to church to hear an attack on her. Makes me almost ready to vote for her as a backlash response.

Keep smiling.

Lydia
It is from the book, God in the Wasteland, that I have to read for one of my classes. My understanding is that the obituary pages, from that one newspaper, were researched. I just happened to read all the footnotes in the book.

buzzkat
don't criticize me when you can't read.

these are estimates but do the words "characterizations overlap"e and "far from mutually exclusive" mean anything to you?

the study and i didn't quote it all (because i have been criticized for cut and paste) was differenting between mainline christians and evangelicals.

the terms i highlight were used because of that.

of course you don't agree with the evangelical number because conservatives have a stereotyped illusion of what type of politics evangelicals are supposed to have.

that is the problem. many conservatives have lost touch with reality because they never have interactions outside of their own reinforcing circles. the only time you encounter opposing views is here and even here you have all the other conservatives reinforcing the myths.

that is why conservatives have fell into the minority in the past few years .
the public has heard all your myths about liberals and media for the last 20 years and it turns out they are not true.


Reigious lib
I just wanted to affirm your posts - I totally agree, all one has to do is read down the list of column topics to see that the obsession with liberals and the need to create some form of evil, menacing, larger-than-life enemy seems to be necessary to keep most conservatives interested. As for disagreeing posts, it seems that the good ones are wasted here, and results in thoughtful, considered reponses like Ice Dogs, on this thread:

"we get your standard, unhinged, vile, incomprehensible, and frothing at the mouth diatribe."

(I'm writing a column on this subject and Ice Dog is one of my favorite resources)


religiouslib
Squawk all you want, I have demonstrated that your statistical analysis skills are non existent, using YOUR OWN numbers. For instance, your contention that a higher percentage of Christian evangelicals is liberal than non-evangelical Christians is truly ludicrous!! Furthermore, every single poll for years now that has asked if one is conservative, middle of the road, or liberal, has shown that the smallest percentage is liberal (on the order of 20%). Most Americans classify themselves as middle of the road, but more ALWAYS classify themselves conservative rather than liberal. To this day, the country remains slightly to the right of center by this measure. You can delude yourself that the 2006 election results showed a move toward liberalism but in actuality the vote was AGAINST the Republican Party, nothing else. The new Democrats who won were almost all conservative Democrats, not flaming libs, and they won by a razor thin margin.

If there is anyone clueless about the real world, it is you, as your posts consistently prove.


Mr. Hawkins
Perhaps a better title for your column would be "Liberal Contempt for Fundamentalist Conservative Christians" judging from some of the responses in the posts. The diatribes against fundamental Christians don't seem to be confined to liberals. Many conservatives express equally vemonous distain for their fundamentalist Christian fellow conservatives. I can't find it in myself to condemn all fundamental Christians because a few are wackos. Most live quiet lives and simply love God, their neighbors and their country and believe God meant every word of the scriptures inspired by His Holy Spirit. Their hearts hurt when they see wanton destruction of the innocent babies before they are allowed to draw breath, the obscenties that are paraded before our youth in TV, movies, books and public discourse. For many their only "sin" is to dare and become vocal in the polital arena as is their constitutional right. They are not blowing up infidels at walmart or killing innocent men, women and children because that isn't what real fundamental Christians are about. It is about imitating Christ. Anyone who is against that is simply foolish.

religious lib
I'll go slow, because I think perhaps you find 8th grade math a bit taxing, and you clearly find college-level sociology out of your league.

You say:

32% in "the survey" identify themselves as "liberal or progressive Christians."

38% in "the survey" identify themselves as "born again" or "Evangelical" Christians.

Then you say "more than a third of Evangelicals (36%) also describe themselves as liberal or progressive Christians."

Then you add 32% and 36% to get 68%.

1) First, the citation. I note you omitted it. Who did this? Where was it published? Was it peer-reviewed? What were their definitions?

2) Next, the math.

Your 36% of Evangelicals who call themselves "progressive", assuming these are all from the same survey, constitutes 36 percent OF THIRTY EIGHT PERCENT. Again, slowly: the Evangelicals constituted 38% of the survey; you claim that 36% OF THAT 38% is actually progressive. .36 x .38 = .137, or just below 14% of the entire sample. So your correct number of "progressives," assuming everything else is kosher (which is FAR from the case) is 32% + 14%, or 46%.

3) Now, the mishmash of sociological goop that you just threw out there:

a) A progressive Christian is not the same as a political progressive. You assume that they are. BZZZZT! foul. Equivocation. Logical fallacy.

b) Your "38% of Evangelicals [who] describe themselves as progressive" clearly came from a different survey than the previous statistics came from, and it's just as clear that the definitions of "Evangelical" and "progressive" were different in those two surveys, since in the first, "evangelical" and "progressive" were mutually exclusive, while in the second, they were not. And you want to use those two statistics in conjunction with each other. BZZZT! foul. Bad methodology, won't pass peer review for a nanosecond.

c) You started out talking about the number of Christians who call themselves something that sounds like "liberal" or "progressive," but you end up with a conclusion about the number of political liberals who consider themselves Christian. BZZZT! foul. Logical converses don't follow without proof; if all A is B, that doesn't mean all B is A. Logical fallacy.

Summary: your explanation merely confirmed what I suspected by reading your other posts from the past two weeks. You have a low IQ and/or a badly deficient education, but you lack the humility to realize it. The result is the absolute bumbling of statistics that we just read. And then, you feel completely justified in insulting people who actually understand social research, and actually care what it really means.

Are you, perchance, barely out of your teens, and just starting college? Seriously, you need to stop posting until you've completed your education and actually used some of those statistics in the real world. You're clearly not ready to handle them correctly yet.

singularity
The single stroke of brilliance in this article comes from someone else.

Here's the analogy: I was watching Futurama last night on adult swim, the episode where Bender becomes pharaoh. The populace began praying to the great wall of wisdom to guide them in the choosing of the new leader, chanting things like "we abandon all of our will and reason, and thereby our thoughts and responsibilities."

Liberals salivate over this sort of power. They want to be your god through government.

If the religeous right followed the example of the founding fathers, fighting for freedom half as hard as they fight for some etherial adgenda...


Flame
"God in the Wasteland," by David Wells?

A) The college you're attending must be hard-core Evangelical. Do I hear Asbury?

B) Fascinating stuff. What thesis was he illustrating with those surveys from Salem, and where did he go with it?

I probably should get my hands on the book, and perhaps some of his others. Some of his titles sound interesting, if a bit "Hank Hannegraaf fundamentalist".

Didn't Wells write a book with Hannegraaf about Charismatics?

Why is it that
christians can not come to terms that there are people out there that do not believe as they do, and that we don't care what they believe as long as you keep it to yourself.

When we have had enough of christians trying to force their views on the minority through the power of government and try to DEFEND our rights by limiting the preferential treatment christianity gets, then that somehow is an attack on them and they are the ones being persecuted instead of the other way around.

Are christians so weak in faith that they need to have the government acknowledge and show preference to their belief.

DA
I can only accept at face value what you say about your own life, and hope like crazy that "marrying the woman I love and the daughter I love" doesn't mean you married your own daughter. I presume you left out a word somewhere.

But I'll stick to my observation: people don't come up with the virulent anti-Christian line by observing Christians, they do it backward; they observe Christians through their pre-conceived virulent anti-Christianity, and they always see what they expect. Furthermore, there's almost always something the person wants to do that his own (or some relative's) Christianity condemns out of hand, at the root of the virulent anti-Christian bigotry. I've seen it dozens of times.

Beyond that, I notice you didn't accept my challenge. So I'll reassert it in slightly different terms.

Either:

A) Produce something, ANYTHING, from a comparable number of Christian fundamentalists that corresponds to the violence perpetrated regularly by Muslim fundamentalists, as I documented; or

B) Admit that your opinion is nothing but a bigoted rant by a fool who knows nothing of fundamentalist Christians, except what he's venting from his own, distorted past.

I'm giving you a fair chance to redeem yourself. Let's hear it. Where's your support?

Libertarian atheist
Jim Quinn noted an interesting take on your position just two days ago. Here's how it went:

Name the number of things you are forced to do every day, simply because some religious Christian got the government to force something down your throat.

Do they affect what car you drive? What clothes you put on? What shoes you choose? What sort of washing machine you buy? How you comb your hair? Whom you can hire? Who you can ask out? Whom you can vote for?

By contrast, now, let's name the number of things we are all forced to do because LIBERALS got the government to force something down our throats. If I ask a co-worker out for lunch, I can be fired because of sexual harassment. I have to watch the racial proportions of whom I hire; I can't use my land any way I like; I'm forced to drive cars that meet certain criteria; etc.

It isn't the Christians who are forcing their religion down America's throats; it's the Liberals. And make no mistake, Liberalism is every bit as much a fundamentalist religion as the most virulent Christian fundamentalism. That's why they make no sense; all that can come out of their mouths is unthinking dogma.

Libertarian Atheist asks
"Why is it that
christians can not come to terms that there are people out there that do not believe as they do, and that we don't care what they believe as long as you keep it to yourself."
Answer: Christians are aware that there are people that don't believe as we do and are sorry if expressing OUR beliefs causes you such distress. However, we will continue to publicly express our opinions as is our constitutional right. By the way the constitution allows freedom of religion, not freedom from religion. And exactly HOW have the Christians trampled on the rights of a Libertarian Atheist such as yourself...seeing as the constitution is a secular document?


HR 254
HR 254 the David Ray Hate Crimes Prevention Act, is an excellent example of persecution against Christians. If this bill is passed, it will be ILLEGAL to say ANYTHING against homosexuals. It will be treated as a "hate crime". If this bill passes, my husband, a pastor, can be arrested for teaching out of Leviticus 18 or Romans 1 which is very adamant on the sin of homosexuality. The same type of law was already passed in Canada a few years back.

Gov. Arnold Schwartzenegger just passed a bill that states that any group, organization, etc. cannot receive government funding if they say anything against homosexuals. No Cal-grants for kids attending Christian colleges, no help for running soup kitchens that feed the poor & homeless, etc.

The homosexual lobby is a modern day Mafia that will force it's agenda in every area of life, regardless of a persons freedom of choice. As a Christian I choose to follow the Bible and the Bible says homosexuality, or any sexual immorality for that matter, is wrong. But I am not allowed to have those beliefs, and soon maybe publicly state those beliefs without the government waiting to arrest me for a hate crime. People choose to live that way - fine. That's their choice. But I am not allowed to have a personal opinion.

The state of Massachuessets has deemed that parents who disagree with their grade school aged kids being taught about homosexuality cannot pull their kids out of class. The judge told the parents to "put their children in private school or homeschool if they don't like it". In this state, parents no longer have the right to teach their children according to their beliefs and values. They have to conform to the state.

This is not whining. It is a statement of fact.

And you call this freedom? I don't think so.

Inkling
Being the only atheist in my family I do not come by my viewpoint backwards but by reading, and observing their actions.

All in all I don't hate christians nor the church.

All I want is for them to show the same respect and deference to my and others beliefs that they EXPECT.

As well as not having the government showing any more consideration to the christian faith thna any other.

Every faith should be equal in the eyes of the government and I am sorry but having things like "in god we trust" and "under god" is not equal but showing preference, and wanting those thing removed is not an attack or persecution of christians but a defense from them.

Inkling
I agree that liberalism (I am not one by the way) is a more of a problem. However you ask what has christianity shoved down my throat.

It's not so much as what christians have made me do, but what I believe is more of an equal treatment argument.

My beliefs should not be secondary to christianty nor should christianities be second to mine.

CC

your are free to express your beliefs and I am not the least bit distressed about it, just when you use the government to do it for you is my problem.

And hate to tell you but its impossible to have freedom "of" religion without freedom "from"

Libertarian Atheist
I'm sorry, but I humbly disagree. Furthermore, I believe, based on a pretty thorough reading of American history, that every single one of the Constitution's authors and signers would disagree as well. Government recognition of religion as a fundamental and necessary basis for law and public felicity was never forbidden, nor was it questioned; only establishment of an official government religion was forbidden, a clear reference to the official state religions of Europe. Also forbidden was any governmental action prohibiting the free exercise of religion. So saying "under God" or "in God we trust" is only an offense to the Constitution if the god is specified, or a particular doctrine required.

Having said that, I also recognize that those two instances you name are incursions from the 1950s, not institutions established at the birth of the nation, and I wouldn't be all that offended if they were removed. My objection to those movements in the modern milieu come from my concern about precedent; the basis on which those two items are objected to is a horrible wrenching of Constitutional principle, that will be further used to drive religion altogether out of the public marketplace, something the authors of the Constitution would find abhorent.

But I'm really curious to know what you find so offensive about them. If I, as a Christian, had to make an oath to Allah, I would find that offensive because I've made an oath of allegiance to a living God of a different name. But if you don't believe that such things exist, what's wrong with just keeping your mouth shut when that part of the Pledge rolls around? Is GHU or GAIA going to declare you unfit for atheist nirvana?

I do understand you don't believe in God, and I would stand at your side and defend you if, someday, the government tried to outlaw atheism. But nothing in our national makeup guarantees that you'll never hear ideas you disagree with, or attempts to protect you from that.

Libertarian Atheist
Yeah, you probably feel the same way about gays too. Why can't they come to terms that there are people out there that do not beleive as they do, and that we don't care what they do as long as they keep it to themselves.

Are gays so weak in themselves that they need to have the government acknowledge and show preference to them.

Which Stooge are you, Moe, Larry or Curly Joe?

Inkling
I served in the military for 3 years and consider myself patriotic, and I have a great love of this country.

That being said why should I have to "keep my mouth shut" to show my allegiance and love of this country.

Also implying that they are not specifically talking about the christian god is a little off. The reason under god was put in the pledge

................................................
President Eisenhower declared, "From this day forward the millions of our schoolchildren will daily proclaim ... the dedication of our Nation and our people to the Almighty." As the flag was then raised above the U.S. Capitol, the bugler played "Onward Christian Soldiers."
................................................

And look at the main people complaining about it being removed and what their complaint are and you will see it is anything but ceremonial deism.

Leroy
sorry guess I don't get where you are coming from.

I am for gay rights, but how are they using the government to force their views on me.

And no I don't consider fighting for equal right forcing their views.

But that is for argument for another time as I don't want to get off topic.

Libertarian Atheist
Boy what a relief! in your previous post you said Christians could have their beliefs as long as they kept it to themselves. Now you say its OK for Christians to express our beliefs as long as we don't get the government to do it. Well let me set your mind at ease....the government doesn't express my Christian beliefs....in fact it gives EVERYONE the right to believe or not to believe in anything or nothing at all. Merely having the expression "In God We Trust" on our money doesn't make the person carrying it a Christian believer and our government doesn't force any particular religion be followed to the exclusion of the others. I glad you don't hate Christians and this country should really be thankful for the Christians that helped found our nation. It is a Christian heritage, not a secular or atheistic one that made this country great and allows the freedoms we enjoy today. Examine some secular and atheistic societies today and see if they are as tolerant or free as America.

inkling_revival and icedog
inkling_revival

-marrying the woman I love and raising the daughter I love-
Sorry, I did leave out a word (btw she’s 3 yrs old)

I was a Methodist growing up, however, religion never made since to me because it always came down to blind faith.

When I talk about those Christians that have the same ideology as radical muslims; I’m talking about the Benny Hinns and the Pat Robertsons (the dominionists) who want to institute a strict biblical law similar to the sharia. I have recently read the book “American Fascists” by Chris Hedges and it was very scary. I am not worried about the Christians who are violent now, I am worried about the Christians who will become violent when they obtain enough power.

Here is a quote from his book.
"What I watch reminds me of a lazy spring afternoon nearly 25yrs ago, when Dr James Luther Adams, my ethics professor at Harvard Divinity school, told us that when we were his age-he was then close to 80-we would all be fighting the "christian fascists."
The warning came at the moment pat robertson and other radio and televangelists began speaking about a new political religion that would direct its efforts at taking control of all insitutions, including mainstream denominations and the government. Its stated goal was to use the united states to create a global christian empire. It was hard, at the time, to take such fantastic rhetoric seriously, especially given the buffoonish quality of leaders in the christian right who expounded it. But Adams warned us against the blindness caused by intellectual snobbery. The nazis, he said, were not going to return with swastikas and brown shirts. Their ideological inheritors in america had found a mask for fascism in patriotism and the pages of the bible.
Adams was not a man to use the word 'fascist' lightly. He was in Germany in 1935 and 1936 and worked with the underground anti-Nazi church, known as the confessing church, with dissedents such as Dietrich Bonhoeffer. Adams was eventually detained and interrogated by the Gestapo, who suggested he might want to consider returning to the US. It was a suggestion he followed. He left on a night train with framed portraits of Adolf Hitler placed over the contents inside his suitcase to hide the rolls of home movie film he took of the so-called german christian church, which was pro-nazi, and the few individuals who defied them, including theologians Karl Barth and Albert Schweitzer. The ruse worked. The border police lifted the tops of the suitcases, saw the portraits of the the Fuhrer and closed them up again. I watched hours of the grainy black-and-white films as narrated in his apartment at cambridge.
He saw int the Christian right, long before we did, disturbing similarities with the German christian church and the Nazi party, similarities, he said that would, in the event of prolonged social instability, catastrophe or national crisis, see American fascists, under the guise of christianity, rise to dismantle the open society."

Icedog

-You're not a bigot...you're an idiot.-
Your right, I’m not a bigot. I also haven’t resorted to calling you names.
“turn the other cheek.”


Inkling
Also concerning the establishment clause I believe having such things such as the pledge, money, ten commandments, etc.. is by default creating a national religion.

If I were a foreigner and heard nothing of America before and then came to visit and see all the churches, evangelical tv, holidays observed I would come to the conclusion that this is a nation of christians.

If then I saw the government steeped in christian imagery I would conclude that this is a christian nation.

Also for the reason you wouldn't like those 2 items removed are the same reason I do. I think it has added precedent to try an include more christian beliefs into the government.


DA
Please learn what a Christian fundamentalist is and stop making ignorant, hateful comments.

While you are at it, please cite a single Christian fundamentalist group that suggests our religion should be spread by force.

Kimberly, Please tell us the abortion clinic bombers you are referring to and the churches they belong to. If you are going to blame a group for the actions of individuals... at least make the connection.

I'm not asking you to do my research for me, mind you... I am asking YOU to do some research before making an accusation.


To whoever said
that fundamentalists have misinterpretted the Bible's teachings on homosexuality, cite you case. I have read the arguments by liberal theologians and critics. None allow the words to say what they mean. None in reality put the teachings back into historical contexts. Every single one has been rank eisogesis... a predetermined conclusion looking for support even if honesty must be jettisoned.

Sexual perversion of all kinds was rampant in the Gentile missions areas. The Bible generally just condemns fornication (porneia (sp?)) which includes every sexual act outside of the bonds of marriage... to include homosexuality for which the Bible provides no means of legitimizing whatsoever.

CC
about other atheist societies.

I have always believed maybe with a biased view that the those societies were not bad because of secularism, and atheism but because of the type of government they had ie.. communistic, dictatorship.


religiouslib
I have no idea what you church teaches doctrinally.

Here are things I do know:

-Jesus taught property rights
-Jesus taught individual responsibility for charity
-Jesus taught respect for the things of others
-Jesus valued life
-Jesus taught a gospel of exclusion- all were free to come but only if they repented and left their previous views behind
-Jesus did not teach that Christians should do Christian work with other people's money
-Jesus did not advocate the use of gov't at all and Paul admonished that Christians shouldn't even take each other to law in front of non-Christians
-The NT respect for gov't was that it was God ordained to keep the peace

Statists are anti-Christian regardless of what they call themselves. At best, they advocate a government that displaces God or plays God by deciding who has too much and who has too little amongst other things. At worst, they believe that socialism and social liberalism are actually derived from Christian teachings and/or are consistent with NT teachings.

Christian liberalism as it applies to both theology and politics is a manifestation of the corrupting influence of naturalism and of late even post-modern philosophy.

You stated several things you believed before... I didn't see anything about the gospel in those beliefs. John 3:16 isn't the whole gospel by any stretch and you didn't even post the words of it.

Just curious- how reliable do you think the Bible is? And if it isn't totally reliable... upon what do you base those beliefs you cited earlier?

LA
If all people were atheists... you could probably expect no better than that. Man requires boundaries... something greater than himself that establishes a standard. Social convention won't work since it might as well be "beat your wife" as "love your wife as your own body".

What source can you point to for morality absent God? Society, right? And what force would be behind society? What would keep people in line?

As for the article
Judging from many of the comments by liberals here... I'm not so sure that liberals hate Christians because of what Christians are as much as because of what liberals believe them to be.

Several have accused fundamentalists of hijacking Christianity by various terms... yet none have established what Christianity is by their beliefs (with support from scripture or some authority) so that we can see if that claim is actually true or not.

It is said that
people fear and hate what they don't know or understand. You folks are demonstrating that very effectively.

DA equated Christian fundamentalists to Islamic fundamentalists revealing that he hasn't the first clue of what a Christian fundamentalist believes or teaches.

DA
I take it back. You're not the fool who knows nothing about fundamentalism. Christopher Hedges is. You're just his dupe.

I've been listening to Robertson and Hinn pretty much all my adult life, and while I don't think much of either of them, I've never heard either one utter a single word of the sort Hedges claims they said. There's no plot to create a global Christian theocracy. There's not even talk of such a thing; not a faint dream, not an occasional mention. Nothing. He's absolutely making it up out of thin air.

Did he actually quote either of them making speeches regarding such laws? and if so, did he omit the context in which they argued for laws that were identical to laws that were in force at the time the Constitution was written? These guys are socially conservative, sure, but... SHARIA???? Nah. Hedges is insane.

Here's the thing you need to remember, pal: crazy Christian fundamentalists WROTE the Constitution. They're not about to tear it up.

(And don't let anybody give you that "they were all Deists" crap, either. Nobody who's actually read their works, and who knows what a Deist is, would ever say such an insanely stupid thing.)

I'm serious. Check the HELL out of anything Hedges footnotes. Don't believe a word of it. It's crap.

DA
Benny Hinn isn't even close to being a fundamentalist. I'll even be so bold as to say that his witness is antichrist.

Robertson holds some fundamental doctrines but abandons others. The historic fundamentalists for instance were every bit as tough on the Charasmatics and Pentacostals as they were the liberals. We still are.

Robertson is far more dangerous to fundamentalism than he is to "Christianity" as a whole or politics of any sort... precisely because folks like you help him foster the myth that he is fundamental in his beliefs. He isn't.

On Robertson
I agree often with his goals... but often he advocates statism to achieve them. He effectively legitimizes the weapon liberals use.

FTR, in agreement with the basic premise of the article, fundamentalist Christians have far more to fear from liberals than liberals do from us... OTOH, we have far more to fear from religionists who call themselves Christian while denying its basis- scripture than we do non-religious liberals.

Statist Christians have been no less hesitant to persecute biblical fundamentalists than statists who were atheist or some other religion.

BTW, George Barna developed a questionaire that identified a "biblical" worldview. I'd say that this probably parallels "fundamentalist" Christians fairly close. At best, fundamentalists constitute less than 20% of self-professing non-Catholic Christians.

We're much closer to the stocks than the sceptre.

Libertarian atheist
You wrote:

"That being said why should I have to "keep my mouth shut" to show my allegiance and love of this country."

You just lost my goodwill, a**hole. I said nothing of the kind. I said stop saying the words "under God" when they roll around. I said not a thing about your patriotism.

You're dishonest, and I despise you for it.

You also wrote:

"If I were a foreigner and heard nothing of America before and then came to visit and see all the churches, evangelical tv, holidays observed I would come to the conclusion that this is a nation of christians.

"If then I saw the government steeped in christian imagery I would conclude that this is a christian nation."

And you'd be right. This is, largely, a Christian nation. And even the enormous parts of it that have abandoned Christianity (pretty much the entire entertainment industry, politics, the universities, the schools, the courts, etc.) owe an enormous debt to the Christian thinking that undergirds those institutions.

The truly astonishing and frightening thing is that you actually believe "they'd conclude this is a Christian nation" is somehow anti-Constitutional.

Here's the thing you need to learn: nothing in the Constitution was written to make it possible for you to live your life never hearing about religion. That wasn't the goal. You are ABSOLUTELY free to believe whatever you want, practice whatever religion (or non-religion) you want, publish anything you want, teach anything you want. But you're in the minority; and you have a lot of damned nerve trying to pretend its US who lack courage, when this whole debate is about what a DAMNED COWARD you are, how you're not willing to live your life in the minority, but instead want us all to pretend that we don't believe what we believe, just so "it will be fair." That's a whine of a damned THREE YEAR OLD.
You need to GROW THE M***** F*** UP.

sht18
Yes society can and did make a world of morals long before christianity came along.

The golden rule is what most civilized societies are based on and that predate any religion.

I don't need a god to tell me that.

So if it could be proven without a doubt god doesn't exist does that mean christians are going to go out and start stealing, raping and murdering?

Inkling
But if you don't believe that such things exist, what's wrong with just keeping your mouth shut when that part of the Pledge rolls around?
...................................................

that is what you wrote. What is wrong with that is saying that what I believe doesn't matter and what others believe is more important and if i dont like it I should hold my tongue.

Sorry if you take it another way but thats how you came across to me.

Atheist governments
Libertarian Atheist has his head in a hole, and doesn't want to learn from history. The attempt to excise religion from government was one of the deliberate topics of the turn of the 20th century, and the forms of government that arose were EXPLICITLY areligious.

It is not an accident, but rather a direct result, that the 20th century is the bloodiest in human history, with just those explicitly areligious governments committing literally hundreds of millions of murders in the name of the State, which replaced the name of God.

How any person can remain an atheist in the 21st century, and argue with a straight face that religion isn't necessary for good behavior, is a testament to the uncanny ability of human beings to deceive themselves.

And even most of those were places that were, in some way, moderated by Christian history. Want an example of what happens in a country where Christianity is unknown, and completely secular ideas take hold? A young oriental man studied leftist philosophy in a French university, and returned to his native land to practice what he'd learned. His notion was to rid the entire nation of the superstition of the ancients; his tactic, influenced by Marx and Mao, was to establish state-run child care, then MURDER THE ENTIRE PREVIOUS GENERATION, so the children would be raised serving the State. His name was Pol Pot, and I'm talking about the killing fields in Cambodia. There's your secular government.

Inkling
and so the name calling comes out as well huh?

This country was set up to protect the minority from the majority. I am not looking for you to dismiss your or be protected from seeing any form of christianity. I just want christians to stop using government to further their beliefs.

gee who would of thought fairness and equality for everyone is a bad thing. not our founding fathers.

Alexis de Tocqueville
Anybody here read "Democracy in America," by Alexis de Tocqueville? de Tocqueville was a Frenchman who visited America during the 1820s and 1830s, and wrote what was one of the earliest works of sociology.

Among de Tocqueville's conclusions was that America was, at its heart, a deeply religious nation, and that that religion was the heart of its prosperity and strength.

This sounds remarkably like Libertarian Atheist's description of what a foreigner would discover if visiting America with an open mind. He's right. That's what one did discover. And oddly enough, it didn't destroy American liberty then; quite the contrary, it was the SOURCE of American liberty.

How is it possible, I ask, to argue that the Constitution requires all public discourse to be secular, when nearly all public discourse was religious when the Constitution was written, and no attempt was made or even suggested to change that? You have to ignore 200 years of American history to argue what the atheists argue about the Constitution.

LA
Don't insult the founders. I'll wager you've never read a single word of their writings on your own, have you? I mean, aside from facile collections of out-of-context quotes about how they despised "the institutions of religion."

Go get an education. If your bizarre distortions of history survive even a CURSORY reading of Jefferson or Madison, we'll converse then.

LA and name-calling
I just reread my comments, and you know what? I said EXACTLY of LA what he said of us believers in his first post. So when he does it, it's "analysis," but when I do it, it's "name-calling."

You're a hypocrite, LA, and an intellectual zero.

Inkling
here lets see.

You just lost my goodwill, a**hole.
You're dishonest, and I despise you for it.
what a DAMNED COWARD you are
That's a whine of a damned THREE YEAR OLD.
You need to GROW THE M***** F*** UP.

Now go back and list me anything of the like that I have said.

Now you have no idea where I am coming from.
I have no problem that I am a minority and I could care less if I was the only one.

I understand this country has a christian heritage and I don't think the government should be stripped of all things christianity. I am not anti-christian just because I don't belive what you do. I am just not willing to let the majority use the government to perpetuate their belief.

LA
"sht18"

Hopefully that was a typo since I don't know of anything I said that should have offended you personally.

"Yes society can and did make a world of morals long before christianity came along."

Depends on what you call morals I suppose. None of the ancient goddess worship religions were "moral" in the Judeo-Christian sense. Ritual prostitution, human sacrifice, infanticide, ritualistic orgies, et al were common fare. They truly were conquering societies as well that demonstrated little compassion for their enemies.

What do you think modern liberals would say if we took the brightest Iraqi youth, castrated them, and pressed them into service in the Capitol?

"The golden rule is what most civilized societies are based on and that predate any religion."

I'd like to see your citation of a society that lived by the Golden Rule for very long without the correcting influence of the Bible. Yes... It is a universal truth for having a peaceful society. And, Yes, various great cultures have briefly employed a version of it at their apex. No. It is not sufficient to govern a society into harmony for very long unless the source of the Truth is acknowledged and honored.

"I don't need a god to tell me that."

Really? The cultures you cite thought they did. But more importantly, did you dream it up or were you taught it by someone? Do you honestly think you would have arrived at it without boundaries that you did not establish?

"So if it could be proven without a doubt god doesn't exist does that mean christians are going to go out and start stealing, raping and murdering?"

People have done that while espousing a god. If you can prove that God does not exist then I personally could point to no reason... nor source of fear or love... to cause me to accept moral constraints. If God does not exist then I SHOULD do whatever I want so long as I can get away with it.

If there is no God then there is no reason to conclude that I can't take what belongs to others if I am powerful enough... there is no reason to suppress wrath or hatred if I can get away with it... or any other passion. If there were no God there would be no reason whatsoever NOT to do what was pleasing in my own eyes.... as long as I could get away with it.

The "get away with it" part points directly to the manner of gov't required for a people that are largely not self-governing.

We are indeed headed toward totalitarianism. The signs aren't in Christian fundamentalism though. The signs are in a liberal secular society that is losing all grasps of the concept of self-governance and only respect that which is illegal as being out of bounds.

sjt18
woops sorry yes that was a typo.


Skip
"I reject that brand of Christianity, and I am sick to death of hearing it. You can stretch out on the ground and let these people walk all over you if you want to. I won't, and I don't appreciate your "kick me, spit on me, I am holy" interpretation of scripture."

The power of Christianity has always been the gospel and only the gospel. If you use the sword of gov't to oppose the world, you've rejected THE brand of Christianity of Christ and the 1st century church. The witness of the martyrs that led from a trembling group of fugitives to the dominant faith of the known world in about 250 years was that they held their convictions to death and forgave their persecutors.

Your hostile tone isn't congruent with that. Yes. Use your free speech rights on politics. Yes. The Bible should inform your political beliefs. But stop there. Don't merge Christianity with politics... the result is ALWAYS harmful to the gospel.

The one thing liberals here are right about is that many on the "right" are becoming statists themselves. They've gone beyond trying to prevent liberals from trampling our rights through gov't to thinking Christianity can and should be promoted by gov't.

For instance, I don't want prayer in gov't schools. I want gov't out of prayerful schools. When the aforementioned De Toqueville toured, he noted that most Americans were literate and that almost all the teaching was done by the clergy.

We need to stop our claims at the ends of the noses of others while demanding they do the same.

FTR, if gov't were still the size and scope envisioned by the founders even accounting for greater defense needs and environmental protection, the argument over whether gov't was too religious or not enough would be moot. Religious and private enterprises would be far more meaningful to the domestic affairs of the country than gov't.

John MacArthur said
it best concerning Christians and gov't. He said the best way a Christian could effect gov't was to evangelize his neighbor.

It truly is too bad that many Christians knock at the door of gov't before they knock at the doors of their neighbors... and that goes for "conservatives" and liberals.

Who is "Trannie Mannie"?
And, What Republicans do you think are hiding behind religion?

Are you asking why my religion informs my politics? Because God doesn't want part of us. He wants all of what we say, do, and believe to be consistent with His Word. The GOP is not perfect on principle... and far less than perfect in application of principle but their stated positions on most major issues are more biblical than Dem positions.

sjt18
I am not making hateful comments. I think that religion (Not just Christianity) in general is dangerous. It has been demonstrated throughout history and we see it today (just look at Iraq). Islam is where Christianity was 300 yrs ago. In Europe, it was protestant v catholic. In the middle east, it is sunni v shiite. Add to that a christian political movement in the US and any reasonable non-religious person should be scared. Not against the 99% of peace loving christians, but the 1% of christians that seek the power to control. What do you think would happen to the 2 million atheists/agnostics in the US if a literal interpretation of the bible was inacted as law?

If you don't think that gullible people can be swayed by fundamentalist christians in the US, then why are people making $20,000
a year giving money to people like Benny Hinn who drives around in a limo and has his own jet?
"While you are at it, please cite a single Christian fundamentalist group that suggests our religion should be spread by force."

The reconstructionists/dominionists that follow the christian ideology of Rousas Rushdoony. A good example is Ohio; with Kenneth Blackwell as the secretary of state. Another good example is James Kennedy:
“Our job is to reclaim America for Christ, whatever the cost, as the vice regents of God, we are to exercise godly dominion and influence over our neighborhoods, our schools, our government, our literature and arts, our sports arenas, our entertainment media, our news media, our scientific endeavors -- in short, over every aspect and institution of human society.”

The Family Research Council said:
"While it is true that the United States of America was founded on the sacred principle of religious freedom for all, that liberty was never intended to exalt other religions to the level that Christianity holds in our country's heritage."
(in response to a Hindu priest, Venkatachalapathi Samuldrala of the Shiva Vishnu Hindu Temple in Parma, OH, opened a session of the U.S. House of Representatives with a prayer on 2000-SEP-14.)

George Bush
"God told me to strike at al Qaida and I struck them, and then he instructed me to strike at Saddam Hussein, which I did, and now I am determined to solve the problem in the Middle East. If you help me I will act, and if not, the elections will come and I will have to focus on them." -- According to Palestinian Prime Minister Mahmoud Abbas [too bad god didn't tell him there were no WMD's in Iraq]

A lot of hostility to go around
Why is it that whenever Townhall.com publishes an article that discusses Leftist activists' deep-seated distrust of religion, the hostility always comes out in force? On BOTH sides?

Surely there are some things we must be able to agree on:

First, Leftists who tar all people of faith with the same brush are wrong.

Second, Kansas preacher Fred Phelps and his ilk do not speak for most Christians. (I can't help thinking it's a shame they speak for ANY Christians, but what do I know?)

Third, if you are looking for reasons to take offense at a novel, film, or TV show, you are bound to find them. Therefore, if your sole motive for reading or watching is to take offense, naturally you regard all art or entertainment as evil. (I'm looking at YOU, Mr. "Kids-will-become-evolutionists-if-they-watch-Finding-Nemo"!)

Fourth, we might be much better off as a society if we tried to listen and think a little more, and yell and scream a little less.

As an atheist
I'm apparently a pro-Christian atheist.

I have no problem with the bulk of the Christians in the U.S. It is pretty clear that the U.S. is essentially a Christian nation, and that is fine by me. The system largely leaves me alone and makes no effort to force anything on me. Even things such as copies of the 10 Commandments in a courthouse, or nativity scenes in front of a City Hall are perfectly acceptable, as no one requires my to pay them any greater mind than I choose.


Jimmy the Saint
Thanks for your post. Very rare I must admit, but appreciated.

Usually I'd say "God bless you" but that wouldn't mean anything to you, so I'll just say "have a nice day". Thanks again for your respectful post. I hope that other Christians are as respectful to you.

inkling_revival

You gave DA 2 choices:

A) Produce something, ANYTHING, from a comparable number of Christian fundamentalists that corresponds to the violence perpetrated regularly by Muslim fundamentalists, as I documented; or

B) Admit that your opinion is nothing but a bigoted rant by a fool who knows nothing of fundamentalist Christians, except what he's venting from his own, distorted past.

He opted to not say anything and hoped the folks here would forget about it.

Your choices should have included

C) Say nothing and we will acknowledge your intention to pick ‘B’.

sjt18
i guess the thing many conservatives don't seem to understand is that their view of the world, politics, and religion aren't the only ones that matter.

let say that i didn't get into a long explanation of my set of beliefs because the Christian community i have been involved with for 50 years uses Jesus Christ as the role model and hence, when someone says they are a Christian we take it on face value until proven otherwise.

i have been surrounded by good Christian people all my life and have never seen Christians act the way the "so-called" Christian conservatives do on this board.

one of the lessons i have learned over the years is that God is too complex to truely understand all his teachings and that being a Christian is a journey towards the truth and the light using his word as the guide.
the idea that any Christian knows everything about the bible and God is simply puzzling to anyone who has studied the bible for any length of time.

i grew up in a family of preachers (my brother is an ordained baptist minister) and i have sat in sunday school rooms and sanctuaries and discussed the meaning of almost every single passage of the new testament again and again. every time i re-read a passage i learn something new or see the passage in a different light.

i do know this.
Christians like inkling revival obviously has not been around other Christians who were sincerely searching Gods word for enlightment and guidance because according to him, he has it all figured out.
there is no litmus test to be a Christian. that is the reason i put down John#:16 as a core belief.
i have had that verse memorized since i was 5 years old and to challenge me like i didn't know what i was talking about is not only insulting but un-Christian.

that is the problem here, many conservative Christians have all the answers when many of the answers are unknowable until we meet face to face with God.
yet you and others on this board want to judge others based on your interpretation of the Gospel.
i find it quite telling that conservatives quote more from the old testament and Paul than they do from Jesus.

could it be that their politics would not be so conservative if they had to live with the actual text of Matthew,Mark, Luke and John.

To decide who is a better christian is blasphemy on your part in my opinion. Who made you the judge of God's servants.

did it ever occur to you that maybe God has plans for some Christians that is different than others.
some of us were meant to be missionaries some were meant to be preachers, some to be youth directors. could it be that some were meant to be liberal and some conservative.

conservatives have the brazen audacity to speak for God and decide who is Christian enough and what a Christian really is?

i am sorry but those conservatives have missed the basic precepts of the teachings of Christ.
The church is a community of believers and when you rule that some who gave their heart to God are not fit to worship in your church because you disagree with their politics you have lost your way.

It comes down to this,the hatred and the name calling and the derisive comments i have recieved from conservative Christians on this board because i dared to be a Christian and a liberal does not speak well for their personal beliefs and their relationship with God.

May God bless you and keep you





christian terrorists
Birdman

I thought I made my point clear. I am not worried about christians strapping bombs to their back. I'm worried about the christians who are trying to take over our government. If they are able, they will institute biblical law; driving us back into the dark ages. This is worse that islam. At least they do not have power in the US. Research dominionism and you will understand what I fear.

However, If you want proof of christians being violent; just look at the hutu genocide of the tutsi. One million tutsi's slaughtered by christians (the leader was a 7th day adventist preacher named Elizaphan Ntakirutimana. Several nuns were also indicted for turning over 7,000 tutsi's to the hutu for slaughter. What was the Pope's response to this massacre? Did he apologize for the active participation of cergy? No, he merely asked for clemency for those convicted of crimes against humanity.

You can also look at Europe. Protestant v Catholic violence occured for centuries and lasting until the last decade.

If you want evidence of christian terrorists in the US, we have Eric Rudolph, Clayton Wagner, James C Kopp, Michael Bray, Paul Jennings Hill, & Gordon Kahl.

Some christian terrorist groups listed by the USAF include:
Christian Patriots Defense League
Covenant Sword and Arm of the Lord

Assault on Christianity?
Is there more to this "assault" on Christianity than a few potshots taken by some over-the-top bloggers? Has a single church been burned? Has the private display of the cross been banned? Is the Bible no longer available for purchase at Barnes & Noble? Is anyone of substance, or for that matter anyone at all, even proposing such things?

Please. If you'd like to see an example of an assault on religion, in this case Judaism, google "Inquisition".


religious/lib..oxy/moron
Not possible to stay "liberal" and be called a Christian! Christian, means immitator of Christ, where do we learn of Christ? Ummh, maybe the Bible??? It states that "all have sinned and come short of the glory of God", Rom.3:23. "The wages of sin is death",Rom.6:23. Not just physical death.. see Rev. 21:8. The good news Christ paid the debt we owe, by breaking God's Law, see 10 commandments, Ex.20. A Christian is one who repents and recieves Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior and then FOLLOWS HIM as revealed in scripture! Scriture is the very Word of God, and it catagorically reveals God's moral positions, and I'm sorry He's pro-life, Pro marriage(one man-Adam,one woman,Eve), pro work for pay, and pro love thy neighbor as thyself.

tom
are you saying being liberal means you aren't following the bible?

a couple quick points -
conservative Christians in the south used The Word of God to morally justify slavery and then segregation.

conservative Christians use the Bible today to justify capital punishment even though a vast majority of theologians and denominations use the Bible to refute that point of view and say it is immoral.

who is correct?

again, conservatives have for the past 20 years scurrilously defined liberal in negative terms with no knowledge of what they speak.

should liberals assume that david duke, haggard or phelps is representative of conservative religious thinking. no

so then why do conservatives take the most extreme examples of liberals and then paint all liberals the same. it is not logical or rational.
but then conservatives think with their emotions most of the time rather than using facts and logic.

now does that last statement upset you. of course but i hear it in the reverse all the time on this board.

There are at least 20 million liberal Christians in mainline protestant churches who do not fit the accepted stereotype of liberal that is constantly used on this board by conservatives.

what disturbs me the most is that conservatives seem to hate their fellow americans more than any other supposed enemy if their fellow americans claim to be liberal or God forbid a liberal Christian.

and Jesus wept

DA and religious lib
I really liked your posts, especially "what disturbs me the most is that conservatives seem to hate their fellow americans more than any other supposed enemy if their fellow americans claim to be liberal or God forbid a liberal Christian."

One of the interesting things, to me, is that people often see themselves at the end of history, instead of standing in its current. Christianity has changed dramatically over the centuries, and one of the things that happens is that the mythology and interpretations change with it. This isn't just true of Christianity, it's true of many things, but the way we understand it today has more to do with our culture and ourselves at this moment in time.

The Christian hatred and fear of non-Christians has been going on in one form or another for hundreds of years. It's only expressed differently now, in the context of the current century.

Fundamentalism is a world-wide phenomena now, and has been since the late 70s. Fundamentalists have more in common with each other than with the main stream members of their respective religions, and what we are beginning to see now, at this point in history, is the increasing demonization of non-fundamentalist Christians.



cece
your posts are always intriguing and although i agree with you general point, what concerns me most is that some conservatives have been repeating myths about liberals for so many years now they actually believe them.

the demonizing of liberals who are fellow americans is destructive to democracy and to our country.
it is one thing to disagree it is another to hate.

I have actually heard conservative talk show hosts talk about putting liberals in detainment camps so they can be re-educated.
it is right out of the soviet union playbook.

they seem to believe we need to have a one party system based on their beliefs and anyone who disagrees will be dealt with. that is why they immediately start calling people anti-american and traitor when they run across opposition.

i mean there are hundreds of posters on here that actually believe liberals and even liberal christians are marxists.

it is all propaganda that has gone on for 30 years now but it is scary that they sincerely believe that.

it is scary.




scary stuff
I see no point in using liberal blogs as "proof" that liberals hate Christians. That makes as much sense as using quotes from the god hates f@gs group and then saying those are mainstream Christian beliefs. This sort of thing certainly doesn't encourage any thoughtful dialogue. From the looks of the posts here this article serves to divide the body rather than unite it and absolutely does nothing to encourage people to follow Christ.

My daughter and I are both Christians and each has a very strong and sincere faith. Politically I'm a conservative and she's a liberal. For a Christian to support abortion is totally irreconcilable in my mind. Likewise, for a Christian to support a war, any war, is irreconcilable in her mind. There are other differences of opinion on issues but I'm limiting my post to those two as an example.

The point I'm trying to make is that being a Christian isn't about liberal or conservative. Being a Christian is about following Christ. It's a journey with constant learning and striving for understanding. We Christians must always be mindful of the way people see us living out our faith. If we're driving people away from Christ, if people are afraid of Christianity, then we're not living the Christian life whether we're liberals or conservatives. PP

pastyp
very thoughtful post, i couldn't agree more.

MikeR
Like your comment as follows:

"I still think this is a silly debate but I like the way inkling_revival keeps it in perspective. There is a great deal of antipathy but little outright contempt and persecution."

I would amend it to read "zero persecution." Anyone who is free to vent in this forum has no clue what real persecution is. (And if minor quibbles may be admitted, I would also up the "outright contempt" assessment to more than a little.)

Still, though, a most just and salient thought. The whole point of civil liberties is that people have differences of opinion. Get over it, folks.

karennkc
the compliment is much appreciated.

i also appreciate the editing of my post. i simply have too many thoughts sometimes to slow down and use the Kings English, so to speak. i just fire from the hip and if i stop to edit i sometimes lose the correct wording of a point i was trying to make.

anyway, my post was heartfelt and if it spoke to someone else, all the better.


God Bless You and Yours

Anti-religious bigotry
It's impossible to get a liberal to admit his anti-religious bigotry. To him, anti-religious bigotry doesn't exist. It CAN'T exist.
The only bigots are Christians, and only they can be bigots.

Even though entire liberal institutions are dedicated to the purging of religion in the public schools and elsewhere, anti-religious bigotry doesn't exist.

Even though whole websites (especially by some atheists) are nothing but anti-faith bigotry incarnate, anti-religious bigotry doesn't exist.

Even though bigots such as Bill Maher spew their anti-faith hatred on TV on a regular basis, anti-faith bigotry doesn't exist.

Even though bloggers routinely make fun of Southern Baptists as being fat, anti-faith bigotry doesn't exist. (Imagine a white person writing about an NAACP convention and remarking that the attendees have big lips.)

Get caught saying ANYTHING about a black person, even if it is positive, and get accused of bigotry. (Unless you are black.)

Slander, libel, lie about Christians. It doens't matter. Because it's, well... Christians, and anti-religious bigotry doesn't exist!


Joe23649
-religion in the public schools and elsewhere-
It has to be either all religions, equally, or none. Since there are >30,000 sects of christianity alone in the US, the answer is none.

-anti-faith bigotry incarnate-
Kind of like the anti-nonchristian bigotry I've seen on TH.com?

Joe, let me remind you that there was a story here called "stupid atheists." Find me a "stupid christian" story in the national media and then you can cry, boo hoo, about christian bigotry.
Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.