Christian Embassy: worming Jesus into government

[TheNoNamedOne]

How often do we hear Christians innocently say we do have "separation of church and state" as if they are not and have not been trying to infuse religion, more specifically Christianity, into government. Some people buy that, thinking good ol' Christian folk of the USA are all about live and let live. But they are not.

Christians are actively trying to breakdown that wall of separation of Church and State, and, furthermore, organized Christian groups are targeting the military and civilian leaders to use for exporting their faith in Jesus Christ Christian beliefs to other countries.

The next time you hear a Christian protest against atheists who are moving to keep Christians from proselytizing into the government domain, be it through demanding the removal of 10 Commandments from a courthouse, not allowing the teaching of creationism in a science classroom, or the removal of a nativity scene from a public space, remember just how aggressive Christianity is today in its worming into the government.

Some scary things are said here and what those ramifications could entail:

YouTube - Christian Embassy Part I

YouTube - Christian Embassy Part II

[okisteve]

Well, actually... if they can turn just one corrupt murderer into a moral human being, I'll be there supporting them. Ah, right, we might not agree on what is moral, but look, there are so many bad examples out there (I even saw Donald Rumsfeld in a cameo). Think Idi Amin, Noriega.

On the other hand.... all those group-thinkers getting together in the Pentagon. Those are the people whose fingers are on the button, aren't they? Deciding who is a terrorist?

[TheNoNamedOne]

I see what you are saying, Steve, but why don't the Christians just come out and be honest and clearly say?:

"We are not for separation of church and state. We want Christianity to spread into all governments and their branches and for people to base their decisions on Biblcal beliefs and values that stem from it."

I think they should. I wish they would. That way at least the "Yes, you are! No we aren't! Yes, you are! No, we aren't" game of what the other accuses the other of doing back and forth could be dispensed with.

You know...like making clear lines in the sand that they are definitely crossing to show us that they are and are not apologizing for.

[dk]

Maybe they should, but who'd be the one to do it? As with anything, there are extremists. Some Christians are probably all for separation of church and state. Others might not be. So, which Christian should/would be the voice?

[okisteve]

I see what you are saying, Steve, but why don't the Christians just come out and be honest and clearly say?:
"We are not for separation of church and state. We want Christianity to spread into all governments and their branches and for people to base their decisions on Biblcal beliefs and values that stem from it." I think they should. I wish they would. That way at least the "Yes, you are! No we aren't! Yes, you are! No, we aren't" game of what the other accuses the other of doing back and forth could be dispensed with.

You know...like making clear lines in the sand that they are definitely crossing to show us that they are and are not apologizing for.

It really looks like they are doing everything to get the idea across that they want a Christian country, short of having Bush read it in a speech. What is needed is a counter-lobby that can point out the pitfalls in store for everyone.

[Bones]

As posted by okisteve:

It really looks like they are doing everything to get the idea across that they want a Christian country, short of having Bush read it in a speech. What is needed is a counter-lobby that can point out the pitfalls in store for everyone.

Kind of would be interested in reading that list myself.

Seems to me though, that any American citizen can pretty much practice any religion that want to. They can freely choose to convert to ISLAM, BUD ISM, SHINTO, etc..., without fear of the "Religious Police" coming to arrest them after they do.

You don't have to be religious if you don't want to.

If there are religious symbols on display at any Government bldg, you're free to ignore them. I've never encountered any symbol that has gone out it's way to offend me as a non-practicing Christian, nor am I offended by any religious buildings of any other country. And I've lived in many.

It makes me wonder however, why is all of this anti-religious thing popping up in the first place? Perhaps some of the negative news (child molestation charges against priests), people not having a life (until the internet came along), or things that they've been watching in the media?

Another thing, peoples values change after they get married. If they don't, the marriage usually won't last very long. And this normally doesn't have to do much with religion, as compared with financial issues, infidelity, etc...

Let's say the "Atheist's" win. What are the pro's, or consequences?

Should be a fun read.:cool:

NBTP

[okisteve]

NBTP, my "list" isn't very long. Seems to me though, that any American citizen can pretty much practice any religion that want to. They can freely choose to convert to ISLAM, BUD ISM, SHINTO, etc..., without fear of the "Religious Police" coming to arrest them after they do.

You can say that NOW, but it's all to easy to see parallels with how the Christian Embassy infiltrates (yes, what else can you call it?) the major US institutions, and how the National Socialists took over Germany. It didn't happen overnight, closer to 15 years. And guess what: most everybody saw it coming but didn't or couldn't stop a police state from happening. Same as in Iran, and in Afghanistan with the Taliban, to name some more recent examples.

[TheNoNamedOne]

if they can turn just one corrupt murderer into a moral human being, I'll be there supporting them.

If only it were so clean as that, eh?

What happens when they can turn just one drunk into a born-againer and he hears voices of God telling him to attack another country, or that Jesus is guiding his leadership that allows him to sleep peacefully at night by eroding constitutional rights and allowing waterboarding? Pretty scary make-believe friend for a person who truely believes it exists.

Are religious memes a healthy virus for the mind to be infected by?*

Perhaps rationalism would be the better medicine for one corrupt murderer rather than filling his mind with another virus.




-------------------------------------------------------------
*No offense meant, Steve. Don't even know your religion. Just talk.

[Bones]

As posted by okisteve:

You can say that NOW, but it's all to easy to see parallels with how the Christian Embassy infiltrates (yes, what else can you call it?) the major US institutions, and how the National Socialists took over Germany. It didn't happen overnight, closer to 15 years. And guess what: most everybody saw it coming but didn't or couldn't stop a police state from happening. Same as in Iran, and in Afghanistan with the Taliban, to name some more recent examples.

Oh, well I have a better idea where you're coming from now.

Good points up to "Germany". The National Socialists took over Germany, due to poor living conditions after the WW1, and a great orator inspired the people to rise up. Doesn't mean I agree with what he did, but it almost has nothing to do with religion.

The other examples that you have posted are worthy as well, where countries were literally transformed overnight, by religious zealots. The populace had no say in that decision, or if they complained they were killed.

Tempted to say that "Christianity" won't do the same thing, but if you look at the history of that religion....

NBTP

[TheNoNamedOne]

Doesn't mean I agree with what he did, but it [Hitler/Nazism] almost has nothing to do with religion.

I think it was clear that Steve was referring to the slow creep into the society and government of Germany, and reminding you that Christianity is doing the same thing, or could do the same thing, and that Christian Embassy seems to be attempting that with their influence in the corridors of power.

So, the slow movement into government in a sense does have something to do with religion.

[Bones]

As posted by TP:

So, the slow movement into government in a sense does have something to do with religion..

To which I would reply:

"It's always been that way since the founding of our nation."

Or, as far as any other nation that I've lived in.

To suggest that "The Cristian Congress", is going to implement a "Police State", as mentioned in Steve's posts, is ridiculous.

NBTP

[TheNoNamedOne]

You don't have to be religious if you don't want to.

That is easy for people to decide if they have not been raised to believe it as Truth and fear of eternal hell is awaiting them if they are not. Free will is often perverted and denied once a strong fear takes over. At that point it becomes not a question of what they want to do or not, but what they can or cannot do.

[Bones]

As posted by TP:

That is easy for people to decide if they have not been raised to believe it as Truth and fear of eternal hell is awaiting them if they are not. Free will is often perverted and denied once a strong fear takes over. At that point it becomes not a question of what they want to do or not, but what they can or cannot do.

Good enough point.

Also interesting to note, as people get older, they return to their faith. Just in case.

Someone tells somebody else, that this thing can't be done, they'll go out of their way to do it.

And the wife is ordering me to log off.

Something to think about for tomorrow.

NBTP

[okisteve]

As posted by TP:

.

To which I would reply:

"It's always been that way since the founding of our nation."

Or, as far as any other nation that I've lived in.

To suggest that "The Cristian Congress", is going to implement a "Police State", as mentioned in Steve's posts, is ridiculous.

NBTP

I doubt it too, and I didn't mean "police state" so much as "religious state". I hope you don't think that it is so far out of the question. Think what that means, even in a mild form like some of the R.C. countries in Europe and Latin America until recently - no contraception, no divorce,...

[okisteve]

As posted by okisteve:



Oh, well I have a better idea where you're coming from now.

Good points up to "Germany". The National Socialists took over Germany, due to poor living conditions after the WW1, and a great orator inspired the people to rise up. Doesn't mean I agree with what he did, but it almost has nothing to do with religion.

The other examples that you have posted are worthy as well, where countries were literally transformed overnight, by religious zealots. The populace had no say in that decision, or if they complained they were killed.

Tempted to say that "Christianity" won't do the same thing, but if you look at the history of that religion....

NBTP
That's the World History 2 condensed version, but in fact there was a long struggle between democratic parties and the Nazis to gain supremacy. The people didn't "rise up" in Germany. They were just so tired of instability and poverty for so long that it was more like "lying down" and letting Hitler and the Party walk over them. It could have ended up as a democracy if Hitler had been willing to play by the rules, not having his thugs murder influential people and that sort of thing. And by the time Germany started rearming and people started getting rich off the rearmament, it was too late to stop.

You are correct about religion not playing a large part, but both Protestant and Catholic church leaders were either co-opted to go along with the Nazis, or were expelled or jailed, even executed.

And then they were all led into Hell, by the most famous vegetarian of the 20th century.

[kombu_kid]

That is easy for people to decide if they have not been raised to believe it as Truth and fear of eternal hell is awaiting them if they are not. Free will is often perverted and denied once a strong fear takes over.

Here we go......here's the part where he slowly creeps to the assertion that parents shouldn't be able to teach their kids about God.

What happens when they can turn just one drunk into a born-againer and he hears voices of God telling him to attack another country, or that Jesus is guiding his leadership that allows him to sleep peacefully at night by eroding constitutional rights and allowing waterboarding? Pretty scary make-believe friend for a person who truely believes it exists.

You know, there should be a name for the type of argument that so many people use like this.......like when a cop goes bad, the entire police force is corrupt, and the whole legal system is a farce. When a priest gets busted molesting a child, then all religious groups are secret perverted societies intent on ruling the world, forcing their doctrine upon the population.

I don't remember Bush declaring that he heard voices from God telling him to attack other countries.....did he? And while we're on the subject of eroding constitutional rights, how many of your posts/threads have to do with taking away people's rights "for the good of society"?

Pretty scary make-believe friend for a person who truely believes it exists.

Don't you have an imaginary friend named "Gaia"?:)

[TheNoNamedOne]

And then they were all led into Hell, by the most famous vegetarian of the 20th century.

Yikes! lol.

Actually, Hitler never gave up his love for bavarian sausages.

[okisteve]

I don't remember Bush declaring that he heard voices from God telling him to attack other countries.....did he? And while we're on the subject of eroding constitutional rights, how many of your posts/threads have to do with taking away people's rights "for the good of society"?



Don't you have an imaginary friend named "Gaia"?:)

Listen closely to the first 6.44 of this one. Yes, it's a spoof, but???
(Both presidents' voices are Harry Shearer, who does several characters on The Simpsons, including good old Flanders)

http://play.rbn.com/foo.ram?url=livecon/kcrw/g2demand/ls/ls071216le_Show_-_December_1.rm&Start=21:16

[TheNoNamedOne]

I don't remember Bush declaring that he heard voices from God telling him to attack other countries.....did he?

Looks like you weren't at the meeting and didn't get the memo afterwards detailing it:

From the BBC (http://www.bbc.co.uk/pressoffice/pressreleases/stories/2005/10_october/06/bush.shtml):

Nabil Shaath says: "President Bush said to all of us: 'I'm driven with a mission from God. God would tell me, "George, go and fight those terrorists in Afghanistan." And I did, and then God would tell me, "George, go and end the tyranny in Iraq …" And I did. And now, again, I feel God's words coming to me, "Go get the Palestinians their state and get the Israelis their security, and get peace in the Middle East." And by God I'm gonna do it.'"

[kombu_kid]

Okay, you got the quote......I haven't checked it out to see how reliable it is, but I'll take your word for it.

Now, let me ask you this: what do you think of judges who have been raised in a religious upbringing, with their morals formed by the 10 Commandments? Should they be allowed to sit on the bench and judge, or would you consider them "tainted"?

[TheNoNamedOne]

Okay, you got the quote......I haven't checked it out to see how reliable it is, but I'll take your word for it.

Now, let me ask you this: what do you think of judges who have been raised in a religious upbringing, with their morals formed by the 10 Commandments? Should they be allowed to sit on the bench and judge, or would you consider them "tainted"?

Sure they should be allowed to sit and serve so long as we are a democratic society. Certain moral values from past religious upbringing is fine as a base.

However, if they make their decisions not in accordance to logic and reason based on law, either legislated or prior precedent, and instead assert Christian values and conversations with Jesus as to what to decide as the core reasons for their judgements, then they should be removed from the bench.

A psychotic person exhibiting schizophrenic or bi-polar tendencies should be in a mental institution and medicated with his daily choices in life decided for him, not deciding them for someone else.

[kombu_kid]

However, if they make their decisions not in accordance to logic and reason based on law, either legislated or prior precedent, and instead assert Christian values and conversations with Jesus as to what to decide as the core reasons for their judgements, then they should be removed from the bench.

This is very interesting and I'm a little skeptical here of your post. Why? Because of the fact that G.W. verbalized a belief in God, and you basically labeled him "delusional"......while let's say, a judge who has similar beliefs and upbringing, while maybe not verbalizing how they draw on those beliefs to form their moral code is all right.

I would offer that either you're not being completely honest here, or at a later date you would question the appointment of such a judge with a religious background.

Certain moral values from past religious upbringing is fine as a base.

I thought you likened it to believing in fairy tales, Santa and the boogey-man? Would you be in favor of giving judicial authority to a church-going judge, a practicing Christian, Jew, or Muslim?

I always wondered how long it will be until we see some really strange religions appear, demanding the same rights and equality as mainstream religions. I heard about a lady, years back, who supposedly claimed she was a high priestess of an ancient Egyptian religion, and sex was part of the mass. Of course, those who took part in the ceremony were expected to give a "donation"......the cops busted her for prostitution.

Now, how many of us would miss church on Sunday with that religion?:)

[okisteve]

Or this one:

http://www.peyoteway.org/peyoteway/PeyoteWay.html

[Asshat]

There is a big difference between a Christian judge voting his conscience, and a President who states "God told me to do it." And if the beliefs of judges is not at issue, then why in the heck do sitting presidents do their damndest to get judges who all think alike on the bench?

Also, a public building is exactly that. I don't want to religious idols in a building I am paying for. Ignore it my ass. It's my building, so take out the voodoo.

And I agree that there are many good Christians out there, and that they are not the extremists. However, I have seen a great increase in the use of the word "prayer" in news casts. This bothers me, because it is apparent that networks are pandering to Christians....as if prayer is the most natural thing in the world.

I also refute the statement that as we age, we go back to the religion of our childhood. That's like saying I am going to once again start believing in the boogy man under my bed.

I want nothing to do with religions, and I don't want to hear any missionary work, or see their idols like the ten commandments either.

[Asshat]

http://listverse.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/09/irony-4-tm.jpg

[TheNoNamedOne]

Because of the fact that G.W. verbalized a belief in God, and you basically labeled him "delusional"...

KombuK, Bush did not just verbalize a belief in God, he verbalized that he was told by God to attack those countries and do things. Big difference.

What do people mean by when they have a personal relationship with someone, be it Mike, John, Sue, or ....Jesus? In my personal relationships with others I have conversations with them. I see them and I hear them. Is Bush seeing and hearing Jesus and then listening to his orders?

I thought you likened it to believing in fairy tales, Santa and the boogey-man? Would you be in favor of giving judicial authority to a church-going judge, a practicing Christian, Jew, or Muslim?

Sure, so long as they are not hearing voices and are basing their decisions on legal wrote, logic, and reason.

I always wondered how long it will be until we see some really strange religions appear, demanding the same rights and equality as mainstream religions.

The biggest one is already really strange. Nothing "appear"ing about it. It is here already! Quite strange that in it exists a talking snake, three things are one and one thing is three, all Earth animals took a long boat ride on one ship, etc...

I heard about a lady, years back, who supposedly claimed she was a high priestess of an ancient Egyptian religion, and sex was part of the mass. Of course, those who took part in the ceremony were expected to give a "donation"......the cops busted her for prostitution.

Interesting case. Do you have a link?

[Asshat]

Then there was the smoking weed religion. The guy got busted. (I sometimes wish I was a Navaho)

[devine]

I seriously wonder if it is so wrong to have a belief in something. Whether you are Christian, Muslim, Jewish, Pegan, Satanist, or anyother religion that believes in higher being is that so wrong?
The founders of America based the constitution and the Bill of Rights on Christianity laws. I don't think our founding fathers were so messed up then. Ok. So now we have many more dominate religions that want to be recognized but from the time America was born GOD was apart of how life was lived in everyday. Turn your American dollar over and you will see this. "In God We Trust is the current official national motto of the United States and the U.S. state of Florida." We didn't come up with this design 20, 30, 40 years ago. We are talking centuries old.

Maybe if people would just accept society for it's past then things would not blow out of proportion. I dunno, I don't understand I suppose. Only lived in the US for 3 decades myself.

[Asshat]

I seriously wonder if it is so wrong to have a belief in something.

No. Everyone should believe in something. We are human after all. It is when that belief causes you to judge others based on your beliefs that the problems start.


The founders of America based the constitution and the Bill of Rights on Christianity laws.

This is a common misconception. The constitution was absolutely NOT based upon "Christianity Laws" and the Bill of Rights did more to distance Law from religion than to prove a relationship between state and church.

I don't think our founding fathers were so messed up then. Ok. So now we have many more dominate religions that want to be recognized but from the time America was born GOD was apart of how life was lived in everyday. Turn your American dollar over and you will see this. "In God We Trust is the current official national motto of the United States and the U.S. state of Florida." We didn't come up with this design 20, 30, 40 years ago. We are talking centuries old.

So was it God guiding the hands of those Americans to attempt to wipe out every single native American they could find? How was God a part of that, or any other aspect of the history of the US?

Maybe if people would just accept society for it's past then things would not blow out of proportion.

Because there a few Muslims who believe in the same God the Christians do who want to kill you. Because there are a group of Christians in the US who want to unilaterally attack Iraq and force the Jews to become Christian. Because there are people who shove their version of God down everyone else's throat.

[vvloc]

no bones may wish to believe that it's always been that way since the founding of the union, and you, devine, may wish to believe that it's been that way for centuries; however whether you like it or not, the facts are different.

http://www.rationalrevolution.net/articles/history_of_the_separation_of_chu.htm

As the article states:

"If we are going to have national debate on this issue, please, can we at least do it honestly?"

[TheNoNamedOne]

I seriously wonder if it is so wrong to have a belief in something. Whether you are Christian, Muslim, Jewish, Pegan, Satanist, or anyother religion that believes in higher being is that so wrong?

I am not so sure whether the question centered around the word "wrong" is accurate. Perhaps "unhealthy" is the better choice. Insert that to see if it makes a difference.

It may not be so much that believing in a divine being is the problem, but rather believing in the dogma that that being sits atop is.

Devine, what if you had co-workers that believed in a religion with a God that told its followers that if they had faith, and that while exercising that faith, if they had AIDS but could rape a pure 13 year old virgin, that that would cure their AIDS; would you think there would be anything unhealthy with such a religion or God like that existing? Wouldn't you like to see that God disappear taking its dogma with it? I would.

As scary as that is I also find it scary that a God sends his son here proclaiming not to bring peace, but to bring the sword and to set father against son, mother against daughter, husband against wife for his glory and that there will be a final apocolypse because that will be necessary to fullfill all his plans.

Now, if that God truely does not exist and there is no evidence of his existence, but we have millions of people looking forward to this apocolypse because that will mean their saviour has come back, don't you think it is scary that someone in a position of power may be deluded and think they are a tool to help usher in this apocolypse and start the process of bringing their Saviour back?

Isn't this kind of dogma scary -- or is it just all out of the realm of possibility to even consider as likely so it should all be ignored? I think it is more likely that that is more possible than a dead man getting up 3 days later and then flying to heaven 40 days later.

[Bones]

As posted by TP:

I am not so sure whether the question centered around the word "wrong" is accurate. Perhaps "unhealthy" is the better choice. Insert that to see if it makes a difference.

It may not be so much that believing in a divine being is the problem, but rather believing in the dogma that that being sits atop is.

Devine, what if you had co-workers that believed in a religion with a God that told its followers that if they had faith, and that while exercising that faith, if they had AIDS but could rape a pure 13 year old virgin, that that would cure their AIDS; would you think there would be anything unhealthy with such a religion or God like that existing? Wouldn't you like to see that God disappear taking its dogma with it? I would.

As scary as that is I also find it scary that a God sends his son here proclaiming not to bring peace, but to bring the sword and to set father against son, mother against daughter, husband against wife for his glory and that there will be a final apocolypse because that will be necessary to fullfill all his plans.

Now, if that God truely does not exist and there is no evidence of his existence, but we have millions of people looking forward to this apocolypse because that will mean their saviour has come back, don't you think it is scary that someone in a position of power may be deluded and think they are a tool to help usher in this apocolypse and start the process of bringing their Saviour back?

Isn't this kind of dogma scary -- or is it just all out of the realm of possibility to even consider as likely so it should all be ignored? I think it is more likely that that is more possible than a dead man getting up 3 days later and then flying to heaven 40 days later.

No problems up to this latest posting.

I gotta tell you TP, if there is one person who needs to be "institutionalized, under heavy sedation", it should be you.

NBTP:thumbdown:

[TheNoNamedOne]

Well geeez, NBTP...thanks for saving your time and merely going ad hom rather than addressing any particular point you could refute.

Though, if I did believe in talking snakes and ancient boat rides of all the animals in the world, I would hope that for my safety and the safety of others, I would be institutionalized.

[Bones]

Had a good reply going, but got knocked off 'cause of a monkey on my back. Can't smoke in the apartment. Might try to post again tomorrow, or not.

Just seems to me, that for everything the gets abolished, something has to take it's place.

And for the most part, as it relates to the people that I've known, the people who are against "Religious" laws, hope to get them replaced by something to justify their behavior.

NBTP

[DougP]

I for one am not trying to get rid of religion. Just because I don't believe in any of that doesn't make me someone who is for abolishing it all together. But if I were to wake up one day to find that organized religion had packed up and moved to another planet, I wouldn't be heartbroken.

[Asshat]

Had a good reply going, but got knocked off 'cause of a monkey on my back. Can't smoke in the apartment. Might try to post again tomorrow, or not.

Just seems to me, that for everything the gets abolished, something has to take it's place.

And for the most part, as it relates to the people that I've known, the people who are against "Religious" laws, hope to get them replaced by something to justify their behavior.

NBTP

NBTP, I thought TP's supposition had merit. Check out the Zionist movement. If you dig just a little bit, you'll find some of their ralleys have been attended by elected officials!

[devine]

I am not so sure whether the question centered around the word "wrong" is accurate. Perhaps "unhealthy" is the better choice. Insert that to see if it makes a difference.

It may not be so much that believing in a divine being is the problem, but rather believing in the dogma that that being sits atop is. .

Anything when taken to an extreme or abused can be unhealthy. You can take something as innoculous as water and injest enough of it and kill yourself. Adherance to a dogma of any kind at the expense of socially acceptable behavior can be unhealthy. here is the rub P, Athiesm is a religion too. It is a relation based upon the absence of a diety. Some religions do have extreme dogma but a "religion" with no implied rules whatsoever is just as dangerous if not moreso.


Devine, what if you had co-workers that believed in a religion with a God that told its followers that if they had faith, and that while exercising that faith, if they had AIDS but could rape a pure 13 year old virgin, that that would cure their AIDS; would you think there would be anything unhealthy with such a religion or God like that existing? Wouldn't you like to see that God disappear taking its dogma with it? I would.


That scenario flies in the face of the law which as I have previously stated is the tipping point thusly it is non applicable. I have co-workers who believe in nothing, nothing as far as a diety is concerned. They do however believe they should not force that belief on me. I similarly do not believe I should force mine on them. To use the most extreme example of anyth is a reach that thins the argument. I may decide today that I want to attack my co-worker with a stapler. Do we ban staplers now because they are unhealty?


As scary as that is I also find it scary that a God sends his son here proclaiming not to bring peace, but to bring the sword and to set father against son, mother against daughter, husband against wife for his glory and that there will be a final apocolypse because that will be necessary to fullfill all his plans.

Now, if that God truely does not exist and there is no evidence of his existence, but we have millions of people looking forward to this apocolypse because that will mean their saviour has come back, don't you think it is scary that someone in a position of power may be deluded and think they are a tool to help usher in this apocolypse and start the process of bringing their Saviour back?

Isn't this kind of dogma scary -- or is it just all out of the realm of possibility to even consider as likely so it should all be ignored? I think it is more likely that that is more possible than a dead man getting up 3 days later and then flying to heaven 40 days later.

Secular people are just as potentially dangerous, to suggest religion as the only source of mass violent or dangerous behavior ignores the people who belived in nothing but thier own self-appointed right to do anything they want who have shaped history. I know this will shake your view of the world at large but you do not know all things, you are not omnipotent, you were not there. Niether was I. Thusly, in the absence of first hand experience we all must look at the historical records and decide for ourselve what we believe. It's hard to get two people to come to the same conclusion on a movie they just watched, do you find it so hard to believe that something as important as this would divide people down many schools of thought?

You believe what you want and I am perfectly willing to let you. You however will not be satisfied until every shred of thought that does not conform to your self actualized belief is eradicated because it is "unhealthy".

So whose the one with the rigid dogma?

[Asshat]

Secular people are just as potentially dangerous, to suggest religion as the only source of mass violent or dangerous behavior ignores the people who belived in nothing but thier own self-appointed right to do anything they want who have shaped history.

Hint for you: By personally attacking someone you are not lending credence to your points.

So you are not concerned about the current brand of Zionists? Also, please state a group who currently is more dangerous to the peace and stability of the planet than a religious one.

[P_chan]

Secular people are just as potentially dangerous, to suggest religion as the only source of mass violent or dangerous behavior ignores the people who belived in nothing but thier own self-appointed right to do anything they want who have shaped history.

I believe those people would be called Nihilistic (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nihilism). Animal mother from full metal jacket was considered to be Nihilistic. Hell, I feel like I'm Nihilistic at times!

[devine]

Hint for you: By personally attacking someone you are not lending credence to your points..

How is that a personal attack exactly?

So you are not concerned about the current brand of Zionists?

I am concerned. I am also concerned by militant athiests who march to a different tune but at the same goosestep.


Also, please state a group who currently is more dangerous to the peace and stability of the planet than a religious one.

Vladimir Putin. Last time I checked he believes in nothing but his right to take anything he wants and kill anyone who stands in his way. Never heard him say anything about god telling him to do it.

[Asshat]

How is that a personal attack exactly?

You believe what you want and I am perfectly willing to let you. You however will not be satisfied until every shred of thought that does not conform to your self actualized belief is eradicated because it is "unhealthy". So whose the one with the rigid dogma?

I am also concerned by militant athiests who march to a different tune but at the same goosestep.

Who are these militant atheists? What goosestep are they marching to?

Vladimir Putin. Last time I checked he believes in nothing but his right to take anything he wants and kill anyone who stands in his way. Never heard him say anything about god telling him to do it.

So if Putin told the world that God told him to attack a nation as Bush did, it would be okay then? And what exactly has Putin done to take anything away?

Sure, Russia is at war with Chechnya. But aren't they blowing stuff up too? They killed about 335 hostages, including about 156 children.

Isn't this the same thing the Christian led Bush cabinet is doing?

[devine]

Who are these militant atheists? What goosestep are they marching to?

Let me ask, Prosecuter, what is playing in your ipod right now?:D



So if Putin told the world that God told him to attack a nation as Bush did, it would be okay then??

Pulled from here
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2005/10/20051006-6.html
Go ahead, Peter.

Q Have you ever heard the President say that God told him to invade Afghanistan and Iraq and --

MR. McCLELLAN: No, and I've been in many meetings with him and never heard such a thing.

Q Are you aware of the -- there's a BBC broadcast tonight that's quoting the Palestinian Prime Minister and Foreign Minister as saying that they were in a meeting with the President in June of '03, and there are some very detailed quotes here, saying that the President said to them, "God told me, 'George, go and fight those terrorists in Afghanistan,' and I did," and then "God told me, 'George go and end the tyranny in the Iraq'" and so forth and so on?

MR. McCLELLAN: No, that's absurd. He's never made such comments.

Q Were you in the meeting when that took place?

MR. McCLELLAN: I've been in meetings with him with President Abbas; I didn't travel on that trip, if you're talking about to Jordan. But I've been in many meetings with the President with world leaders where he's talked about this.

Q So you don't know about the June '03 meeting?

MR. McCLELLAN: No, I checked into that report and I stand by what I just said.




And what exactly has Putin done to take anything away?

Sure, Russia is at war with Chechnya. But aren't they blowing stuff up too? They killed about 335 hostages, including about 156 children.

Isn't this the same thing the Christian led Bush cabinet is doing?

Chechnya is fighting an oppressive Russia, russians are fighting an oppressive russia. Dis you miss what just happened in russia? Ask that KGB agent about putin. Oh wait they poisoned him, I guess you can't. I am sure god told them to do it. :rolleyes:

[Asshat]

Pulled from here
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2005/10/20051006-6.html

You are using the President's press secretary for a cite? lol...come on!


Chechnya is fighting an oppressive Russia, russians are fighting an oppressive russia. Dis you miss what just happened in russia? Ask that KGB agent about putin. Oh wait they poisoned him, I guess you can't. I am sure god told them to do it. :rolleyes:

My Russian friends don't think Putin is evil, and it was Yelsin who refused to recognize the independance of Chechnya. Since then, Chechnya has been attacking Russia. I could go on with that history, but the fact of the matter is, you are using Russia to bolster your argument that atheist zealots are a threat. Russia is not an atheist zealot, nor even an atheist state with 89 percent of it's population Christian.

[TheNoNamedOne]

Let me ask, Prosecuter, what is playing in your ipod right now?:D

I don't have an ipod. I have Okinawa's best, WAVE 89.1 as my only source to excellent music. btw, I do wonder why they designate time for Christian Radio once or twice a week but do not do so for Muslim or other faith programming.

Doesn't that bother you and make you think? Or at least shouldn't a military radio station which is an arm of the government, too, be held accountable to the idea of "Separation of Church and State"? I think it should.

[Asshat]

I don't have an ipod. I have Okinawa's best, WAVE 89.1 as my only source to excellent music. btw, I do wonder why they designate time for Christian Radio once or twice a week but do not do so for Muslim or other faith programming.

Doesn't that bother you and make you think? Or at least shouldn't a military radio station which is an arm of the government, too, be held accountable to the idea of "Separation of Church and State"? I think it should.

They have a Christian radio program? WTF?

Oh and....I'm listening to Sonic Youth Teenage Riot. Because my 19 y/o son and I share our song list on the home PC. :)

PS: I am not going to go out and blow something up in protest....or perhaps launch a pre-emptive strike on the Plaza antenna!

[TheNoNamedOne]

They have a Christian radio program? WTF?

Yeah, sometime on Sat, or Sun evening or morning for an hour or two, or three. Forgot exactly when.

[P_chan]

Vladimir Putin. Last time I checked he believes in nothing but his right to take anything he wants and kill anyone who stands in his way. Never heard him say anything about god telling him to do it.

Actually, he's russian orthodox. Russian orthodox is AKA Orthodox Christian Church of Russia, so that would make him a christian.

[TheNoNamedOne]

Q Have you ever heard the President say that God told him to invade Afghanistan and Iraq and --

MR. McCLELLAN: No, and I've been in many meetings with him and never heard such a thing. ...

Devine, if you read carefully that exchange above again that you posted, you will see the skillful avoidance of denying that Bush said that. In fact, a reporter specifically asked if the reports of what Bush said were true and the White House officially declined to comment on it.

Again, read your post again and you will see how sidestepping is being done.

[Bones]

As posted by Uminchu:

NBTP, I thought TP's supposition had merit. Check out the Zionist movement. If you dig just a little bit, you'll find some of their ralleys have been attended by elected officials!

Ok, can you provide me with a link?

Elected officials do attend religious meetings, either out of personal conviction, or to appeal to their constituency. Where is the big shock value in that?

NBTP

[kombu_kid]

Everyone has their interests at heart.......sounds like we have a nice group here who can't stand to even have a little religious programming on Sunday, regardless of how many request it. Well, truth be told, I never listened to it anyway when I was stationed over there, but I wonder.......if there was a large group of ARists on island who had a chance to get an hour of airtime per week.......would they try to? Maybe putting up a few veggie dish recipes? Hmmmmm? How about Planet Police getting an hour of topics like recycling, switching to reuseable burlap shopping bags etc, ways of cutting back on greenhouse gases......let's be honest now.

[DougP]

Everyone has their interests at heart.......sounds like we have a nice group here who can't stand to even have a little religious programming on Sunday, regardless of how many request it. Well, truth be told, I never listened to it anyway when I was stationed over there, but I wonder.......if there was a large group of ARists on island who had a chance to get an hour of airtime per week.......would they try to? Maybe putting up a few veggie dish recipes? Hmmmmm? How about Planet Police getting an hour of topics like recycling, switching to reuseable burlap shopping bags etc, ways of cutting back on greenhouse gases......let's be honest now.

Honestly, I wish all that crap would go away. special programs for a selective audience pushing an issue. Regardless of what that issue or agenda is I don't want to hear it on public airwaves. But screw it, I just don't tune in.

And as much as I don't care for ARist groups like PETA, I have to admit they are very different in a few ways from organized religion. Yeah they tug at the moral heart strings like religion does but they don't push the envelope threatening an eternal damnation in hell by the hand of a God who loves you. There's no mysticism associated with AR. Some of the church sermons I went to sounded more like D&D anonymous meetings with all the talk of warlocks, demons, angles, God, miracles, Christian warriors, four horsemen etc. Crap, how about something more down to earth?

[Bones]

Nothing destroys the belief that you have faster, than seeing the person preaching to you not to commit those sins, commit those same sins after a sermon.

NBTP

[OCanadaOurHomeAndNativeLand]

It really looks like they are doing everything to get the idea across that they want a Christian country, short of having Bush read it in a speech. What is needed is a counter-lobby that can point out the pitfalls in store for everyone.
Slowly, but surely, it is happening. Richard Dawkins has been leading the charge with his recent bestseller The God Delusion, and the follow-up documentary and many interviews and appearances on TV & radio. Christopher Hitchens and others have been taking up the cause more publicly and vocally in his wake. I highly recommend his website as a starting point.

http://richarddawkins.net/

[Asshat]

Slowly, but surely, it is happening. Richard Dawkins has been leading the charge with his recent bestseller The God Delusion, and the follow-up documentary and many interviews and appearances on TV & radio. Christopher Hitchens and others have been taking up the cause more publicly and vocally in his wake. I highly recommend his website as a starting point.

http://richarddawkins.net/

The evangelicals are saying it is Obama...doing everything but calling him the anti-christ.

And again, the comment was made, "he worries more about us evangelical christians than he does about the terrorists.

I don't go that far....I am worried about all extremism- from Zionists, to evangellical christians forcing God into government, to terrorists trying to get even for forcing them off their lands, and arming their enemies.

There is no room for compromise with extremists of any stripe.

[OCanadaOurHomeAndNativeLand]

A very interesting review I came across...will have to give it a look.

Goldberg, Michelle
KINGDOM COMING: The Rise of Christian Nationalism W. W. Norton, New York, N.Y., 2007
An expose of the ongoing attempt to take-over American society by the "dominionist" movement - an ever increasingly powerful movement within right-wing Christianity which seeks to establish a Christian theocracy - an American run by an unreasoning adherance to a totalitarian interpretation of Biblical authority. The American analogues to the Taliban. The book is, at the same time, both witty and fair.